IDPI

Institut za društveno-politička istraživanja
Institute for Social and Political Research

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

(4/4) Any interpretation disregarding these established constitutional standards is a serious breach of Annex IV of the Dayton Peace Agreement, i.e. the Constitution of BiH, and undermines the legal foundations of the peace settlement, thereby risking the hard-won peace in BiH.

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

(1/4) The claim made in this tweet is in direct contradiction with the jurisprudence of the BiH Constitutional Court. In its Decision U-23/14, the Court explicitly refers to the concept of “legitimate representation” as part of the *general principle of democracy*.

[Jasmin Mujanović @JasminMuj]

The concept of “legitimate representation” (i.e. segregated voting) does not appear in the Washington or Dayton agreements, and is a purely partisan HDZ talking point. Moreover, a succession of rulings by the @ECHR_CEDH and BiH Constitutional Court make clear that concept is incomparable with the EU acquis and ECHR, and thus both a violation of the letter and the spirit BiH’s constitutional regime.

In short, BiH must choose: it must either pursue EU and NATO membership in accordance with liberal democratic norms of free and fair democratic elections. Or it can opt for the HDZ’s “legitimate representation” and remain mired in the muck of Jim Crow-style institutional discrimination.

It is evident Croatia’s HDZ government wants the latter for BiH. But it is not up to them. It is up to citizens of BiH and their elected representatives.

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

(3/4) The Constitutional Court has characterized the principle of constituent peoples as an “overarching principle of the Constitution”, underscoring its normative supremacy within the constitutional order.

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

RTV HB | Formula za prelazak iz daytonske u bruxellesku fazu https://t.co/Jli7uRYE87 via @YouTube

[pangea netzwerk @pangeanetzwerk]

Liebe @KroBotschaft, für einen Völkermord wurde Kroatien nicht verurteilt, aber hier die Fakten: Die Herceg-Bosna war ein „selbsternannter, international nicht anerkannter Parastaat von 1991 bis 1994.“ Es war also der erste Parastaat, mehrere Monate vor der Ausrufung der 1/x

[Martin Mikulić @MartinMikulic_]

(1/4) Deeply inaccurate & immature assessment by a part of MEPs. Crucial events are being overlooked.

The reason @OHR_BiH Schmidt had to intervene in the first place is failure of domestic actors to implement the #MostarAgreement, notably by @BiH_SDA & @Izetbegovic_B.

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

https://t.co/2Rc1Y0uVVQ

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

(3/3) Tijekom dosadašnjih 25 godina od prvih izbora., Hrvati su 12 godina imali 0% vlasti u PrBiH; 5 godina 0% vlasti u PrFBiH i 6 godina 0% vlasti u VFBiH. Stoga i 0% direktora i ostalih „funkcija“ koji su se u tim razdobljima imenovali u PrBiH, PrFBiH i VFBiH.

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

(1/3) @ReufBajrovic i @Izetbegovic_B manipuliraju „točnim brojevima“. Za raspodjelu vlasti u BiH nije mjerodavan postotak Hrvata nego njihov ustavni status.

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

(2/3) Sukladno DMS i Ustavu BiH, Hrvati su konstitutivan / ustavotvoran /državotvoran narod i kao takvi, kroz mehanizme pariteta i konsenzusa, moraju biti jednakopravni s Bošnjacima i Srbima u PrBiH, VMBiH, DNPSBiH, DNPFBiH, PrFBiH i VFBiH.

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

(4/4) Croats also had 6 years 0% of governance in GovFBiH. Therefore, 0% of directors and other "functionaries" who were appointed in these periods in PrBiH, PrFBiH and GovFBiH were appointed by Croats.

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

(1/4) @ReufBajrovic and @Izetbegovic_B manipulate with "correct numbers". The percentage of Croats is not relevant for the distribution of power in BiH, but their constitutional status.

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

(3/4) They must be equal in PrBiH, Council of Ministers of BiH, HoP of PABiH, HoP of PFBiH, PrFBiH and GovFBiH. During the previous 25 years since the first elections, Croats had 0% of governance in PrBiH for 12 years and 5 years 0% of governance in PrFBiH.

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

(4/4) Croats also had 6 years 0% of governance in GovFBiH. Therefore, 0% of directors and other "functionaries" who were appointed in these periods in PrBiH, PrFBiH and GovFBiH were appointed by Croats.

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

(1/4) @ReufBajrovic and @Izetbegovic_B manipulate with "correct numbers". The percentage of Croats is not relevant for the distribution of power in BiH, but their constitutional status.

[IDPI @IDPI_Mostar]

(3/4) They must be equal in PrBiH, Council of Ministers of BiH, HoP of PABiH, HoP of PFBiH, PrFBiH and GovFBiH. During the previous 25 years since the first elections, Croats had 0% of governance in PrBiH for 12 years and 5 years 0% of governance in PrFBiH.