High Representative Christian Schmidt hinted in an interview with the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung that a decision on the issue of state property – one of the most sensitive political disputes in Bosnia and Herzegovina – could be reached this year.
Schmidt also referred to the possibility of international intervention, emphasizing that pressure is growing not only from the international community but also from local communities that are unable to implement even basic infrastructure projects due to the unresolved issue of state ownership.
However, the Office of the High Representative (OHR) did not officially confirm Schmidt’s statements. Meanwhile, political representatives in Bosnia and Herzegovina continue to hold sharply divided positions, although one term is increasingly appearing in discussions – a commission.
For more than two decades, the issue of state property in Bosnia and Herzegovina has remained unresolved, without a law, political agreement or institutional solution. The dispute has repeatedly blocked major infrastructure and development projects, while deepening political tensions between the country’s entities.
The topic once again gained international attention after Schmidt suggested that progress could finally be possible.
“With a little luck, we will still reach a decision on the state property issue this year,” Schmidt stated.
The High Representative also outlined what a potential solution could look like, suggesting a model in which an independent commission would determine the purposes for which state land could be used.
While politicians continue debating ownership over forests, rivers and land, legal and institutional experts warn that the absence of a state property law is creating serious practical consequences.
One of the key examples is the Southern Interconnection gas pipeline project, considered a strategic energy initiative intended to provide Bosnia and Herzegovina with an additional gas supply route. However, disputes over land ownership and management rights along the planned route have become one of the main obstacles to implementation.
Larisa Velić stressed that decisions on construction land do not automatically transfer ownership rights to local authorities.
“No matter how much the area of construction land expands or how many decisions are made regarding it, this does not mean a change of ownership title or authorization for local self-government units to dispose of that property. The state of Bosnia and Herzegovina is still called upon to decide what will happen to that property,” Velić explained.
In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the issue has remained blocked primarily due to the stance of political parties from Republika Srpska, which reject the idea that the state of BiH can own property.
Radovan Kovačević argued that ownership was already defined by the Dayton Peace Agreement.
“There is no state property. Property was resolved by the Dayton Agreement. It was clearly stated that 49 percent belongs to Republika Srpska and 51 percent to the Federation. Everything on that territory clearly belongs to someone,” Kovačević said.
On the other hand, Kemal Ademović believes the solution lies in adopting a state-level law through the Parliamentary Assembly of BiH.
“The solution is the adoption of a law on the management and disposal of state property by the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina, where all citizens have their representatives,” Ademović stated.
Representatives of the Croat political bloc also called for dialogue and compromise.
Marina Pendeš supported the idea of establishing a commission to seek a compromise solution.
“I think there is no reason not to form a commission that would examine the issue from all sides and find a solution,” Pendeš said.
Similarly, Zlatko Miletić emphasized the importance of dialogue and international expertise.
“We should open a dialogue and perhaps ask for help from the international community – not for them to dictate solutions, but to guide us through examples of how other countries have resolved similar issues,” Miletić stated.
Entity governments also continue to send opposing political messages.
Nermin Nikšić reiterated that authorities in the Federation respect the decisions of the Constitutional Court and the High Representative.
“We in the Federation adhere to the decisions of the Constitutional Court and the decisions of the High Representative, and that is not always the case when it comes to Republika Srpska,” Nikšić said.
Meanwhile, Savo Minić rejected the possibility of transferring control over natural resources.
“We have our own forests and our own agricultural land – to whom are we supposed to transfer it?” Minić asked.
Schmidt’s announcements about a possible solution this year indicate that pressure is increasing both domestically and internationally. Many observers believe that if Bosnia and Herzegovina fails to adopt a law independently, the final solution could once again come through international intervention.
The announced meeting between the Quint countries and the Council of Ministers of Bosnia and Herzegovina is increasingly being viewed as a potentially decisive step, although no official date for the meeting has yet been announced.
