Bosnia is country — country led by few, not by people. People are responsible to choose their leaders as they can turn-over the situation, but they don’t and it is not predictable when those Bosnian people would make the change.

Leaders and the government is RACIST and that has been shown in the court. When the constitution itself is RACIST, then their politicians are racist.

Of course that BOSNIA IS RACIST COUNTRY. Since the fall of communism major pathetic politicians knew how to separate the country based on ethnicity, they formed nationalist parties and segregated people based on their origins. That is RACISM by definition.

But people? People are just people. They want to live and work, they wanna have a normal life. If they cannot be responsible enough for their lives, food and cloths, how they can be in the situation to recognize who is who, which is the lamb and which is the wolf in sheep’s clothing. They do have responsibility, but overall, how can illiterate people make right decisions?!

Bosnian leadership is racist leadership. Every single name in Bosnian politics, including libertarian parties and any non-nationalist party is racist, as they do not and did not give a stand against the segregation and virtually all politicians did agree and still agree that Bosnia shall remain racist country.

The two people, one Roma and other Jew, deserve the Nobel price for Peace.

in response, I think I have walked the villages of Bosnia both before, during and after the war, so my empirical experience is immense, not to mention that I do speak all those “different” languages which would sort of put me into a better position to judge situation than yourself.

But that’s not the point – whether people in villages are racists or not, that is up to you to make up your mind and your judgment will depend on your perspective. If one is to follow that logic of going from village to village and city to city, on some scale of racism we would thoroughly and consistently condemn the US as a racist country only by having a short walk down the South and Central Los Angeles, or for example asking Chicanos or Asian-Americans if they think they are being treated in a non-racist way by their fellow white citizens (imagine response). To take a more European example, a cursory public poll of Algerians in Paris would probably find that most of them consider white French to be racist. But it would be a far fedged move to judge a whole legal system racist by relying on social facts and judgments.

But your points are wholly of-track and you are not responding to what is my major claim. Dayton Peace Agreement and its Anex IV (the current constitution) places the supreme decision making power (by supreme i mean so supreme that it overrides decisions made using democratic means) in Bosnia into hands of a so-called Peace Implementation Council which consists of the representatives of the US, EU, number of European countries (Germany, France, etc.), Russia, Turkey and international organizations. Moreover, the same constitution proclaims European Convention of Human Rights to be superior to all other legal documents. Further, the said Peace Implementation Council is in charge of enforcing the constitution, hence enforcing the European Convention of Human Rights in Bosnia, due to its supreme position as a decision making and enforcement body.
Now from that it follows that if fifteen years after Dayton has been signed, the provisions of the European Con., including its provisions on discrimination on any grounds have not been enforced (hence the Finci judgment) within the Bosnian legal system, you tell me where the blame is due. That is my major claim throughout the comments I have made and you still have not responded to any of that – rather, the debate is obfuscated trough your personal sociological opinions and judgments.

Do you have any legal arguments against what I have put forward above?

If Bosnia is not your country, then please stop talking that I am poorly informed as I am very much informed and I know the situation of all former countries.

Why do you cite Clinton and outsiders. Why don’t you walk around the villages and ask the people. I have done reports and research of the current and past situation in Bosnia with my own eyes, and I don’t need media and third party informations to build my opinion.

Bosnia has NOT implemented basic human rights in the ruling system, its constitution is not in accordance with the EU based constitution, Bosnia has discriminatory policies, segregated schools and segregated people.

Bosnia is RACIST country. That is DE FACTO.

Words on this forum and discussion source from intelligent people, obviously, including you, people who are thinkers.

But in Bosnia, the great majority of people are not thinkers, they are lead by primitive urges and the country is not civilized.

Bosnia is RACIST country. That is DE FACTO.

I think you are poorly informed and btw. Bosnia is not my country. You are basically throwing of rather cliche-like opinions i.e. “danger from other people,” “degraded group,” and than some citation free opinions about Balkans history, which for some reason I think you have no idea of (talking of natural disposition towards knowledge).
Please first read on the Dayton Peace Agreement its background, and the principle framers (recommended reading R. Holbrook “To End a War”), and than about the decision-making mechanism, something that the ECHR had to elegantly avoid discussing, though they aware of the problem.
On human rights etc., would you proclaim the Lebanese constitution to be a shining flag and a human rights victory, and if so how would you defend it? Also, I like you comment on “learning how it works in civilized countries” – I know one interesting civilized country called France and here is my favorite quote from their ex-president Mitterand (recounted by ex-pres. Bill Clinton in his last book), source
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/books/excerpt-clinton-tapes.html?pagewanted=5

and a quote of the day is
“Clinton said U.S. allies in Europe blocked proposals to adjust or remove the embargo. They justified their opposition on plausible humanitarian grounds, arguing that more arms would only fuel the bloodshed, but privately, said the president, key allies objected that an independent Bosnia would be “unnatural” as the only Muslim nation in Europe. He said they favored the embargo precisely because it locked in Bosnia’s disadvantage. Worse, he added, they parried numerous alternatives as a danger to the some eight thousand European peacekeepers deployed in Bosnia to safeguard emergency shipments of food and medical supplies. They challenged U.S. standing to propose shifts in policy with no American soldiers at risk. While upholding their peacekeepers as a badge of commitment, they turned these troops effectively into a shield for the steady dismemberment of Bosnia by Serb forces. When I expressed shock at such cynicism, reminiscent of the blind-eye diplomacy regarding the plight of Europe’s Jews during World War II, President Clinton only shrugged. He said President François Mitterrand of France had been especially blunt in saying that Bosnia did not belong, and that British officials also spoke of a painful but realistic restoration of Christian Europe.”

