Implementation of the Dayton Agreement for peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Report (1)

Doc. 7842

4 June 1997

Rapporteurs : Mr. Peter Bloetzer, Switzerland, Group of the European People's Party and Mr. René van der Linden, Netherlands, Group of the European People's Party

Summary:

There are signs of improvement in the functioning of the joint political structures in Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, strengthening Bosnia and Herzegovina's relationship with the Council of Europe will require further progress, in particular on respect for human rights, co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and free movement, including re-establishment of telephone and postal communications, between the two entities.

The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Croatia should, together with the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina and its two entities, contribute actively to the creation of proper conditions for the holding of municipal elections.

I. Draft resolution

1.The Assembly notes progress in a number of areas in the implementation of the Dayton Agreement since the elections of 14 September 1996 .

2.The preparation of the municipal elections on 13 and 14 September 1997 is proceeding satisfactorily. Together with the legislative elections to be held in September 1998 these elections are vital to the consolidation of the peace process and the reconstruction of a democratic and multi-ethnic state of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Assembly supports the measures taken by the Provisional Electoral Commission to improve and supervise closely the process of voters' registration.

3.There are signs of improvement in the functioning of the joint political structures although the dialogue between the two entities - the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republika Srpska - as well as between the political representatives of the three constituent peoples remains difficult and further improvements are necessary to carry out priority tasks such as the adoption and the implementation of the "quick start" legislative package for the economic reconstruction.

4.The Assembly welcomes the appointment of the new five member special guest delegation from the Parliament of Bosnia and Herzegovina, with the participation of parliamentarians from both entities representing the governing and opposition parties.

5.The Assembly is also encouraged by the recent reports of the United Nations Comissioner for Refugees that more than 200 000 persons have returned to their pre-war residences. It notes however, that most of them returned to "majority areas" controlled by authorities of their own ethnic group. It supports all initiatives for return to "minority areas" such as the recently announced plans for the return of Bosniac and Croat refugees and displaced persons to the Brcko area and efforts to organise the return of Serb refugees and displaced persons to Drvar, Grahovo and Glamoc.

6.The Assembly welcomes greater availability of objective and balanced information through internationally supported independent media. Experience of the elections held in September 1996 shows, however, that the electronic media controlled by the ruling parties and the state-dominated media in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Republic of Croatia continue to have a decisive role in forming public opinion in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

7.These achievements are encouraging but not sufficient. Strengthening Bosnia and Herzegovina's relationship with the Council of Europe will require further progress, in particular on respect for human rights, co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and free movement, including re-establishment of telephone and postal communications, between the two entities. With regard to the forthcoming municipal elections the existing divisions and the atmosphere of insecurity and mistrust continue to play in favour of the ethnically dominated political parties.

8.Moreover, so long as individuals indicted for war crimes and individuals illegally benefiting, economically or otherwise, from the status quo remain in positions of political influence, further progress in the implementation of the Dayton Agreement will be difficult.

9.The Assembly calls on:

1. the Stabilization Force (SFOR) and all authorities concerned to take immediate action to apprehend and transfer indicted persons to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia;

2. the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina and of its two component entities, in co-operation with the Office of the High Representative, to take effective measures against individuals who obstruct the implementation of the Dayton Agreement, bearing in mind that such measures will only be effective if those charged with war crimes are prosecuted;

3. the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Croatia to encourage the media to reflect the spirit and aims of the Dayton Agreement, to use their influence with the Bosnian Serbs and Croats to ensure full compliance with the Dayton Agreement and, together with the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina and its two entities, to contribute actively to the creation of proper conditions for the holding of municipal elections;

4. the Office of the High Representative and the authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina to give priority to programmes for economic reconstruction and for restoring cultural institutions and structures, facilitating closer links and greater freedom of movement between the two entities, in particular the re-establishment of telephone and postal communication and improvement of road and rail connections;

5. the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina and of its two component entities to create the conditions for, and effectively assist, the voluntary return of all refugees and displaced persons to their places of origin, in order to enable the establishment of a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society.

10.The Assembly resolves to continue to co-operate in the implementation of the Dayton Agreement, and to follow closely the situation in the country and in the region, in the context of the accession procedure of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the Council of Europe, under its monitoring of the respect of commitments and obligations of Croatia, and in the context of its contacts with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

II. Explanatory memorandum by Mr. van der Linden

A. BACKGROUND

As the Rapporteur on the implementation of the Dayton Agreement for peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, I visited Sarajevo from 30 April to 1 May 1997.

