‘Who owns Bosnia and Herzegovina’ was the issue discussed by the Independent association of intellectuals Circle 99 at the regular Sunday session in Sarajevo.
Keynote speakers, academician Stiepo Andrijić and Prof. Dr. Zlatko Hadžidedić, focused on the notions of sovereignty and ownership in BiH, i.e. on misunderstanding and chaotic substitution of theses not only in this, but also in a set of other issues, which produces the “enchanted circle of theses substitution” in which, according to Hadžidedić, BiH has been moving around for a while now.
Hadžidedić invited the academic community to not use these terms irresponsibly, but to generally clear the question like it was made clear at other places in the world. Otherwise, some very serious legal and political implications derive from it.
“Ownership is in the sphere of civil, not constitutional right and sovereignty is not derived out of ownership. Sovereignty cannot be brought down to private ownership in any way,” said Hadžidedić, disagreeing with some theses presented by the other keynote speaker at the session, Andrijić.
However, Hadžidedić generally agrees with Andrijić in the statement that the “violation of sovereignty” is on the scene in BiH and concludes that such chaos has been predominant not only since the Dayton agreement.
Stiepo Andrijić started his presentation with theses that stability of the national community depends on the way the ownership is arranged and that sovereignty can only be achieved through legitimate constitution and arranged ownership. Therefore, he said that something which is legal and regulated does not necessarily mean is legitimate.
“If the constitution and laws do not express sovereignty, they are illegitimate. They are legal, but not legitimate,” said Andrijić.
“Illegitimate constitution and disorganized ownership corrodes and demolishes the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina” was the starting thesis of this keynote speaker. If those pillars are disorganized in one state, then the state cannot function, Andrijić concludes.