30 April 2024
Madam President, thank you for giving me the floor.
Allow me to congratulate you on the exceptional administration of the Presidency for the month of April. You certainly had before you a fair share of challenging issues and far more urgent matters to address, so we regret that for the final day of your Presidency, you have before you, quite unnecessarily, a situation that merits no urgency whatsoever.
In particular given that the regular meeting on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina is already scheduled for 15 May. However, it merits a serious concern that this Council is being instrumentalized as a public stage to the detriment of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It has nothing to do with concerns over the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina but with abusing one’s power in the Council to perpetuate a one- sided and dangerous narrative.
The Russian Federation repeatedly demonstrated its concern with one part of BiH alone. Let me recall the words of the Russian PR from May 2023: “Dayton’s multi-ethnic vision for the country is in danger. The Western countries’ classic neo-colonial Western approach in Bosnia and Herzegovina poses a real threat to the implementation of the Peace Agreement. Worse, it is undermining the very foundations of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s statehood and violating the fundamental rights of its constituent peoples, thereby ratcheting up the tensions yet again.”
Now you have the opportunity to explain how today’s meeting upholds a multiethnic version of the country if we are, under the pretense of urgency, listening to a private person from one administrative unit in BiH speak about the situation in BiH. How is this in conformity and in support of the Dayton PeaceAccord?How isthisnotaviolationoftherightsofatleast2constituentpeoples,ifnotall3,and Others, as well as citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina that, in fact, determine the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, annexed to the Dayton Peace Agreement?
If anyone, you unnecessarily stir up tensions. Let me be more precise.
First, the very fact that you have circulated a letter from the Member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina from Republika Srpska, fully aware that by circulating this letter as a pretext for this meeting, both you and that Member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina violate the Dayton Peace Agreement, speaks of, to say it lightly, your partiality.
Absent a clear request from the Head of State, in this case, the Chairman of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, or communication of the UN SC-mandated mission, EUFOR Althea, on the ground supporting urgent action from the Council, you have resorted to procedural misuse of this Council’s provisional rules of procedure. In doing so, you also further degraded the institution of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
While the Constitution of BiH legally establishes that Bosnia and Herzegovina shall consist of two entities, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republika Srpska, it does not leave room for “sovereignty” of the Entities in accordance with international law, and the Entities’ powers are in no way an expression of statehood but are derived from the allocation of powers through the Constitution of BiH. This is also the position of the Constitutional Court of BiH, whose decisions are final and binding.
Therefore, expressing the standpoints of an administrative-territorial unit in Bosnia and Herzegovina instead of the official state positions, as the case here with the letter in question, has no legal foundation and, again, is in violation of the relevant provisions of the Dayton Peace Agreement.
Let me illustrate some elements of ignorance related to constitutional settings contained in the letter from the Member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina from Republika Srpska. It starts by incorrectly describing the “competencies of BiH institutions in only six areas. When you count them thou, you see that there is a list of only 5 of them. However, we do not recognize either 5 or 6 competencies. “Article III: Responsibilities of and Relations Between Institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Entities” in Paragraph “1. Responsibilities of the Institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina” are listed precisely one after another as competencies of BiH institutions in ten (10) areas — not 5 or 6.
Same Article Ill, in Paragraph “5. Additional Responsibilities” in line (a) defines that “Bosnia and Herzegovina shall assume responsibility for such other matters as are agreed by the Entities; are provided in Annex 5 through 8 to the General Framework Agreement; or are necessary to preserve the sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence, and international personality of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in accordance with the division of responsibilities between the institutions of BiH. Additional institutions may be established as necessary to carry out such responsibilities”.
The list of these institutions established in the last two decades is very long. To name just a few as an illustration: Armed Forces, Court, Indirect Taxing Authority, Border Service, Intelligence and Security Agency of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Furthermore, the United Nations Charter provides that Member States address the organs and bodies of the United Nations (and those are always states, not their administrative-territorial units). Continuously trying to introduce this practice related to the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina is a direct attack on the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The independent, sovereign, and integral State of Bosnia and Herzegovina is subject to international law, and the creation and implementation of foreign policy is not under the competence of the Entities. Madam President,
Second, I will concede that BiH has been confronting several critical challenges for the past few years, but predominantly through the course of action repeatedly undertaken by the Government of Republika Srpska. It represents an unprecedented attack against the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The authorities in Republika Srpska (RS) have taken continuous actions that undermine the constitutional order and state institutions, increase inter-ethnic tensions through divisive and inflammatory rhetoric, and limit freedom of assembly and expression, which contributed to increased political and ethnic tensions throughout the country.
The ruling coalition of Republika Srpska started to implement steps creating the preconditions for a potential future secession of Republika Srpska from BiH, which were outlined in a joint statement signed by the ruling parties of Republika Srpska on 24 April 2023 outlining a series of steps which can create the preconditions for future secession. The most recent adoption of the Proposal of the Election Law of the RS, where BiH state competencies in the field of elections in the Assembly of the Republic of Srpska are assigned to the entity.
