The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights rejected the appeal of Slaven Kovacevic, assessing that he cannot be considered a victim of discrimination in the electoral process in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). The Court concluded that Kovacevic abused the right to application and did not prove that he was personally and directly affected by the provisions of the electoral system.
The judgment states that Kovacevic acted on behalf of others, which is not allowed under the rules of the Court.
“The aim of the applicant was not the protection of his individual rights, but the change of the constitutional-electoral structure of BiH in general. In doing so, he abused the right to application,” the judgment states.
The Court, by a majority of 16 votes to one, concluded that during the proceedings, Kovacevic made offensive and unprovoked accusations against judges and government agents, and even the High Representative in BiH.
“These are personal attacks and intimidation that went beyond permissible criticism and showed disrespect for the institution he addressed for the protection of his rights,” explained the Grand Chamber.
Additionally, the Court established that Kovacevic used misleading statements, including circumstances regarding his ethnic self-identification in an earlier period.
The Grand Chamber considered the claims that Kovacevic could not vote for candidates of his choice in the House of Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly of BiH (PABiH) and the Presidency of BiH. However, it concluded that he did not provide evidence of personal and direct discrimination.
“Victim status cannot be obtained solely on the basis of precedent from the Sejdic and Finci case. In this case, the applicant did not prove that the electoral system had a concrete negative impact on his vote,” the decision states.
The Court emphasized that the division of BiH into entity electoral units is part of the complex constitutional structure established by the Dayton Peace Agreement.
With regard to the Presidency, it was assessed that both voters in the Federation of BiH (FBiH) and those in Republika Srpska (RS) have equal limitations: they vote exclusively within the entity in which they live.
The judgment was adopted by a majority of 12 votes to 5. Thus, the earlier decision of the European Court from 2023, which declared BiH responsible for discrimination in Kovacevic’s case, was annulled.
Lawyers consider this decision a sign of the Court’s return “to the zone of legal caution and political realism.” As they point out, the Court clearly conveyed that an individual cannot use an appeal to advocate for the general interest if he is not personally affected.
Slaven Kovacevic, advisor to the Chairman of the BiH Presidency Zeljko Komsic, filed the appeal in 2022, claiming that as a BiH citizen, he was discriminated against because he cannot decide on the election of the Serb member of the Presidency nor be a delegate in the House of Peoples of PABiH.
Until now, the European Court of Human Rights, in several judgments (Pilav, Zornic, Slaku, Pudaric), starting from the Sejdic-Finci case from 2009, has established discrimination in the Constitution of BiH. However, none of those judgments have been implemented in practice.
