Support for Slaven Kovačević: A Civic Choice Against the Politics of 'Legitimate Representation'

By Azra Zornić

In the context of pre-election dynamics in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the public debate has, judging by the candidacies so far, marginalized two fundamental aspects crucial for the very survival and future of the country. First and foremost, it is necessary to demystify one of the greatest illusions of ethno-nationalist politics, which deliberately spreads a misinterpretation of electoral law.

First, it is important to clarify the nature of the electoral right for the Presidency of BiH. According to the current constitutional and electoral order, voters in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina vote for members of the Presidency from among the Bosniak and Croat peoples, while voters in Republika Srpska vote for a member from among the Serb people. Therefore, the key fact being concealed is that the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina does not recognize the institution of a "Bosniak" or "Croatian" member, but exclusively a "member of the Presidency from the Bosniak people," or "from the Croat people." This distinction is not semantic but essential. It opens space for civic politics, as every voter in the Federation of BiH, regardless of their national declaration, can cast their vote for a candidate from among either of these two constituent peoples. As a citizen advocating for the protection of human and civil rights, I have the option for the first time to support the "only proven fighter for these rights," a person who has already initiated their fight for the equal rights of all citizens before the European Court of Human Rights.

In a situation where the state, thanks to chronic blockades and the veto of ethno-nationalist parties, is economically, socially, and politically degraded below the line of tolerance, their campaigns are based on the segmental principle of "everyone vote for their own." Their goal is not systemic improvement of the situation, but the preservation of pathological structures that enable personal material gain at all levels of government.

In this light, the analysis boils down to two key imperatives:

First, achieving a favorable balance of political forces. For the functioning of the state, it is of essential importance to achieve a 2:1 constellation in favor of pro-state and civil rights-oriented programs. Any candidacy that implicitly accepts the entry of the HDZ into the Presidency as a normal political fact actually legitimizes further paralysis of the state. In a scenario where the HDZ and SNSD are simultaneously members of the Presidency, any possibility of influencing the appointment of the Chairman of the Council of Ministers in favor of BiH becomes illusory.

Second, consciously choosing between two opposing visions. The question facing voters is whether we will have a person in the Presidency who will, using foreign policy tools, lobby for the implementation of the "Zornić" judgment and other ECtHR judgments, thereby working towards building a civic state? Or will we, by supporting unarticulated candidacies driven by personal ambitions, allow that crucial position to be occupied by an HDZ candidate, whose political program is based on the idea of "legitimate representation" and the sovereignty of the constituent people, which directly threatens the territorial integrity of the state?

However, this analysis would be incomplete without addressing the third, perhaps most important factor: the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina themselves. For more than three decades, the dominant political narrative has fed on our collective apathy and historically low voter turnout. This passive stance has enabled ethno-nationalist elites to consolidate power and transform the state into their private property. It is time to wake up from this hibernation. Every vote left unused is not a neutral act; it is, in essence, a vote of confidence given to those who are leading us to ruin. These elections should be transformed from a ritual of insignificance into an act of collective awareness and taking responsibility.

This call to wake up also applies particularly to the diaspora. Millions of citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina living and working outside its borders are not spectators, but an essential part of our society. Their experiences in functional democracies, their economic strength, and their emotional attachment to their homeland make them a key factor for change. I call on all members of the diaspora to exercise their right to vote and become active creators of the future of the country they come from. Their vote can be the decisive factor that tips the scales in favor of a civic Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The answer to this question determines the future of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Therefore, my support, and at the same time an appeal to all fellow citizens at home and in the diaspora who see the state as a common project, goes towards the candidacy of the only proven fighter for civil rights, Slaven Kovačević. He represents the only authentic alternative that can initiate the processes of dismantling the ethno-nationalist system and direct Bosnia and Herzegovina towards a modern, unitary civic state based on the principle of one person – one vote. Any other option is, in essence, a confirmation of the status quo and a path to further state crisis. In the context of regional instability and geopolitical tensions, such a path carries not only the risk of further institutional collapse but is a potential catalyst for the escalation of conflicts that could, from Bosnia and Herzegovina, engulf the entire Southeast Europe. This is no longer a choice between political options; it is a choice between the survival of the state and its complete collapse.