Three Months of Silence from the HJPC: Who Protects the Non-Enforcement of the BiH Court's Ruling?

In a country where politicians often invoke the rule of law only when it suits them, in recent months we have witnessed one of the most serious tests of the legal system of Bosnia and Herzegovina. And it is not only politicians who are failing this test, but also the institutions that should be the last line of defense of legality.

As early as March 12, 2026, the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council announced a disciplinary process because the Basic Court in Banja Luka did not immediately enforce the ruling and carry out the deletion of Milorad Dodik from the court register as an authorized person of the party.

But, to this day, there is no information from the HJPC.

For months, there has been institutional disregard for a final court decision. Even more seriously, this is not just a disciplinary matter or a procedural oversight. Disrespecting and failing to enforce court decisions in a state governed by the rule of law represents a much more serious problem, with elements of criminal liability. Precisely for this reason, the fact that the Office of the Disciplinary Prosecutor of the HJPC has opened a case against the judges of the Basic Court in Banja Luka cannot be the end of the story, but only its beginning.

However, three months later, the public knows nothing.

There is no information on whether the investigation has been completed, whether the facts have been established, nor are there any indications that anyone will be held responsible for the blatant disregard of the ruling of the highest state court. The silence of the HJPC further deepens the suspicion that the case is being deliberately dragged out until the political consequences become irreversible.

And the consequences are already visible.

The Central Election Commission of BiH certified the SNSD's application to participate in the General Elections, even though the documentation was signed by Milorad Dodik himself, a person for whom there is a court ruling that he cannot perform the function of party president. The only dissenting vote was from CEC member Suad Arnautović, who warned of the legal and institutional consequences of such a decision.

His warning remained a lone voice.

In this way, a dangerous precedent was created. Instead of institutions insisting on the enforcement of the ruling, they have adapted to its non-enforcement. In other words, an illegal situation has become the basis for making new decisions.

This is perhaps the most dangerous aspect of the entire case.

Because this is no longer just about Milorad Dodik or the SNSD. It is about the question of whether court rulings in Bosnia and Herzegovina apply equally to everyone, or whether there are political centers of power that can count on institutional passivity until time takes its toll.

If a court decision produces no consequences, then it ceases to be an instrument of justice and becomes a mere piece of paper. If courts refuse to enforce rulings, and the HJPC does not react for months, then a message is sent that responsibility is not a legal but a political category.

And if the CEC accepts the signatures of a person who, according to the ruling, should not represent a political party, then trust in the electoral process is also undermined. The game without limits continues.

It is particularly concerning that all this is happening in an election year. While citizens are told to respect the laws, institutions show a willingness to turn a blind eye to their violation when it comes to the most powerful political actors.

Therefore, the public has the right to demand answers. What has the HJPC established in the case against the judges of the Basic Court in Banja Luka? Why was the ruling of the BiH Court not enforced? Who is responsible for its disregard? And finally, how is it possible that the SNSD was certified for the elections based on documentation signed by a person who, according to the ruling, should not perform the function of party president?

While there are no answers, the impression remains that before the eyes of the public, it is not just one ruling being tested, but the very ability of the state to enforce its own laws.

And a state that cannot force its own institutions to respect court decisions risks losing much more than a single legal dispute; it risks losing the credibility of the legal order.

And there is no doubt that on Friday, June 19, the coalition will also be certified, just like the SNSD itself, because the system is unable to clearly respond to a very simple matter and protect the rule of law.