But more importantly, the attacks of the Government of Republika Srpska currently target the two civilian institutions in Bosnia and Herzegovina defined by Dayton Peace Accord: The Office of the High Representative and the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, that both have the mandate and the means to prevent secessionism.
Here, I wish to note the following: From the text of Annex 10, it is clear that the appointment is not made by the Security Council, though it must be consistent with “relevant” resolutions. The Peace Implementation Council Steering Board practice clearly demonstrates that the High Representative is appointed to the position upon designation by the Peace Implementation Council Steering Board and that this practice is “consistent with UN Security Council resolutions,” beginning with Resolution 1031(1995) of 15 December 1995.
As for the Constitutional Court, RS’s efforts to limit the jurisdiction of the BiH Constitutional Court to only one part of the country are unlawful attempts to change the constitutional order of BiH and are irresponsible, to say the least. Calling upon the judges representing the Serbs in the BH Constitutional Court to present their resignations to their positions represents an unfathomably dangerous attempt to recreate the anti-constitutional methods used by the ICTY convicted for genocide war criminal Radovan Karadzic in 1992.
Unfortunately, after many years of denying the verdicts of United Nations courts on the genocide committed against the Bosniaks and publicly glorifying the convicted war criminals, which goes against al civilizational values, authorities in RS are now starting to apply the methods used by war criminals in demolishing the state and constitutional order of Bosnia and Herzegovina. These serious violations of the Dayton Peace Agreement, in fact, threaten peace and stability in the country and the region and are a detriment to a viable and sustainable future among civilized nations.
I will no longer comment on this part of the letter that initiated today’s debate since there will be more time to have an in-depth discussion on May 15, when you will have before you a report of the High Representative with the presence of the Chairman of the Presidency of BiH Dr. Denis Becirovic.
This brings me to my third point and the real reason for this unprecedented abuse of this body — draft resolution on the “International Day of Reflection and Commemoration of the 1995 Genocide in Srebrenica.”
The sole purpose of this meeting is to put pressure on cosponsors of the resolution to withdraw the text, as requested yesterday in the letter from the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Serbia to the UN. It omits to say that, however, in two rounds of consultations, Serbia did not submit a single word of substantive comments, nor did it propose an amendment. As I was told in one of the discussions I had with one of their representatives, “We can engage on the text only after removing one word — genocide.”
The culture of remembering the victims of the genocide in Srebrenica is not and must not be a culture of denial, but a culture of memory so that genocide is never repeated to anyone.
BiH has been a full member of the UN since its independence, and it is our obligation to respect and implement legally binding judgments of UN permanent courts and ad hoc tribunals.
In Article 9 of the Dayton Peace Agreement, the parties (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Yugoslavia ~ Serbia, and Montenegro) undertook obligations to respect and cooperate “in investigation and
prosecution of war criminals and other violations of international humanitarian law.”
Let me be very clear. The Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, with or without consensus, or anyone else, Minister or Ambassador of Bosnia and Herzegovina, cannot engage in discussions on Srebrenica that outright deny genocide committed there, nor has the authority to question or should be above the final proclamations of the judicial institutions of this Organization. One such action would need to be preceded by amendments to the Dayton Peace Agreement, Constitution, and finally, the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which prohibits public approval, denial, or justification of the crime of genocide. Therefore, any action contrary to the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina is a criminal offense in my country. As an example — just yesterday, the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina confirmed charges by the State Prosecutor on this ground against an individual who, in July last year, during a funeral and commemoration in Srebrenica, openly engaged in activities that constitute hate speech and genocide denial related to ICTY and the Court of Bosnia Herzegovina genocide verdicts.
The suggestion by Serbia that we need to aim for an agreement at the level of the region on Srebrenica is also something that we cannot understand given that in the Declaration adopted in 2010, and I quote,“[the] National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia strongly condemns the crime committed against the Bosniak population in Srebrenica in July 1995, in the manner determined by the judgment of the International Court of Justice […]”. End of quote.
Madam President,
That genocide that was committed in Srebrenica is not a matter of opinion but a historical and judicial fact confirmed by the judgments of the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). By these final judgments of the highest UN judicial institutions, it has been confirmed that genocide was committed against the Bosniaks in the UN safe area of Srebrenica. These are judicial rulings that cannot be erased from the history of mankind.
These judgments are the unique and specific rationale for establishing the International Day and focusing the resolution on Srebrenica alone and what transpired in 1995. The continued narrative that diminishes and underrates the genocide in Srebrenica enables the very destructive force aimed against my country and our people; it incites “inter-ethnic” tensions that undermine all genuine attempts at reconciliation in the country and the region. It is the precise reason why the Balkans “continue to be a volatile region” and why Bosnia and Herzegovina could not overcome the consequences of the conflict in the 90’s.
