 | This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page . (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
|
The Human Rights Chamber for Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bosnian : Dom za ljudska prava za Bosnu i Hercegovinu), which was active between March 1996 and 31 December 2003, was a judicial body established in Bosnia and Herzegovina within the Annex 6 to the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Dayton Peace Agreement).
The Chamber had the mandate to consider alleged or apparent violations of human rights as provided in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the Protocols thereto, and alleged or apparent discrimination arising in the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms provided for in the Convention and 15 other international agreements listed in the Appendix to Annex 6 of the Dayton Peace Agreement. Particular priority was given to allegations of especially severe or systematic violations, as well as those founded on alleged discrimination on prohibited grounds.
The Chamber was receiving applications concerning such human rights violations directly from any Party to Annex 6 of the Dayton Peace Agreement or from any person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to be the victim of a violation by any Party or acting on behalf of alleged victims who are deceased or missing.
The Chamber was only receiving applications concerning matters which are within the responsibility of one of the Parties to Annex 6 (the State of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the Republika Srpska), and which occurred or continued after entry into force of the Dayton Peace Agreement on 14 December 1995.
The Chamber was composed of 14 judges. Four members were appointed by the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and two by the Republika Srpska. The remaining eight members were internationals appointed by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. The President of the Chamber, Ms. Michèle Picard, a French national, was designated by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe from among the international members. The members appointed are all distinguished lawyers and bring to the Chamber a wide variety of experience in different backgrounds including the judiciary, the academic sphere, private legal practice, administration and politics, and international, criminal and human rights law.
The composition of the Human Rights Chamber was: [1]
Under the terms of Annex 6 of the Dayton Peace Agreement, when the Chamber receives an application it must decide whether to accept or reject it, taking into account a number of criteria listed in Article VIII. These criteria include:
(a) whether effective remedies exist, and the applicant has demonstrated that they have been exhausted and that the application has been filed with the Chamber within six months from such date on which the final decision was taken; (b) whether the application is substantially the same as a matter that the Chamber has already examined; (c) whether the application is incompatible with the Human Rights Agreement, manifestly ill-founded, or an abuse of the right of petition; and (d) whether the application concerns a matter currently pending before another international human rights body or another Commission established by the Dayton Peace Agreement.
The Chamber’s procedures was modeled on those of the European Court of Human Rights. Unless the Chamber decides at the outset that an application is inadmissible or should be struck out, written observations are requested from the applicant and respondent Party, after which the Chamber deliberates and decides on a case. In addition to the written procedure, the Chamber may decide to schedule a public hearing for oral argument by the parties and submission of evidence by witnesses and experts. The Chamber may also invite written or oral amicus curiae submissions. If the Chamber finds a violation, it may, in its written decision on the merits, issue an order indicating the steps that the respondent Party must take to remedy the breach, including orders to cease and desist or grant monetary relief. At any stage of the proceedings, it may also order provisional measures or attempt to facilitate an amicable resolution based on respect for human rights.
The decisions of the Chamber were final and binding and the respondent Parties are obligated to implement them fully. Chamber decisions on the merits are forwarded to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the Office of the High Representative (OHR) for monitoring of compliance.
According to the Agreement Pursuant to Article XIV of Annex 6 to the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina entered into by the Parties on 22 and 25 September 2003, the Human Rights Chamber's mandate expired on 31 December 2003. This Agreement established the Human Rights Commission to operate between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2004 within the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Human Rights Commission has jurisdiction to consider pending cases received by the Human Rights Chamber on or before 31 December 2003; after 1 January 2004, new cases alleging human rights violations are to be decided by the Constitutional Court.
The Politics of Bosnia and Herzegovina takes place in a framework of a parliamentary representative democracy, whereby executive power is exercised by the Council of Ministers of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Legislative power is vested in both the Council of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Members of the Parliamentary Assembly are chosen according to a proportional representation system.
The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, also known as the Dayton Agreement or the Dayton Accords, is the peace agreement reached at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base near Dayton, Ohio, United States, on 21 November 1995, and formally signed in Paris, on 14 December 1995. These accords put an end to the three-and-a-half-year-long Bosnian War, which was part of the much larger Yugoslav Wars.
Republika Srpska is one of the two entities of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the other being the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is located in the north and east of the country. Its largest city and administrative centre is Banja Luka, lying on the Vrbas river.
The Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina is one of the two entities within the State of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the other being Republika Srpska. The Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina consists of ten autonomous cantons with their own governments and legislatures.
The High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina, together with the Office of the High Representative (OHR) in Bosnia and Herzegovina, were created in 1995 immediately after the signing of the Dayton Agreement which ended the 1992–1995 Bosnian War. The purpose of the High Representative and the OHR is to oversee the civilian implementation of the Dayton agreement. They also serve to represent the countries involved in the implementation of the Dayton Agreement through the Peace Implementation Council (PIC), which chooses the High Representative.
