Correcting the injustice of Nikšić and Dodik and restoring the right to vote in the place of residence from 1991.

By: Rasim Belko @rasimbelko

The SDA caucus in the House of Representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly of BiH has submitted amendments to the Election Law of BiH to the parliamentary procedure. The amendments insist on the right to vote in the municipalities from 1991. This right was guaranteed by the Dayton Peace Agreement, and violated by the current Election Law, especially after the adoption of the Law on Residence, which, long after its adoption in 2013, significantly changed the composition of the voter body in the RS entity.

We remind you that the Law on Residence was voted on by representatives of SDP, SBB, SDS, SNSD, and HDZ on July 18, 2013. This law repealed the legal provision on facilitated registration of residence for returnees and introduced a novelty that did not exist before. To clarify, the Ministries of Internal Affairs were given legal obligations to review each individual residence within five years. The Ministry of Internal Affairs of RS used every opportunity provided by the Law on Residence to make it difficult or discourage many Bosniak returnees from exercising their legal rights, but at the same time, the Ministry of Internal Affairs of RS used its powers under that law and enabled a large number of citizens of Serbia to vote in ethnically cleansed areas, especially in Srebrenica and other cities and municipalities of Podrinje.



SDP President Nermin Nikšić admitted seven years later that they made a mistake, although he defended himself with EU conditions: They did not consider that the RS police would abuse that law and, upon learning that someone working elsewhere or not currently residing there, would come three days in a row, check if they were not there, and ultimately cancel their residence. They did not consider that someone would abuse it.

The consequences of the lack of foresight of those who led the SDP, SBB coalition in the State Parliament will be difficult to correct, but it must be done, for the sake of the rights of those who have been disenfranchised, but also to prevent ethnic cleansing from being rewarded.

The proposed amendments to the Election Law submitted by the SDA caucus state: “In the Election Law of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in Article 20.8, new paragraphs (8), (9), and (10) are added after paragraph (7), which read: ‘(8) Exceptionally, until the decision from paragraph (7) of this article is made, all persons who have the right to vote, and who had their place of residence in 1991 in a different municipality than their current municipality of residence, and who changed their place of residence in Bosnia and Herzegovina due to war operations, have the right to be registered on the voter list in order to vote in person or by mail, for the municipality of residence from 1991, regardless of the municipality of their current residence.’ ‘(9) Persons from paragraph (7) of this article have the right to decide whether to vote for the municipality of their current residence or for the municipality of residence from 1991, and are obliged to provide proof of residence from 1991 when applying for registration on the voter list.’ ‘(10) The Central Election Commission of BiH shall regulate the procedure for exercising the rights and registering persons from paragraph (7) of this article by adopting a special regulation.’

The previous paragraph (8) becomes paragraph (11). Article 2. This law enters into force on the eighth day from the date of its publication in the “Official Gazette of BiH.”

We asked the President of the SDA Caucus in the House of Representatives, Edin Ramić, whether the proposed amendments would nullify the effect of the Law on Residence, to which we received a positive answer.

“Precisely that, and also returning to the Dayton principles that many advocate for, because according to the opinion of experts and constitutional law professors, the current Election Law is unconstitutional precisely because it prevents displaced and refugee persons from voting in their 1991 place of residence,” Ramić told Patria.

Member of Parliament of the People's European Party, Jasmin Emrić, stated that for the same reasons, NES supports this proposal.

The President of the Democratic Front Caucus, Milan Dunović, says that the initiative is good because it essentially nullifies the mistakes of the Law on Residence.


“Intentionally or out of ignorance, the drafters of the Law on Residence 'favored' ethnic cleansing policies in the electoral process. This prevented displaced persons, before their return, which is slowed down due to political, security, and economic blockades, from exercising their voting rights in the areas where they lived and where they wish to continue living and exercising all rights, including political ones,” Dunović told Patria.

We asked the same questions as Emrić and Dunović to Sabina Ćudić (President of the Our Party Caucus), Nihad Omerović (President of the People and Justice Caucus), and Saša Magazinović (President of the SDP Caucus).

They likely could not provide an answer for two reasons. First, because they are lost in panic due to the complete shipwreck of the state government they are part of, and the second reason is the fact that by answering, they would admit that the actions of a part of the Trojka (the Three) from 10 years ago were anti-state and favored policies that continued ethnic cleansing even after the Dayton Peace Agreement.

Support for the SDA proposal is unlikely to be expected from the SNSD, which is cornered with limited political maneuvering options. However, amendments to the Election Law that would restore the rights of disenfranchised, expelled Bosniaks and Croats must be one of the conditions in the creation of future coalition agreements.

Considering that the policies pursued since the 2022 elections clearly indicate that today's rulers gathered in the Trojka - SNSD coalition will almost certainly not have the opportunity to form the government after the next General Elections, the amendments that these parties will likely not support by then must be one of the key demands.

In fact, if issues related to the so-called Croatian electoral issue are resolved during this mandate or the next, then the aforementioned amendments to the Election Law from the SDA proposal must be resolved in parallel with the demands of the HDZ.

And finally, it is up to the public and the pro-Bosnian opposition in the Parliamentary Assembly of BiH to resist the bad decisions of the Trojka (SDP, NiP, Our Party) in every way possible, because for more than ten years we have witnessed serious attempts to correct their mistakes, which sometimes stem from negligence towards state affairs, and sometimes from ignorance and thoughtlessness. The same applies to the FBiH entity, where the Trojka is rushing into a possible mistake that will be much harder to fix than the Law on Residence!