The (un)democratic role of the High Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Chiara Mihalčatinová

The 2022 general elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) were noteworthy for their odd turns and surprises. Presumably, the most shocking moment came just as the polls closed, and it was no longer possible to change the election’s outcome. However, what was possible was to change the next elections’ rules, and that is precisely what was announced by the High Representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Christian Schmidt. In his letter, Schmidt informed the public that he had enacted the controversial electoral law reform to improve the functionality of the institutions in the Balkan country. The implementation of this unprecedented decision would be the third time Schmidt used the so-called “Bonn powers” that grant him a unique position in the BiH political system. However, how is it possible that one externally appointed functionary holds such power that allows him to change not only the country’s voting system but the political system as a whole?

How is it possible that one externally appointed functionary holds such power that allows him to change not only the country’s voting system but the political system as a whole?

High Representative and EU Special Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina, German diplomat Christian Schmidt, speaks during the inaugural press conference, in Sarajevo Bosnia and Herzegovina, 04 August 2021/ EURACTIV

The concentration of power in a one person

The Office of the High Representative (OHR) is an international institution responsible for the implementation of civilian elements of the Peace Agreement that ended the 1992–1995 Bosnian War. The position of High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina was created specifically under the General Framework Agreement for Peace, usually referred to as the Dayton Peace Agreement. In 1997, the Peace Implementation Council (PIC), the OHR’s international overseeing and financing body, introduced new powers that would be associated with the position of the High Representative. These substantial powers, dubbed “Bonn powers,” included: the enactment of binding decisions when local parties seem unable or unwilling to act; and the removal from office of public officials who violate the Dayton Agreement. In practice, the High Representative can act as a judge since he is allowed to impose substantial legislation, judicial reforms, or annual constitutional court decisions. Consequently, the role of the High Representative has been compared to that of a viceroy, an official exercising authority in a colony on behalf of a sovereign (usually associated with governors-general in Commonwealth countries).

The appointment process emphasizes the analogy even further. Given that the OHR is an international body, the process of the High Representative’s selection is internationalized as well. Since 1995, every High Representative has been nominated and voted on by the Peace Implementation Council Steering Board, an 11-member body. The Steering Board members are Canada, the United States, Japan, Germany, France, Italy, the United Kingdom, the Presidency of the Council of the European Union, the European Commission, Russia, and Turkey. In other words, BiH itself has no say in the election process, and therefore it cannot influence who sits in one of the country’s most prominent positions. For this reason and various others, which will be outlined in the article, the High Representative role is often subjected to severe criticism.

BiH itself has no say in the election process, and therefore it cannot influence who sits in one of the country’s most prominent positions
„The fact that this [EU] support and cooperation goes far beyond what any other partner has provided to the region deserves public acknowledgement.“

Schmidt’s intervention

The vesting of so much power in an unelected outsider became controversial over time, and consequently, the High Representative ceased to use his powers from mid-2011 until July 2021. Political passivity ended when outgoing High Representative Valentin Inzko introduced a law providing for criminal sanctions against genocide deniers. The legislation touched on the Srebrenica massacre, which many Serbs do not consider to be an act of genocide. Inzko’s legislative initiative thus reignited national divisions and strengthened secessionist aspirations in the ranks of the Serb minority.

Inzko was replaced in the office of the High Representative by Christian Schmidt. Schmidt took office in August 2021, despite his legitimacy being questioned by Russia and China, which refused to support his appointment. Due to this, Schmidt has been perceived as a polarizing figure since the beginning of his tenure, which was only reinforced later by his relatively frequent use of the Bonn powers. The first time he decided to use his external powers occurred in April 2022, when he suspended the Law on Immovable Property of the Republika Srpska. This move was Schmidt’s response to the activities of the Bosnian Serb majority, which had conceded the right to administer immovable property on its territory. In practice, Schmidt arranged that only the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina could possess the power to regulate state property. His initiative was immediately criticized by Republika Srpska’s political leaders, especially the leader of the Serb entity, Milorad Dodik. However, Schmidt argued that a law adopted by the Republika Srpska authorities would undermine investment stability and reduce the investment potential of BiH.

In June 2022, Schmidt used his Bonn powers for the second time to fund October’s election. He did so after the political parties could not agree on how to fund the elections, even though BiH has a law that requires state institutions to provide funds within 15 days of the announcement of the elections. This legal deadline expired on May 19, and thus Schmidt took care of the allocation of sufficient funds and ensured that the sum of 12.5 million Bosnian marks (approximately 6.5 million EUR) was allocated from the state reserves.

For the third time, Schmidt used his Bonn powers in October 2022 to resolve a dispute between Bosnians and Croats in one of the two main entities and also to suppress Serb secessionists. On election night, Christian Schmidt announced the so-called “functionality package,” which modifies the Bosnian political system on several levels. It adjusts the overrepresentation of some ethnic groups and inclines others; it sets a deadline for the formation of a government after the elections and implements measures to ensure the functionality of the Federation of BiH. However, this package, which was initiated to conciliate the growing tensions in the country, has achieved the exact opposite. Back in the summer, when Schmidt announced his intervention in the political system, protests broke out outside the seat of the High Representative. More than 7,000 citizens expressed their disapproval of Schmidt’s planned actions, but even this did not stop him. The controversy was compounded by the timing that Schmidt chose. Schmidt announced the legislative modifications at a moment when it was no longer possible to reverse an election that might have turned out differently if the citizens had known the effect of Schmidt’s changes.

Aftermath

Schmidt’s action sparked outrage both domestically and internationally. EU leaders have publicly distanced themselves from Schmidt’s decision, and others have labeled it “illiberal.” Moreover, the EP’s Foreign Affairs Committee summoned the High Representative to explain the undemocratic changes to electoral rules. Even the Steering board itself is not united in its support for Schmidt’s actions. As already mentioned, Schmidt does not have Russia’s approval, but countries such as Italy and Germany have also been acting vaguely in expressing their support for the High Representative. And, because his authority is dependent on foreign support, its loss could jeopardize the office’s very existence.

In a country that has been going through a complex process of democratization for almost 30 years, such external interventions in domestic law are thought to be, at best, divisive. How is it possible for citizens to develop faith in a democratic system when that exact system can be arbitrarily reshaped by the actions of an external entity?

Chiara Mihlačatinová  is a student of International Relations and Diplomacy at Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, and an Intern of the Strategic Analysis  Young Leaders Programme.

Disclaimer: Views presented here are those of the author solely and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Strategic Analysis.

How is it possible for citizens to develop faith in a democratic system when that exact system can be arbitrarily reshaped by the actions of an external entity?

Share This Blog, Choose Your Platform!