The Republika Srpska was a self-proclaimed state in Southeastern Europe under the control of the Army of Republika Srpska during the Bosnian War. It claimed to be a sovereign state, though this claim was only partially recognized by the Bosnian government in the Geneva agreement, the United Nations, and Yugoslavia. For the first few months of its existence, it was known as the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The Inter-Entity Boundary Line, commonly abbreviated IEBL, is the administrative line that subdivides Bosnia and Herzegovina into two entities, Republika Srpska and the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The total length of the Inter-Entity Boundary Line is 1,080 km.
The Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina was amended once, in 2009, to include the outcome of the Brčko District final award. Several constitutional reforms were attempted between 2006 and 2014, to ensure it compliance with the case law of the European Convention on Human Rights in the Sejdić and Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina and following cases regarding ethnic- and residence-based discrimination in passive electoral rights for the Presidency and House of Peoples. None of these attempts have been successful so far, notwithstanding EU involvement and conditionality.
Milorad Dodik is a Bosnian Serb politician serving as the 8th president of Republika Srpska since November 2022. Previously, he served as the 7th Serb member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the collective federal head of state, from 2018 to 2022.
The Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina was a state in Southeastern Europe, existing from 1992 to 1995. It is the direct legal predecessor to the modern-day state of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The Constitution of Republika Srpska is the chief legal act of Republika Srpska, an entity within Bosnia and Herzegovina. The constitution was delivered by the National Assembly of Republika Srpska on 28 February 1992, but had to be revised after the Dayton Agreement was signed. It provides the set of laws and principles for the territory, and among its finest functions, it defines the internal organization of the Republic, the function of the official institutions, and the rights and freedoms for its citizens.
The Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina is the interpreter and guardian of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, It has the appellate jurisdiction over issues arising out of a judgment of any other court in the country, including the constitutional courts of the two entities and the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina is the highest legal document of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The current Constitution is the Annex 4 of The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, also known as the Dayton Agreement, signed on 14 December 1995. The Constitution saw the end of war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, however it has seen a large amount of criticism. Under the supervision of international community, an "arrangement of amendments" to the Constitution, agreed upon by leading political parties, was proposed for adoption in the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina in April 2006, but it failed to get the approval of two-thirds of members in the House of Representatives.
General elections were held in Bosnia and Herzegovina on 3 October 2010. They decided the makeup of Bosnia and Herzegovina's Presidency as well as national, entity, and cantonal governments.
The partition of Bosnia and Herzegovina was discussed and attempted during the 20th century. The issue came to prominence during the Bosnian War, which also involved Bosnia and Herzegovina's largest neighbors, Croatia and Serbia. As of 2023, the country remains one state while internal political divisions of Bosnia and Herzegovina based on the 1995 Dayton Agreement remain in place.
Several referendums have been held in Republika Srpska during its existence, whilst others have been proposed but not happened.
The Dayton Agreement ended the Bosnian War and created the federal republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), which consists of the Bosniak and Croat-inhabited Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH) and the Serb-inhabited Republika Srpska (RS). Although the Bosnian Serbs were viewed as "anti-Dayton" during the first years after the war, since 2000 they have been staunch supporters of the Dayton Agreement and the preservation of RS. Bosniaks generally view RS as illegitimate, and an independence referendum from BiH has been proposed in RS. The 2006 Montenegrin independence referendum and Kosovo's 2008 declaration of independence have raised the possibility of a referendum and unification with Serbia. In 2015, after a judicial and police crisis, the governing Alliance of Independent Social Democrats said that it would hold an independence referendum in 2018 if RS's autonomy was not preserved.
Access to public information and freedom of information (FOI) refer to the right to access information held by public bodies also known as "right to know". Access to public information is considered of fundamental importance for the effective functioning of democratic systems, as it enhances governments' and public officials' accountability, boosting people participation and allowing their informed participation into public life. The fundamental premise of the right to access public information is that the information held by governmental institutions is in principle public and may be concealed only on the basis of legitimate reasons which should be detailed in the law.
The human rights record of Bosnia and Herzegovina has been criticised over a number of years by intergovernmental organisations including the United Nations Human Rights Council, the European Court of Human Rights and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, as well as international and domestic non-governmental organisations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. The government of Bosnia and Herzegovina has been criticised for ethnic and religious discrimination in its treatment of ethnic and religious minorities such as the Romani people and the Jewish people. The government has also been criticised for its treatment of Internally Displaced Persons following the Bosnian War and its failure to provide asylum seekers with resources such as food, shelter and medical assistance. According to BH Novinari, the Bosnian Journalists’ Association, freedom of the media is an issue in Bosnia and Herzegovina, with journalists facing attacks, threats and pressure from government. Human rights non-government organisations have also reported interference in their work from the government. The Bosnian government has been criticised by the European Union for its slow response to domestically prosecute war crimes from the Bosnian War following the closure of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in December 2017.
