Judge Uzunović rejected the defense's request for the trial to start over, Dodik asked who is speeding up the process against him

(Patria) - Judge Sena Uzunović rejected the request of the defense of the president of the BiH entity Republika Srpska, Milorad Dodik, and the acting director of the "Official Gazette", Miloš Lukić, to re-read the indictment and re-examine witnesses, i.e., for the process to start over because more than 30 days have passed since the last hearing.

Uzunović stated that the request was unfounded and would lead to a delay in the proceedings before the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina. She added that all witnesses have been examined both directly and cross-examined.

Uzunović also listed how many times hearings were postponed, including those due to Dodik's surgical procedure.

"Because of this, the trial could not proceed at the planned pace," the judge said.

Lawyer Goran Bubić said that in this case there is no continuity of the process because throughout the summer and autumn, the Prosecutor's Office was given the opportunity to present evidence related to Annex 10 of the Dayton Peace Agreement.

Bubić stated that during the reading of the indictment on February 5, 2024, a curtain was lowered, preventing the public from hearing everything, and that this was one of the arguments for the request to re-read the indictment.

Dodik also addressed the Court of BiH, stating that his human rights were violated and asking whether someone was speeding up this process for political reasons.

Today, witness Siniša Karan was heard, who said that Dodik had two options: either to be tried by the people of Republika Srpska or by the Court of BiH.

- He did not allow himself to be tried by the people who elected him - said Karan.

He explained that the president of RS has no ability to influence legislative decisions, nor can he be a lawmaker.

- The Constitution is the only framework based on which institutions pass laws - said Karan.

Before Dodik signed the decrees, Karan noted that he had discussed with him the constitutional relationship between the institution of the president and the National Assembly.

Karan emphasized that no one disputes Annex 10, but that no high representative is or can be a legislator.