A Verdict That Isn't: How a Procedural Decision Becomes a Victory for an Ethnic State in Bosnia and Herzegovina

By: Prof. Dr. Hazim Bašić, member of the Presidency of Krug 99

When political structures in Bosnia and Herzegovina celebrate a procedural decision as a "victory for constitutionality", and present the rejection of a lawsuit as a "triumph of the constituent peoples' status", it is clear that truth in this country is a matter of interpretation. Once again, a court decision has become a weapon in the fight against civic equality, against the idea that BiH can be a state of all its citizens.

A Verdict That Isn't

The Club of Founders of HDZ BiH announced that the decision of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which rejected the request of Dr. Slaven Kovačević, "confirms that the constitutional order of BiH is based on the principle of equality of constituent peoples". This claim is simply untrue. The Grand Chamber did not rule on the constitutional order of Bosnia and Herzegovina, nor did it consider the "civic model".

The Court rejected the lawsuit for procedural reasons, as the applicant was allegedly not directly affected by the disputed provisions but sought to act on behalf of all or on behalf of democratic principles, which the Court completely misinterpreted as an actio popularis, but which does not and cannot mean that the merits of his request – the issue of discrimination against citizens in terms of exercising active voting rights – were unfounded. In other words, the ECtHR did not say that BiH's ethnic model is in line with European standards. It only said that the specific lawsuit did not meet the procedural requirements. But in a country where facts are merely raw material for political rhetoric, a procedural decision has immediately been turned into ideological capital.

Manipulation of Terms and Substitution of Theses

In the statement of the HDZ founders, the civic model was declared "unitarism", and the demand for equality was labeled a "political agenda". This is an old trick of local nationalists: every attempt to free BiH from ethnic tutelage is interpreted as a threat. However, in Europe, the "civic principle" is not an ideological novelty, but a fundamental condition for democracy. The civic model is not unitarism, but a civilizational standard.

In France, Germany, Belgium, or Switzerland – countries with far deeper cultural, linguistic, and identity differences than Bosnia and Herzegovina – one person means one vote. Only in our country does ethnic affiliation carry more political weight than civic status. Only here is equality treated as a threat, not as an ideal.

Discreditation Instead of Argument

Instead of discussing legal grounds, the authors of the statement choose personal attacks. Dr. Slaven Kovačević is accused of "misuse of the right to sue", "insulting judges", and "disrespecting the constitutional order". This does not refute any of his arguments. On the contrary, it confirms that arguments are not welcome at all.

Kovačević's real "sin" is not a procedural omission, but the fact that he sought what Europe takes for granted – equal political rights for all citizens. When such a demand is declared an "attack on the Constitution" in BiH, it becomes clear that the problem is not with the Constitution, but with its interpreters.

Europe Does Not Recognize Ethnic Democracy

In its five previous judgments, the ECtHR consistently reiterates: discrimination of citizens based on ethnic or territorial affiliation is not in line with the European Convention. If these judgments are ignored for years, and a procedural rejection of a lawsuit is celebrated as a "victory for the constituent peoples' status", it is clear that the domestic ethno-national order is not seeking justice, but confirmation of its own monopoly. Such an interpretation of judgments leads BiH further away from Europe.

There are no constituent peoples in the European Union, only constituent citizens. Europe seeks citizens, not peoples. Behind the calls for "agreement of peoples" lies an attempt to turn citizens into ethnic figures on a political chessboard. This is not democracy, it is a sophisticated form of exclusion. The founders of HDZ claim that the Constitution can be changed "only by political agreement of the peoples and their legitimate representatives". In practice, this means that nothing can be changed without the consent of ethnic elites, the very ones who live off the status quo.

The civic principle, which implies that every person has equal political value, is called "usurpation". The true usurpation of democracy is the constitutional system that has been blocking the development of the state for thirty years.

Bosnia and Herzegovina Between Past and Future

The European future of Bosnia and Herzegovina does not depend on rhetoric about "sovereignty of the people", but on the willingness to accept the sovereignty of the citizen. A country that does not recognize equal voting rights for all its inhabitants cannot be part of the European political space. Those who today celebrate the "victory of the constituent peoples' status" are actually celebrating the defeat of the European idea.

Ultimately, this ECtHR decision did not bring any "victory for constitutionality", but only another round of political illusion. In a country where procedural errors are declared proof of "sovereignty of the people", and the fight for civil rights is called "unitarism", democracy is reduced to an ethnic census. BiH will become European only when it ceases to be ethnic. Until then, every "victory for constitutionality" will be just – a victory for the status quo.