Confused BiH Constitutional Court President: Seada Palavrić doesn't even know what she voted for

By Avdo Avdić/Istraga.ba

If Seada Palavrić had carefully searched the website of the Constitutional Court of BiH, she would have realized that the decision in the Zuhrić case has been published.

Here is a brief instruction for her. Let her click here first. When the website of the Constitutional Court of BiH opens, let her click on the "court practice" section. Then an icon will appear that says - latest decisions.

If she clicks on that, all decisions made at the last session of the Constitutional Court of BiH will appear. At the bottom of this page, numbers from 1 to 7 are listed. We suggest she clicks on number 3.

The third decision from the top is decision number AP-849/23, next to which is written Albin Zuhrić. After that, let her click on "details" and she will be able to read the following content:

"The Constitutional Court concludes that there is a violation of the right to non-discrimination from Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 to the European Convention because, in the procedure for nominating the President and Vice-Presidents of the Federation of BiH, the final decisions of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, made on the basis of the provisions of Article IV.B.2 of the Constitution of the FBiH and Articles 9.13-9.15 of the Election Law, prevented the first appellants as delegates in the House of Peoples of the FBiH from proposing candidates for the President and Vice-Presidents of the Federation of BiH from the "others" category, and prevented the second appellant as a member of the "others" group from being a candidate for the President and Vice-Presidents of the Federation of BiH".

And now let's see what the President of the Constitutional Court of BiH, Seada Palavrić, writes in the press release regarding the Zuhrić verdict.

"The Constitutional Court reminds that the decision on case number AP-849/23 (Albin Zuhrić and others) was not listed at all in the Constitutional Court's press release from the session held on January 23, 2025, at the time of writing about it, because it is essentially one of a series of such decisions. It was not published on the website of the Constitutional Court, nor anywhere else".

Therefore, the President of the Constitutional Court of BiH is not telling the truth, and this is easy to verify if you follow the instructions from the beginning of the text. Does she want it more vividly? Here:



Let's move on.

The President of the Constitutional Court of BiH writes that "in the case of Albin Zuhrić and others, it ruled on individual appeals filed against the final decisions of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Central Election Commission of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The decisions challenged before the Constitutional Court rejected the certification of Zlatan Begić as a candidate from the group of delegates in the House of Peoples of the Federation of BiH (Albin Zuhrić, Sandra Imširović, and Senita Handukić) for the election of the President and Vice-President of the Federation of BiH from the "others" group.

In that decision, the Constitutional Court proceeded from the conclusions in the Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. U-14/12 of March 26, 2015, in which it ruled on essentially the same legal and factual issue of the impossibility for members of the "others" group to run for the position of President and Vice-President of the Federation of BiH".

This statement is entirely correct. Unlike the next paragraph.

"The Constitutional Court particularly emphasizes that the decision of the Constitutional Court of BiH does not assess the constitutionality of the High Representative's amendments, nor does it contain the conclusion that 'Schmidt's amendments to the Constitution of the FBiH adopted on election night discriminate against the others,' as reported by some media.

On the contrary, the Constitutional Court emphasizes that in the explanation, it reiterated the position from the Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. U-27/22 of March 22, 2023 (see point 134, available at www.ustavnisud.ba), and clearly emphasized that the content of the contested provisions of the High Representative's Amendments No. CXX and Chapter 9A in relation to the provisions of the Election Law of BiH indicate the fact that the provisions adopted by the High Representative did not change the earlier provisions of the Constitution of the FBiH and the Election Law that related to the exclusion of the possibility for members of the "others" group to run for President and Vice-Presidents of the Federation of BiH".

Let's follow the bolded parts, since the president herself bolded them. Seada Palavrić, therefore, states that the decision of the Constitutional Court of BiH does not contain the conclusion that "Schmidt's Amendments to the Constitution of the FBiH adopted on election night discriminate against the others".

Let's go back to the website of the Constitutional Court of BiH. Here's what it says there regarding the Zuhrić and others decision.