The aim of the visit was to assess the state of implementation of the Dayton Agreement in view of the municipal elections to be held on 13-14 September 1997.

The Rapporteur also attended the session of the Parliament of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BH) at which a new Special Guest delegation of the BH Parliament to the Assembly was appointed.

The programme, which appears in Appendix A, was prepared at very short notice, thanks to co-operation of the Representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina in Strasbourg and the Office of the Representative of the Secretariat of the Council of Europe in Sarajevo.

B. ANALYSIS

i. Session of the BH Parliament (House of Representatives and House of Peoples)

The second session, which took place almost four months after its constituting session, was again held in a Museum building in Sarajevo, as no agreement has been reached yet to hold meetings at a more adequate location.

The session of the House of Representatives began after a delay of an hour and a half, due to last minute consultations being held in the Council of Ministers and in the Bureau of the House of Representatives (composed of representatives of all political parties in the House).

All but two of the 42 members of the House attended the session in the presence of members of the BH Presidency Zubak and Krajisnik, the two Co-Chairmen of the Council of Ministers Silajdzic and Bosic and the Principal Deputy High Representative, Ambassador Michael Steiner.

The agenda as adopted at the session included the election of working bodies, appointment of delegations to the Parliamentary Assemblies of the Council of Europe and the OSCE and the Inter-Parliamentary Union, solemn declarations of the Bosnian members of the BH Constitutional Court and consideration of the status of the parliamentarians. Ratification of several international agreements on foreign loans as well as the adoption of the "quick start" legislative package for the reconstruction were deferred to the next session held on 9 May 1997.

Following a decision of the Assembly's Bureau of 18 March 1997, the Special Guest Delegation had five instead of three seats. It was appointed as follows:

Edhem Bicakcic(Party of Democratic Action - SDA)

Mariofil Ljubic(Croatian Democratic Union - HDZ)

Momir Tosic(Serb Democratic Party - SDS)

Savo Loncar(Union for Peace and Progress - SMP)

Mediha Filipovic(Party for Bosnia and Herzegovina - SBH)

In the discussion that followed MM Lagumdzija (Social Democratic Party) and Tokic (Union of Bosnian Social Democrats) claimed that the two additional seats should be given to the opposition. They argued that Mrs Filipovic belonged to the party of the Co-Chairman of the Council of Ministers, Mr Silajdzic, and that therefore the opposition had only one representative -Mr Loncar from Banja Luka. The proposal to appoint Mr Lagumdzija a member was not adopted.

There were no other significant discussions during that session and the session of the House of Peoples that followed. It was evident a consensus on all questions had been reached beforehand between SDS, SDA and HDZ.

ii.Working lunch with President of the House of Representatives

Mr LOZANCIC and with members of the new Special Guest Delegation

The two members from the Republika Srpska, MM Tosic and Loncar, apologized for not attending. The reasons given by Mr Tosic were that too short notice had been given, that the lunch was taking place in Sarajevo outside the Museum building and that security could not have been guaranteed, that no instructions had been received to attend such a working lunch and that they had other commitments in the afternoon. Mr Tosic suggested to meet with the Rapporteur in the Museum building. The Rapporteur insisted that he would only hold meetings with the entire delegation and that separate meetings with members from the Republika Srpska were and would continue to be unacceptable in the future. He took note of Mr Tokic's complaint concerning the short notice and the problem of security. According to the Secretary of the BH Special Guest Delegation parliamentarians from the Republika Srpska had not been informed of the presence of the Rapporteur before their arrival to Sarajevo. There were still no direct means of communication between the two entities which meant that, for example, the President of the House of Peoples, Mr Tosic (SDS), had no possibility of direct contact with his secretariat in Sarajevo.

Mr Lozancic (HDZ) was satisfied that the working bodies of the Parliament had been constituted. The working conditions were extremely difficult, as there was no permanent building, no technical equipment. He was optimistic with regard to the future work of the Parliament and stressed that the next session was set for 9 May. He was aware that there had to be real progress before the international community would send financial assistance for the reconstruction.

For Mr Bicakcic (SDA) security concerns were exaggerated as parliamentarians from RS were free to move around Sarajevo. He would, however, hesitate personally to travel to the Republika Srpska. The entire Special guest delegation would meet soon and prepare a common platform. The joint institutions were set up but there were obstacles to their functioning. Bosnian members of the Constitutional Court had given solemn declaration at the session that day. The law on the Central Bank should soon be adopted. The relations with the Republic of Croatia were not ideal but were getting better. A meeting between President

Izetbegovic and President Tudjman was expected to take place in the near future. The agreement on special parallel relations between the Republika Srpska and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia went beyond the competence of the entities. The municipal elections in September 1997 would bring about legitimate and democratic local authorities. The Provisional Electoral Commission, led by OSCE Head of Mission Frowick, adopted rules for the voting of displaced persons in places of residence other than those where they had resided before the war. In spite of numerous conditions this type of voting still allowed for the consolidation of the ethnic cleansing, particularly by Serbs.

