Bišćević Tokić: Which law are we even adopting tomorrow?

(Patria) - A 19th emergency session of the House of Representatives of the Parliament of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina has been scheduled for tomorrow in Sarajevo, starting at 12:00.

Only one item has been proposed for the agenda - the Proposal of the Law on the Procedure of Extraordinary Administration in the Company Nova Željezara Zenica d.o.o. Zenica of Special Systemic Importance for the FBiH (urgent procedure).

Federal representative Jasmina Bišćević Tokić (SDA) says that, as before, the law is again being passed through an urgent procedure, adding that she is unclear why public debate, broader consultations, and ultimately the regular parliamentary procedure are being omitted on such important issues.

Bišćević Tokić emphasizes that it is also concerning that the very explanation contains an inconsistency in the name and subject of the law.

- In one place it refers to the "Proposal of the Law on the Procedure of Extraordinary Administration in the Company Nova Željezara Zenica d.o.o. Zenica of Special Systemic Importance for the FBiH," while in another place it states "Proposal of the Law on the Procedure of Extraordinary Administration in Companies of Systemic Importance for the FBiH," Bišćević Tokić told us.

However, she stresses that this difference is not merely technical.

- It raises the question of whether the proposed law applies to one specific company or a general law that could be applied to several companies of systemic importance. This is a serious legal and legislative drafting oversight and calls into question the seriousness of the preparation of the proposed law, Bišćević Tokić believes.

Nevertheless, she adds, the content of the proposed law refers exclusively to one predetermined company, which leads to a deviation from the principles of equality and legal certainty before the law.

- Also, the Government of the FBiH and the competent Federal Ministry of Energy, Mining and Industry need to provide a clear statement on all previous actions and omissions related to this company, including allegations that an act was sent to the Ministry as early as April this year by previous owners offering the right of first refusal, Bišćević Tokić stated.

And if such an act exists, she adds, it is necessary to answer the following questions: when was it received, who reviewed it and whether any (formal) decision was made, why the Parliament of the FBiH was not informed in a timely manner, why measures were not taken then to protect jobs and the public interest, and why the urgency is now being shifted to the Parliament of the FBiH?

- The Government is a minority owner and, based on ownership, appointed its representative, i.e., one member, to the Supervisory Board of Arcelor Mittal (now Nova Željezara). Through that member of the Supervisory Board, the Government and the Federal Ministry of Energy, Mining and Industry should have had all information regarding the operations and business of Arcelor Mittal, i.e., Nova Željezara Zenica.

Therefore, the submitted justification of urgency does not sufficiently meet the standards of Article 191 of the Rules of Procedure of the House of Representatives and Article 186 of the Rules of Procedure of the House of Peoples of the Parliament of the Federation of BiH.

The impression is that the Government of the Federation of BiH is trying to shift the burden of solving the problem to the Parliament of the Federation of BiH through an urgent procedure, without a complete analysis, without a clear justification of urgency, and without answering the question of why action was not taken earlier to protect jobs and continue production.

Such an approach contributes neither to legal certainty nor to the actual resolution of the problems of the workers of Nova Željezara Zenica, but rather appears as an attempt to buy time and politically shift responsibility, Bišćević Tokić believes.

She adds that in the process of adopting this law, it was necessary to seek an opinion from the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council of BiH (Article 17 of the Law on the HJPC), because it affects the work of courts in the Federation of BiH, particularly in relation to Chapter IV of the Proposal, which prescribes which court is competent, the procedure of a single judge, urgency, deadlines, publication, publicity, data protection, and participants in the proceedings.

- This is just a small part of the proposed law that indicates legal uncertainty, and tomorrow we will talk more about all the shortcomings of the proposal, concluded Bišćević Tokić in a statement to NAP.