"The Constitutional Court concludes that there is a violation of the right to non-discrimination from Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 to the European Convention because, in the procedure for nominating the President and Vice-Presidents of the Federation of BiH, the final decisions of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which were made on the basis of the provisions of Article IV.B.2 of the Constitution of the FBiH and Articles 9.13-9.15 of the Election Law, prevented the first appellants as delegates in the House of Peoples of the FBiH from proposing candidates for the President and Vice-Presidents of the Federation of BiH from the "others" category, and prevented the second appellant as a member of the "others" group from being a candidate for the President and Vice-Presidents of the Federation of BiH".

The Constitutional Court of BiH, therefore, writes that the decision of the Court of BiH which discriminated against the "others" was based on Article IV.B.2 of the Constitution of the FBiH and Articles 9.13-9.15 of the Election Law.

Do you know who imposed those provisions? Christian Schmidt on election night in 2022. Those who don't believe can click here. When the OHR website opens, look for Amendment CXX. Below it says "Article IV.B.2. is amended and reads..."

Therefore, Article IV.B.2. was imposed by Christian Schmidt. The Court of BiH referred to that article when it prohibited the "others" club from proposing the (vice)president of the Federation.

The Constitutional Court of BiH writes in its ruling that it found discrimination in the decision of the Court of BiH which referred to Article IV.B.2. This means that the article cited by the Constitutional Court, and imposed by the OHR, is discriminatory.

But the President of the Constitutional Court of BiH does not read. However, that's not all. We quote Seada Palavrić's statement again.

"The provisions adopted by the High Representative did not change the earlier provisions of the Constitution of the FBiH and the Election Law that related to the exclusion of the possibility for members of the "others" group to run for President and Vice-Presidents of the Federation of BiH".

The President is not reading again. Before Christian Schmidt imposed amendment CXX, the Constitution of the Federation of BiH stated that six delegates from each club of the constituent peoples could propose the (vice)president of the Federation.

If Schmidt had not imposed the amendment, that provision, which was previously declared unconstitutional, would have remained in force. However, Schmidt imposed a new provision which reads "any group of eleven delegates from each of the constituent peoples' clubs in the House of Peoples may propose a candidate from the respective constituent people, provided that each delegate may support only one candidate.

All candidates may be elected in accordance with this article either to the position of President or to the position of Vice-President of the Federation". Moreover, Christian Schmidt himself writes: "Article IV.B.2. is amended and reads".

If the OHR itself admits that it is changing this article, why does Seada Palavrić say that the disputed provision has not been changed? To make it easier to understand, we are attaching a photo for her.



So, Schmidt changed the provision. Now, the question is why Seada Palavrić does not see, or dares not to see, what is written.

Let's move on. The President of the Constitutional Court of BiH objects to the publication of information that her colleagues Valerija Galić and Marin Vukoja were against accepting Zuhrić's appeal.

"Regarding the statements about the Vice-President of the Constitutional Court Valerija Galić and the judge of the Constitutional Court Marin Vukoja, we emphasize that it is inappropriate to call out judges who, in accordance with Article 43 of the Rules of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, have left the possibility of submitting a dissenting opinion.

At this moment, as stated, the decision is in the post-production process, and whether the named judges will, in accordance with Article 43 of the Rules of the Constitutional Court, use their right to a dissenting opinion at this moment is not appropriate to comment on.

Furthermore, the discussion of the mentioned judges regarding this case did not concern opposition to the decision itself, but rather the consideration of admissibility according to Article 18, paragraph (3), point e) of the Rules of the Constitutional Court, i.e., the question of whether the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina has previously ruled on the same matter, as it is undisputed that it concerned an issue on which the Constitutional Court of BiH had previously made similar decisions," stated President Palavrić.

So, Valerija Galić and Marin Vukoja have the right to a dissenting opinion, but journalists do not have the right to publish that they have a dissenting opinion. That, in short, is the logic of the President of the Constitutional Court of BiH.

Incoherent. Regardless of how many exclamation marks she puts at the end of the statement. Because if anyone contributes to the erosion of the reputation of the Constitutional Court of BiH, it is her - Seada Palavrić.