The appointment of Dragana Cavka (SP) to the Managing Board of the Radio Television of Republika Srpska (RTRS) has sparked strong reactions across Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), with a clear reason – she was selected as a Bosniak. The National Assembly of RS (NARS), during its session on May 28th, following the proposal of the Commission for Selection and Appointments, elected Sasa Andrijasevic from the Croat people and Dragana Cavka from the Bosniak people to the Managing Board of RTRS.
Upon this announcement, it was quickly discovered that Cavka had previously identified herself as a Serb in earlier election cycles and had publicly supported the RS president Milorad Dodik on her social media.
Due to these posts and previous positions held while identifying differently, Cavka’s appointment stirred significant controversy in the political scene of BiH.
In response, the Bosniak Caucus in the Council of Peoples of RS initiated a mechanism to protect vital national interests, claiming a “Bosniak veto” had been violated. It was also announced that they would “seek proof of Cavka’s Bosniak identity.”
Clearly, this is a political appointment and, using the terminology of some political parties in BiH, an “usurpation” of a position designated for one of the country’s constituent peoples. The BiH Election Law, however, states that this move is entirely legal.
According to BiH Election Law, specifically Article 4.19, paragraph 5, a candidate’s national affiliation is valid only for that election cycle.
“A declaration of affiliation with a constituent people or the group of others from paragraph (4) of this article shall be used as the basis for exercising the right to the elected or appointed function for which the declaration of affiliation with a constituent people or the group of others is a condition in the election cycle for which the candidate list is submitted,” states this part of the BiH Election Law.
In previous election cycles, where Cavka was appointed to positions in the RS government (assistant minister of trade and tourism in the entity), she identified as a Serb, considering that her national affiliation was not crucial there.
However, as this Managing Board must “comply” with the provisions of the BiH Constitution on the equality of constituent peoples and others in our country, Cavka quickly “changed” her national affiliation.
This is not an isolated case, and predecessors of Dragana Cavka did not even hide that they “changed” their affiliation for a clear reason. Goran Opsenica declared himself as a Serb, although he later stated that he “went to sleep as a Croat and woke up as one.” The aim was to be appointed as a delegate of the Serb Caucus in the House of Peoples of the Federation of BiH (FBiH).
Haris Pleho is perhaps the most blatant example of the absurdity of this legal provision. The former BOSS representative in the Canton Sarajevo (CS) Assembly identified himself as a Serb to enter the House of Peoples of the FBiH, later stating that he definitely was not a Serb, but was trying to “show what the BiH Election Law is like.” His then-party colleague Rasim Smajic joined him in this endeavor.
To extend this beyond the Houses of People and Managing Boards, we have the example of diplomat Nerkez Arifhodzic. He initially identified as a Bosniak when he was the ambassador of BiH to Turkey. A few years later, he “changed” his nationality and became a Croat when appointed as the ambassador of BiH to Italy. After stepping down from diplomatic functions, Arifhodzic identified as a Bosnian.
The ideal solution is, of course, meritocracy, meaning the best individuals hold positions where they will be most effective, regardless of their national, ethnic, or religious affiliation. However, this solution is ideally termed for a reason – it is hard to believe such a change can happen in the near future.
One proposed solution is to use the declarations from the 2013 population census in BiH.
However, this solution is impossible for a simple reason – answers to the census questions, including the question of national affiliation, were given under the guarantee of anonymity, and no one has the right to “dig” through census responses to determine someone’s national affiliation.
Unfortunately for BiH, such cases will continue to occur as long as the law allows it, and there is simply no consensus required to change the law, Klix.ba writes.
E.Dz.