According to Mrs Filipovic (SBH), the failure to punish the war criminals continued to be the biggest obstacle to any reconciliation in BH. The inter-entity boundary line should weaken and the state borders should become stronger.

iii.Meeting with Mr Jadranko PRLIC, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina(2)

Mr Dragan BOZANIC, Vice-Minister

Mr Fuad SABETA, Secretary General of the Ministry,

Mr Nedzad HADZIMUSIC, Ambassador at large

According to Mr Prlic there was a consensus among the three constituent people on the question of accession of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the Council of Europe. Bosnia and Herzegovina was a specific case and at the moment unable to meet all the criteria for membership. However, an early accession would help to strengthen the ability of BH to respect human rights. The Minister, who was a Croat and the two vice-ministers, a Serb and a Bosniac, disagreed on many issues, but learned to keep an open dialogue among them. Many things had been achieved in the implementation of the Dayton Agreement, although he was not yet satisfied with the dynamics of progress. In the following days the Office of the High Representative would re-unite all members of the Council of Ministers in Dubrovnik, to reach a consensus on the "quick start" legislative package for the economic reconstruction and on the budget. The Parliament should take up these issues at its next session planned for 9 May, in time for the Donor Conference that could be held already at the end of May 1997. There were no significant problems in the preparation of the municipal elections.

According to the Minister the agreement on special parallel relations between the Republika Srpska and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) formally did not exist as there were no diplomatic relations between the FRY and Bosnia and Herzegovina, of which the Republika Srpska is a component entity. Agreement with the republic of Croatia had been concluded by Bosnia and Herzegovina on behalf of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBH), which included both Croats and Bosniacs and as such went beyond a purely ethnic alliance.

The Minister stressed that the return of refugees was improving steadily. The UN High Commissioner for refugees estimated that some 150 000 people returned to their pre-war residences since summer 1995 and that 200 000 might return in 1997. However, most of them were returning to "majority areas" of their ethnic group. The lack of political will, housing and employment were the most serious obstacles for return to "minority areas".

Mr Bozanic said that there was a will on all sides to build a new, better life for Bosnia and Herzegovina. The integration in Europe would help to overcome the differences among former enemies. The situation was improving - the implementation of the peace process was not blocked and there was readiness to implement it. The agreement with the FRY was concluded in accordance with the Dayton Agreement. The Republika Srpska also intended to establish special relations with the Republic of Croatia. Some legal experts in the Republika Srpska considered that the Agreement with the FRY did not have to be presented to the BH Parliament for approval. The main obstacle to the Dayton Agreement was the United States financed "train and equip programme" for the FBH Army. In a rather paradox situation this programme led to the Serb support for a continuation of NATO presence after the expiry of the present mandate in June 1998. The co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was difficult as a large majority of indicted persons were Serbs. The Republika Srpska was ready to accept that there might be some war criminals on its territory, but there had to be more equality in the treatment of all sides involved, in particular with regard to indictments of political and military leaders.

Mr Hadzimusic said that the agreement between the RS and the FRY did not contribute to the good atmosphere in BH. The ICTY had been set up to bring to trial those who committed war crimes, not to seek a balance between Serbs, Croats and Bosniacs.

iv.Meeting with Ambassador Robert Frowick, Head of the OSCE Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina

The preparation for the municipal elections on September 13-14 1997 was proceeding in a satisfactory manner. There was an agreement on 133 municipalities in BH, the remaining cases of undefined municipal borders for municipalities split by the inter-entity boundary line (IEBL) were discussed by the FBH Parliament. Party registration had begun, voters registration should begin on 5 May.

A decision had yet to be taken whether to hold the elections in Brcko or to wait for the elections in September 1998(3). The pre-war municipality of Brcko was today split between the RS and the FBH. The Mayor of the part of Brcko municipality under FBH authority had recently resigned, protesting against the plan for return of refugees, announced by Deputy High Representative for Brcko Ambassador Farrand.

There would be elections in the six municipalities in Mostar, while the elections to the City Council were not certain. Minimal conditions for the functioning of the current city authorities had not yet been secured, mostly due to obstruction from the Croat side. More progress than initially anticipated had been achieved on the subject of police co-operation between the two sides.