I, yet again, wish to denounce the narrative that this resolution is a controversial issue that should not only be subject to discussion and negotiations in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the region but also
threatens peace and stability in both instances.
Contrary to the narrative that is being promoted in opposition to this resolution, allow me to emphasize the fundamental goal of the resolution: to build sustainable peace and encourage the process of justice, truth, and trust in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Western Balkans region. And here, Imost profoundly agree with our neighbor, the Republic of Serbia, when saying that we need discussion on this issue. Yes, we are more than open to discussion; we only need to discuss how to implement judgments of the ICTY and the ICJ, how to come to terms with the past, and how to build a better future together. Institutional protection of the legacy and jurisprudence of the ICTY and the ICJ simultaneously protects civilizational values and the fundamental principles on which the UN rests but also stands as a warning that impunity for this grave crime will not be allowed.
The process of reconciliation must consist of the overall recovery of society and confronting the past, not least through the recognition of genocide and crimes, recognition of victims, and punishment of criminals, but with a focus on an outcome that will promote peace and justice. We would, therefore, welcome a constructive approach by Serbia towards that goal. However, for 30 years, we have been confronted with denial that acts of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes were committed during the armed conflict, where individuals and public authorities openly question the legitimacy of judgments issued by the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia and the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and where individuals and public authorities honour or glorify convicted war criminals.
Instead of recognizing it as one of the vilest chapters of Europe’s contemporary history and working towards reconciliation, many prominent politicians and public figures in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Serbia are fanning the flames of nationalism and wilfully sowing the seeds of hate. Many have failed to understand the historical lessons of Nuremberg and completely miss the point of the ICTY and its work.
I especially want to underline that the resolution of the genocide in Srebrenica is not a threat to the Serbian people but to the individuals with names, in particular in eight judgments of the ICTY that contain guilty verdicts for the crime of genocide committed at Srebrenica in 1995. There are no genocidal nations. There are only criminals who are responsible for genocide.
While strongly condemning the false political narrative that this is all part of an anti-Serb agenda/is a collective judgment against the Serb people, I want to recall the 2001 statement by ICTY Judge Almiro Rodrigues (The Prosecutor vs.Krstic) that, and I quote, “I seek to judge accused. I do not judge people… I consider that to associate this evil with the Serbian identity would be an insult to the Serbian people…. But it would be just as monstrous not to attach any name to this evil because that could be an offense to the Serbs”.
Madam President,
Denial is the final stage of genocide itself that lasts throughout and always follows genocide. It is a form of desecration of the dead, a violation of one of the most basic human norms. It brutalizes us and facilitates the repetition of atrocity. Is that the kind of society we wish to leave to our children? Where genocide denial can only lead to its repetition.
By denying the genocide committed in and around Srebrenica, as well as by glorifying legally convicted war criminals, the surviving witnesses of the genocide are exposed to attacks on their dignity every day. It dehumanizes the survivors and the victims —- and rips them of both recognition and justice. It hampers the fight against impunity for war crimes and, eventually, the possibility of reconciliation. The culture of remembering the victims of the genocide in Srebrenica is not and must not be a culture of denial, but a culture of memory so that the genocide is never repeated to anyone.
The harm caused by denial is not solely to the victims or communities affected or their tireless efforts to keep the memory of those lost to these horrific crimes alive. It harms the very foundations of this Organization, the common values and principles that bind us together. To allow a failure of this resolution will, in fact, cause irreparable damage to the credibility of the United Nations as a bastion of the rules- based international order, have a serious impact on our efforts to promote peace and security and respect for human rights, tarnish the future delivery on accountability and justice. Failure to adopt this resolution would enable genocide denial and hate speech to spread unabated through the region, forever destroying any possibility of reconciliation.
The continuous diminishing and underrating of the genocide in Srebrenica enable the very destructive force aimed against my country and our people; it undermines all genuine attempts at reconciliation in the country and the region. It is the precise reason why the Balkans “continue to be a volatile region” and why Bosnia and Herzegovina could not overcome the consequences of the conflict in the 90s. That is what stands in the way of reconciliation and peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Genocide denial, in fact, seeds discord and mistrust among people and thus increases the chances of conflicts in society and among countries. And if it continues unabated, genocide denial will continue to create fertile soil for some future genocides.
Protecting the truth from deniers and serving justice for the victims of the Srebrenica genocide is our best bet to prevent genocides from occurring again.
The UN has acknowledged the mistake made towards Bosnia and Herzegovina.
UN SG Kofi Annan noted the guilt of the international community by saying that “Srebrenica represents the greatest disgrace in the history of the UN.”
Mistakes committed can no longer be corrected, but we have an obligation to stop the new ones. Together.
If the UN made them in 1995, then we should not make them in 2024 again.
Because of — Never again. Thank you.