Read what the Counter-Declaration on the Protection of the Legitimacy of the OHR, Sent by Pro-Bosniak Representatives from the RS to the PIC, Says

(Patria) - Pro-Bosniak representatives elected to governing bodies in/from the RS have sent a Counter-Declaration on the Protection of the Constitutional Order and the Legitimacy of the Office of the High Representative (OHR) to the Peace Implementation Council (PIC) ahead of its two-day session.

They rejected the Declaration on the Closure of the OHR adopted by the RSNA, stating it is legally unfounded, politically harmful, and contrary to the constitutional order of BiH, and called on the PIC to appoint a new High Representative with full Bonn Powers.

In the Counter-Declaration, they stated that the OHR was established by Annex 10 of the General Framework Agreement for Peace, and that the Bonn Powers are not 'extra-contractual' but a legitimate development of the mandate confirmed by the PIC and accepted in the practice of the UN Security Council.

"The UN Security Council regularly accepted their use through reports of the Secretary-General and welcomed them through resolutions," they noted in the document addressed to the PIC.

They also state that the Venice Commission confirmed that the Bonn Powers are a legitimate evolution of the mandate and that they enabled key reforms in BiH. The Commission never concluded that the OHR or the Bonn Powers were illegal.

The Constitutional Court of BiH, as they stated, has repeatedly confirmed that OHR decisions have the legal force of domestic laws, making the RSNA's claim of 'nullity' legally untenable.

"Such a claim is in direct contradiction with the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court and represents a unilateral denial of acts that are an integral part of the legal order of BiH," emphasize the signatories of the Counter-Declaration.

They note that the appointment of the High Representative is carried out by the PIC, and UN practice confirms that confirmation by the Security Council was never required. This is evident, they state, from the appointments of all previous High Representatives.

"The UN welcomed appointments by the PIC and consistently supported their work without challenging the procedure. The claim of a 'material breach of Annex 10' is a political construct without basis in international law.

The RS authorities attempted to challenge the appointment of Christian Schmidt before UN bodies, which failed," they state in the Counter-Declaration.

They emphasize that the OHR has played an irreplaceable role in protecting the constitutional order of BiH, its territorial integrity, and the rights of constituent peoples. The imposition of decisions was aimed at removing blockades and protecting the Dayton Agreement.

The claim that the OHR 'deepened political divisions,' as the signatories state, ignores that the biggest crises arose due to unilateral moves by entity authorities that challenged the competencies of the state of BiH and its institutions, blockades of the Parliament, denial of rulings by international courts, and glorification of war criminals.

Also, they state that the role of the OHR in the process of return of refugees and displaced persons is one of the most concrete arguments for its continued existence.

The OHR played a key role in promoting and supporting return, especially the minority return of Bosniaks and Croats to the RS. By abolishing wartime laws and supervising entity authorities, the OHR enabled the return of property and the protection of returnees' rights.

Without the Bonn Powers and international supervision, as highlighted in the Counter-Declaration, the return of property would not have been possible, and returnees would have been exposed to selective and discriminatory application of the law.

Today's attacks on returnees and challenges to their rights show, they warn, that the abolition of the OHR would directly jeopardize the results of return and the achievements of Annex 7.

"The OHR can only be closed upon fulfillment of the 5+2 conditions, and the RS, through its blockades, is precisely prolonging its mandate. Unilateral closure without fulfilling these conditions would pave the way for policies that threaten the constitutional order of BiH, its sovereignty and territorial integrity," the Counter-Declaration states.

The RSNA Declaration, as stated, was adopted without respecting the views of Bosniak representatives and citizens in the RS.

"Proceeding from the above, we reject the RSNA Declaration on the closure of the OHR, confirm the full legality and legitimacy of the OHR, including the appointment of Christian Schmidt, and the full legal force of decisions made based on Annex 10 and the Bonn Powers.

We emphasize the irreplaceable role of the OHR in protecting the rights of returnees in the RS in accordance with Annex 7 of the Dayton Agreement, demand that the issue of closing the OHR be considered exclusively through the fulfillment of the 5+2 Agenda, and call on the PIC to appoint without delay a new High Representative with full Bonn Powers.

We warn that any deviation from these principles would jeopardize the Dayton Agreement and the stability of BiH, and especially the status of returnees in the RS," reads the Counter-Declaration of pro-Bosniak representatives in the institutions of the RS - the Vice President of the RS, deputies in the RSNA, delegates in the Council of Peoples of the RS, and representatives in the institutions of BiH.