International agencies in BH had to deal with principles and realities. The aim was to involve people in the process. There was a lot of progress. After the elections of September 1996, 85% of polled persons had said that the electoral process returned parties that reflected the will of the people.

The process of voter registration to begin soon in 420 voters registration centers would be massively supervised by the OSCE. The Provisional Electoral Commission adopted rules for those intending to vote in places where they did not reside in 1991. There were strict criteria and 120 adjudicators would be appointed to ensure strict application of those rules.

The total budget for the elections was 50 million US$ of which only 20 million US$ were available or pledged. Former Italian Foreign Minister Susanna Agnelli has been asked to collect the missing sum.

The Council of Europe was actively involved in the process of defining municipal borders for the split municipalities and in the preparation of a post-election strategy to ensure the proper functioning of the elected bodies.

v.Principal Deputy High Representative Ambassador Michael STEINER

Bosnians had an internal identity problem. They needed a broader - European identity. If the integration in Europe failed, the islamic influence would grow. The authorities in Pale worked to achieve the highest possible level of independence - their dream was to join the FRY. Croats had similar tendencies with regard to the Republic of Croatia. A majority of Bosniacs continued to support a united BH, although a part of SDA would accept a partition. This did not mean that they accepted the current division of territory and partition could again lead to war. The accession to the Council of Europe could have a positive impact on the consolidation of peace - it only remained to decide on when such an accession would be most effective.

The implementation of the Dayton Agreement was hindered by the fact that pre-war and war-time leaders were still in power - a number of them was even legitimized through the elections of September 1996. The issue of war criminals was a crucial one. Obstruction -in particular to the freedom of movement - would continue as long as Karadzic and his likes remained free.

The situation concerning human rights was bad - particularly with regard to the treatment of ethnic minorities in ethnic majority areas. Human rights institutions had been set up but the authorities in the RS and the FBH were not co-operative.

The war mentality continued to prevail, people feared the future, in particular after the departure of the SFOR in June 1998. They had to overcome this fear to be able to make a democratic choice instead of an ethnic one. Municipal elections planned for September 1997 and the general elections a year later are a part of the step-by-step approach to democracy.

Situation on other fronts had to be seen in a more differentiated way. The return of refugees had proceeded faster than initially anticipated, although return to areas where one's ethnic group was in the minority continued to be a problem. The situation was similar in neighbouring countries where, for example, authorities in Zagreb continued with aggressive relocation programmes. On the other hand, there were between 10 000 and 20 000 Serb displaced persons currently living in Banja Luka who had expressed interest to return to Drvar, Grahovo and Glamoc. Serbs from Sarajevo were another category likely to return, as they were without any real perspectives in the Republika Srpska or the FRY.

A programme for the return of refugees to the Brcko area had been launched recently. It was a good programme, although it had been criticized by Bosniac political representatives and the Mayor of the Federation part of Brcko had recently resigned over this issue. There were also protests with regard to the fact that returnees would be obliged to carry identity cards issued by the RS.

The setting-up of common institutions was a success.

Freedom of the media was a problem, but progress had been made. For example, up to 45% of viewers in Tuzla were following news programmes on the Independent Television (NTV). There were other examples of greater impact of independent written and electronic media on the forming of public opinion.

C. CONCLUDING REMARKS

In all our exchanges in Sarajevo our interlocutors spoke of evident progress in the implementation of the Dayton Agreement. These developments are encouraging and Bosnians themselves, as well as representatives of international organizations and agencies working in Bosnia and Herzegovina, should be commended for what has already been achieved.

It is however deplorable that in a number of areas there was very little or no progress whatsoever. This is particularly true for the respect of human rights, co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and for the freedom of movement. Even though final solutions to these three closely interrelated problems cannot be expected overnight, the authorities of the state and its two entities, as well as the political representatives of the three peoples, are in a position to provide tangible evidence of their commitment to the implementation of the Dayton Agreement also in the short term.

Even in areas where some progress has already occurred, such as in the setting-up and functioning of joint institutions, the work is far from being completed and problems are numerous and persisting.

The following events, which took place during or after our visit to Sarajevo, confirm these conclusions.

The announced session of the BH Parliament on 9 May 1997 did not result in any progress on the "quick start" legislative package and agreements with the IMF and other international financial institutions, a pre-condition for the holding of the Donor Conference.

