24 / 514
Post-Communist Transition to Democracy and Problems in the Balkans: Case of Bosnia- Herzegovinia
13
n
The uncertainties in the power-sharing between the state and the Entities consists of a constant threat to the sover-
eignty of the State of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Seperatist policies of the nationalist parties in the country threatens
the sovereignty of the state because of this uncertainty. On the other hand Bosnia has the appearance of an alliance
of two political units. For example, there are parallel bodies in the state such as telecommunication, education,
railway, health and insurance institutions. In addition, for real political power is granted to the regions, the state
organs can not take every decision itself. Possibly, that as a result of this situation, no political party in BiH binds
its political existence to the State of BiH and any political party’s activities does not exceed the limits of the Enti-
ties, in a serious way. Republica Srpska represents the political field of the Serb parties, while the Federation of
Bosnia and Herzegovina represents the political field of the Bosniac and Croat parties. These two separate political
arena is confronted only at the state level. With the voting system at the level of the entites, Article 14 of the Euro-
pean convention on Human Rights are directly violated. The present political arena does not allow correction of
these errors or it is very difficult. The nationalist and separatist Bosnian Serbs do not allow the correction of the
such violations and problematic parts in the constitution.
Aside from everything else, this Constitution creates the basis for the disappearance of the Bosnian identity which
refers the shared past and historical continuity by establishing separate political entities legalizing the results of
the ethnic civil war. This contributes to the strengthening of the idea of the ‘ethnic nation’ rather than the ‘civic
nation’. The idea of ‘ethnic nation’ in the case of the Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats coexist with the idea of
‘fragmentation’. In other words, this idea rejects the common identity of Bosnia and Herzegovina with a desire of
breaking away from the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina and uniting with their motherland, namely Croatia and
Serbia, in the long run. On the other hand, the idea of ‘integration’, does not refer to the concept of ‘civic nation’,
as long as they perceive the idea of ‘integration’ as the creation of a state that would be dominated by the Bosniacs.
In the case of Bosniacs the idea of ‘integration’ seems not necesseraly coexist with the idea of ‘civic nation’, as long
as they identify themselves with the historical territory of the Bosnia as their homeland while the Bosnian Serb and
Bosnian Croat political elites, with the support of their motherland (namely Serbia and Croatia) trying to detach
the loyalty of their populations from Bosnia and Herzegovina. This identification has gained a national meaning
when the Bosnian Muslim political and intellectual elites, in 1993, has decided to change the name of the group
– from Bosnian Muslim to “Bosniak”. This was a result of the efforts to build a Bosnian Muslim national identity
and was also the beginning for abandoning the ideal of creating a civic Bosnian state or a multicultural Bosnian
citizenship under the pressure of the external and internal conditions.
As indicated in the following discussions on the constitutional amendments, it seems quite difficult to hope for the
reconciliation among the representatives of the three ethnic groups for the necessary constitutional amendments
for the establishment of an unified multi-ethnic state.
First of all, there are two main different attitudes among the parties about the DAP. Bosniacs and the Bosnian
Croats believe that the Constitution needs to be changed fundamentally. On the other hand the representatives
of the Bosnian Serbs think that Dayton Agreement is a basic principle to keep the peace in Bosnia and that any
constitutional change needs to be evaluated as a threat to the peace efforts. According to them any amendment
to the constitution will change the current status of the Republika Srpska and would result in its disappearance.
In their statement, the Bosnian Serb leaders threatens to leave the BiH through a referendum, in the case of any
constitutional reform without their consent.
‘
April Package’
The most serious attempt for the amendments to the constitution of BİH was initiated by Principal Deputy High
Representative, Donald S. Hays in 2005. Six leading political parties in the BiH began to work on constitutional
amendments known as ‘April Package’. Despite the support of the international community, April Package was
carried out by direct local politicians. The leaders of the two founding peoples Sulejman Tihic and Bosnian Croat
Dragan Covic were the local politicians showing the greatest effort to initiate constitutional reform (Hitchner,
2006: 125). Serbian leaders have decided to participate this process later. Despite this is an initiative lauched by
US, EU took a very active role since the beginning of this process. But EU, as negotiations progressed, and when
it comes to the critical points reduce their involvement and chose to participate in more audience. On the other