With Big Eyes Due to Panic, Yet Short-Sighted: Murphy's Crisis Over Fear of the Rule of Law!

By: Rasim Belko

Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are binding on the state to which they apply. The obligation of states to implement the judgments of the European Court is stipulated by Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention, and the obligation to fulfill the conditions for friendly settlements is stipulated by Article 39, paragraph 4 of the Convention.

Therefore, judgments of the European Court of Human Rights are binding for all states that are signatories to the Convention on Human Rights, and when it comes to Bosnia and Herzegovina, that Convention is a category above the Constitution.

Given that the current Constitution of our country is temporary and non-European, as a consequence of the peace agreement, it is clear that Bosnia and Herzegovina needs a constitution adopted through a democratic procedure by democratically elected officials. And for officials to be elected democratically, electoral legislation must guarantee equal rights to all citizens. The ECtHR judgments concerning Bosnia and Herzegovina have clearly specified this – five relate to passive voting rights, and the latest in the case of "Kovačević v. Bosnia and Herzegovina" concerns active voting rights.

The rule of law, which the diplomatic corps continuously mentions in an attempt to "teach us about it" in Bosnia and Herzegovina, implies that there is no haggling with judgments and the manner of their implementation. The state can use certain tools to implement these judgments, but it cannot implement them contrary to the essence of the decision, the rule of law, and the Convention on Human Rights.

However, the Ambassador of the United States of America, Michael Murphy, fearing the failure of the project on which he wants to preserve his career – the "Trika - Dodik - Čović - 2030" – presents a nebulous interpretation that judgments must be implemented exclusively by political leaders in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Even if it could and should be so, it is again impossible, considering that the leaders in Bosnia and Herzegovina, with the help of the international community, have proclaimed themselves tribal/ethnic leaders, rather than democratically elected representatives in accordance with European practice.

Murphy is also aware that this is completely contradictory to the rules of the space he comes from and, as Miro Lazović said, it allows Čović and Dodik to continue blocking the process of implementing ECtHR judgments, while creating an escape tunnel for his creation, the Trika, from responsibility.

If he had made such a statement as an official of his country on its territory, he would probably be summoned for questioning, because any derogation and undermining of the rule of law is punishable in civilized countries.

However, with the passage of time from Dayton to the present, it has become crystal clear that it is precisely the diplomats and politicians from the international community, led by the USA, Great Britain, and the EU, who have pushed us into a dark abyss of uncivilized, undemocratic, and non-European values.

Because, before they established their diplomatic missions in Bosnia and Herzegovina, this country had elections like civilized Western countries. Those who opened the doors to European and democratic rules and values, fresh from socialist self-management, enabled this for us.

And then, Murphy's compatriots created Dayton and for almost 30 years offered and created false solutions for the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina to exit the war phase and the Constitution as part of a peace agreement into the phase of European integration, which should automatically mean a transition to the rule of law and full respect for human rights. This did not fall from the sky in Bulgaria, Romania, the Czech Republic… but they were enabled to move from the past into a system that contemporary civilization considers the best.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, those who thought like Murphy have been spinning their wheels, and now it is clear that they have been doing so intentionally. The only question is the motive for such actions! And that motive was revealed when Escobar, Palmer, Varhelyi, Eichhorst, along with Murphy, offered us to accept the rules and values of tribal communities from centuries ago for a country that was democratic in 1991, at the beginning of the second decade of the second millennium. Because, if factors are found who will agree to such solutions, the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina is unsustainable as such and easily divisible into larger entities like Serbia and Croatia.

Therefore, there is no doubt that Murphy's mockery of the values he comes from is used as an opportunity to draw us into a narrative where we depend on a tripartite political mass, which he has already prepared for dark solutions.

The first ECtHR judgment opened a serious crack in these plans, and the latest in the case of "Kovačević v. BiH" completed the picture, forcing the international community to either return to the paradigm it comes from, which is the rule of law and human rights, or to clearly state that, by American-European standards, aggression, genocide, joint criminal enterprise, and ethnic cleansing are profitable in the creation of mono-ethnic states.

Such actions would set a precedent in international law and relations. Therefore, Murphy, by distorting facts, tried to protect his project and keep it alive, so that one day his protégés would vote that democracy is when two people in Sarajevo are worth less than two people in Banja Luka and three in Široki Brijeg, and when someone who declares themselves as Bosniak is worth nothing. That is why Murphy fears European judgments, because he knows that if a critical mass is created for policies that will insist on their implementation as the law dictates, his plan will be nullified.

And then he will have to return to America empty-handed and work as a copy machine operator for the third deputy, fifth advisor to the second secretary!