In an open letter addressed to the Assembly by Human Rights Watch/Helsinki on 29 April 1997, it is stated that political influence of indicted war criminals, obstacles to the freedom of movement, control over the media, harassment of opposition groups and the failure of local authorities in BH to implement the Dayton Agreement, remain serious obstacles to the holding of free and fair municipal elections in September 1997.

Virtually all attempts for minority returns of refugees and displaced persons continue to be obstructed by majority populations helped or even instructed by the local authorities in areas of intended return. New incidents recently occurred in Stolac and Drvar.

At the press conference marking the publication of the first annual report on the Human Rights situation in BH, the BH Ombudsperson, Ambassador Gret Haller, stressed the importance of the freedom of movement as a precondition for the construction of a truly democratic country, based on human rights. The presence of politicians who continued to promote the idea of creating ethnically clean areas or ethnically clean states was an obstacle for BH to join the family of the European states. Ambassador Haller's statement appears in Appendix B.

Appendix A

The programme of the visit was the following:

Wednesday 30 April

06h30Arrival at Sarajevo Airport from Zagreb

09h00Session of the House of Representatives of the BH Parliament

11h00Session of the House of Peoples of the BH Parliament

13h00Lunch with President of the House of Speakers Mr Lozancic and members of the new Special Guest Delegation of the BH Parliament to the Assembly

14h30Meeting with BH Foreign Minister Prlic

19h00Reception hosted by the Ambassador of Netherlands

20h30Dinner hosted by BH Human Rights Ombudsperson Mrs Gret Haller

Thursday 1 May

10h30Meeting with the OSCE Head of Mission, Ambassador Robert Frowick

11h30Meeting with the Principal Deputy High Representative, Ambassador Michael Steiner

13h00Visit to Hrasno (project for rehabilitation of Hrasno communnity, supported by the

City of Amsterdam and the City of Bradford)

14h30Departure from Sarajevo Airport to Zagreb

Appendix B (FRENCH)

Observations formulées par la médiatrice

Reporting Committee: Political Affairs Committee.

Budgetary implications for the Assembly: to be assessed.

Reference to committee: Resolution 1116 (1997)

Draft resolution adopted unanimously by the Committee on 27 May 1997.

Members of the committee: Mr Bársony (Chairman), Sir Anthony Durant (Vice-Chairman), Mr van der Linden (Vice-Chairman), Mrs Ojuland (Vice-Chairperson), MM Aloglu, Antretter, Bakke (alternate: Mr Berg), Baumel, Mrs Belohorska, MM Belyaev, Bergqvist (alternate: Ms Andnor), Bernardini, Björck, Bloetzer, Bokov, Cem (Gürel), Chircop, Chornovil, Deasy, Diacov, Domljan, Eörsi, Evangelisti, Galanos, Gjellerod, Gotzev, Hardy, Hornhues (alternate: Mr Bühler), Irmer, Iwinski, Kalus, Kaspereit, Kautto, Kuzmickas, Mme Lentz-Cornette, MM Lopez Henares (alternate: Mr Puche),Lupu, van der Maelen (alternate: Mr Clarfayt), Maginas, Martínez, Masseret (alternate: Mr Seitlinger), Medeiros Ferreira, Meier, Melescanu (alternate: Mr Badulescu), Mota Amaral, Mühlemann, Oliynik (alternate: Mr Tsybenko), Pahor, Palmitjavilo Ribo, Popovski (alternate: Mr Vangelov), Prusak, Mrs Ragnarsdottir, MM Risari, Schieder, Schwimmer, Selva, Sinka, Sir Dudley Smith, Mr Spahia, Mrs Stepova, Mrs Suchocka, MM Urbain (alternate: Mr Staes), Vrettos, Woltjer, Ziuganov.

N.B. The names of those members who took part in the meeting are printed in italics.

Secretaries of the committee : Mr Kleijssen, Mr Gruden.

Note: 1By the Political Affairs Committee

Note: 2On 12-13 May 1997 BH Foreign Minister Prlic and Vice-Minister Zivalj visited the Council of Europe and held a political dialogue with the Minister's Deputies. The BH Minister called for accession of BH to the Council of Europe before the Second Summit on 10-11 October 1997.

Note: 3On 8 May the Head of the OSCE Mission announced a decision of the Provisional Electoral Commission (PEC) that municipal elections would take place Brcko, but only in the part of the pre-war municipality currently under control of the RS. Those entitled to vote were 1991 residents, Serb displaced persons currently living in the area and Bosniac and Croat displaced persons from Brcko currently living elsewhere. The decision remained a point of contest and had been adopted by a majority of votes in the PEC.