Close the door to Russian chaos: Welcome Mr. Inzko!

By: Muharem Cero

---

The principle of continuity of government derived from Annex 4 of the Dayton Peace Agreement has been explained and confirmed in several constitutional decisions. Simply put, the mandate of elected officials is not tied to the expiration date of four-year terms, but its duration ends with the acceptance and assumption of the same function by a newly elected candidate.

An integral part of Dayton is also Annex 10 and the function of the High Representative in BiH (OHR). Without going into the manner of appointing High Representatives and their legality, it can still be recognized that this Dayton institution, by virtue of its competence, shares the same principle of continuity as elected officials in BiH institutions (parliamentarians and other elected functions).

The current High Representative Christian Schmidt continuously faces challenges to his own legitimacy. In the exercise of his function, this challenge is met with a reduced ability to exercise the powers under Annex 10, both those in the area of authentic interpreter of Dayton and those competencies that give him the authority to substitute for the failure to exercise legislative powers by elected persons in the entities, lower administrative arrangements, and even at the level of the state of BiH.

His predecessor Valentin Inzko resigned from that position with a conditional clause. In submitting his resignation, Inzko conditioned his mandate on its duration until the appointment and assumption of office by the new High Representative.

In the coming months, the deadline approaches by which every High Representative, including the contested Schmidt, submits a six-month report on his work in BiH to the UN Security Council.

Given the veto on his appointment by the Russian Federation and China, the upcoming report will largely determine the further functionality of Christian Schmidt in the role of High Representative in BiH. 

If Schmidt's chair in the Security Council remains empty, and the Russian Federation and China maintain their previously stated veto position, the question of his function and effectiveness on the ground in BiH will indeed continue to be challenged by the RS entity, and the enforceability of the High Representative's decisions will face the impossibility of implementation in almost half of BiH.

It would be useful for elected officials in BiH (members of the Presidency, Presidents of Parliament, presidents of caucuses in the BiH Parliamentary Assembly) to explain and constitutionally interpret such a situation by submitting inquiries to the UN Security Council and the Venice Commission, the legal EU authority.

The issue of High Representative Schmidt's mandate cannot be a question of legitimacy, as it is exclusively and solely a question of legality. 

If legality does not reside in the person of Christian Schmidt, it is quite certainly still in the person of former High Representative Valentin Inzko.

The dilemma of Schmidt's legality in BiH at this moment cannot and must not leave the door open for Russian chaos, as some would wish and diligently carry out.