So much for civilization, but the debate is about the ECHR decision, not useless past French presidents.

Further, it is silly to say that EU/US are responsible for the racism in Bosnia. Sorry, that is not true. It is very clear that people in Bosnia in general do not have conscience about their responsibilities and they are unable to choose leaders to bring them some good. So, criminal leaders put themselves on top position by simply throwing money on marketing and racism theories, dangers “from others”.

My comment is on the court decision.

I have read many constitutions and I know what are basic human rights. There is no excuse that EU/US are responsible: that is your country and people in your country are responsible as they have chosen wrong leaders and they like to be separated and they like to listen of dangers “from other people”, as that is nature of a degraded group that throughout the centuries could not find its place in the peaceful frame.

It is their legacy. It is in their history that on that ground, people have been fighting for centuries, have been mean to each other.

It is time to learn how it works in civilized countries.

thoughtful comment, but lacking information about the legal situation in Bosnia.
Dayton Peace Ag. was imposed in Bosnia by the US, with the consent of the UN and all other interested parties. Hence, you should rethink the adress to send charges of racism.
Racism and discrimination particularly that in schools was attacked for yours by a number of Bosnian political parties, most prominently the multiethnic ones (Social Democrats) and even more Bosniak (Muslims) parties. The staunchest defender of segregated schools was on the one hand the EU Comission in Bosnia and the US, which they perceived as a threat to a stability of the system they created.
On discriminatory provisions within the voting laws (a subject of Sejdic Finci decision) the situation is the same. Provisions were attacked for years and years now by the same parties I mentioned above – includin Silajdzic as the most vocal one – but they were bashed by again the EU and the US as nationalists arguing for the equality of both active and passive voting right for all persons, because such voting system would favor (in the end) numerically superior Bosniaks (Muslims) – and thats the whole issue, the US and EU perceive Muslims as a potential threat (you know across which lines). Dayton Agreement and the Annex IV Constitution were created as a copy paste of Lebanon Constitution – and if you know anything about the effects of the Lebanon constitution on the way of life and demographics, you can imagine how things would look like in 10 years. So again, please send your comments to adrss where its due.

What, by the education, average citizen in EU country knows by heart, is that all people are equal by the law, but in Bosnia and Herzegovina is the opposite.

Not just average citizen, but majority of citizens are absolutely convinced that racism and ethnic origin are of great importance for their future. Would they be friendly to each other, the sole idea of being for one’s nation would not be unnatural.

The European court for human rights clearly said that discrimination by ethnic origin is racism.

When thinking that some schools in Bosnia and Herzegovina are completely separated by the ethnic origin, we can observe that racism is the mainstream politics in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Literacy is the key to awareness of the people. Now we have to ask: Where ARE the thinking people of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

There are many. Many are aware. But majority is illiterate, living in far away villages, and not being able to read and hear and understand their own biased TV station. Unspoken of Court rulings in regards to human rights.

And only small number of those who are aware, dare to speak.

The result is degraded people under fascist and racism regime.

“# Marko Milanovic January 4th, 2010 at 19:37

Ezechiel,

Thanks for your comments, and please let me try to correct what it seems is your misunderstanding of what I was trying to say in regard of the political situation in Bosnia – perhaps I was not sufficiently clear: there is no doubt in my mind that Dodik is the most horrible, malignant figure in Bosnia’s politics today, and that he is doing his best, or worst, to make Bosnia as disfunctional as possible. I am not trying to equate the contribution to Bosnia’s misfortune by the various politicians, and I am most certainly not supporting Dodik’s agenda.

Silajdzic, however, though not worse than Dodik, is certainly not any better. He is also a nationalist, who panders constantly to the worst elements of his constituency, and who ultimately cares about nothing but himself and his own power. He is also part of the problem, rather than the solution. And Bosnia is indeed still a deeply illiberal society, which allows the likes of Dodik, Silajdzic, et al, to thrive and keep their hold on the rest of the country. Not that my own country, Serbia, is much better.”

Marko, you are definitely biased while pretending to be neutral (and btw. who cares about Serbia in terms of this discussion, why bring that up?). Can you please substantiate your claims of Silajdzic’s “nationalism” (another citation free catch word you seem to be fond of using?) You said “Worse elements of his constituency” – can you name few? Silajdzic was backing up this law suit all the way – interesting type of “nationalist.”