Although I currently chair the tripartite Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, I speak to you today in my constitutional capacity as the Serb member of that Presidency—elected by the citizens of Republika Srpska, one of two constituent entities that comprise BiH.

The Dayton agreement was not a perfect solution, but it was an act of courageous diplomacy that balanced three peoples and two entities in one state. It was -  and remains, a legally binding treaty, lodged in the annals of this Council, whose Annex 4 is our Constitution and whose Annex 10 defines the mandate of the High Representative.

It created a decentralized, consensus-based system precisely so, that no single actor—domestic or foreign—could dominate the others. Yet today, that balance is being hollowed out by unaccountable foreign intervention either through the actions of various high representatives or foreign judges in the Constitutional Court of BiH.

Allow me to begin where Dayton begins: with the rule of law. Annex 10 is clear when requiring that the High Representative shall be approved by the UN Security Council. This has never happened in Mr’ Schmidt’s case. He was selected by the self-appointed Peace Implementation Council—an informal assemblage with no charter basis, no treaty or legal authority, and no power to override this body. And he has acted based on the so-called Bonn powers that are not codified in any legally binding international instrument.

Some claim that because the PIC “informed” the Council of its selection, confirmation became unnecessary. But if this Council’s vote were unnecessary, Annex 10 would never have required it.

Annex 10 is also clear about the mandate of the High representative. The Dayton Agreement did not authorize the High Representative to legislate, to suspend constitutions, to criminalize elected officials and political parties, or rule by decree.

Yet, that is precisely what Mr. Christian Schmidt and some of his predecessors have done many times.  

Here lies the heart of a continual crisis in Bosnia whose culmination we are witnessing today. Everything that flows from that irregularity – lack of UN Security Council confirmation and unlawful impositions beyond the mandate set forth in Annex 10, is infected with the same defect. No legal system—domestic or international—can survive if the interpreters of the rules exempt themselves from the rules.

Let me briefly mention only some of numerous edicts Mr. Schmidt unlawfully issued since arriving in BiH.

1.He unilaterally suspended the Constitution of the Federation of BiH to impose a government he preferred, ignoring the election results.

2. He altered the electoral law bypassing democratic parliamentary procedures,

3. As well, he extended the mandate of the Central Election Commission without legislative approval.

4. He amended the criminal code to criminalize non-compliance with his own decrees—a move to primarily eliminate from political life a democratically elected president of Republika Srpska for fulfilling his constitutional duties to sign laws passed by the National Assembly of Republika Srpska, but also to intimidate any dissenting officials who would dare challenge his illegitimate rule.

5. He cut public funding to the democratically elected political parties in Republika Srpska cancelling the political will of the vast majority of its voters.

Esteemed members of the Council,

This is neither the Dayton Agreement, nor a democracy, and certainly not the rule of law. It is dictatorship—government by decree, unchecked by courts, devoid of appeal. What started as mere overreach has now solidified into a system of repression.

Each action was justified in the name of “functionality.” Yet the result is not a more cohesive Bosnia; it is a deeply polarized country which can hardly survive this form and extent of foreign intervention. 

When Republika Srpska protests such violations, we are unjustly labeled as separatists. However, demanding adherence to international treaties is not separatism.

Contrary to some narratives, Republika Srpska is not undermining the Dayton Agreement—it is upholding it. Our demands do not seek to dismantle Bosnia and Herzegovina but rather to restore the legality and balance originally enshrined in the Dayton framework.

For this reason, the National Assembly of Republika Srpska has enacted legislation to defend its rights within Dayton. These measures are not provocations; they are lawful responses to persistent violations of international law.

The ongoing crisis is neither of Republika Srpska’s making nor in its interest. It has been triggered by Mr. Schmidt’s most expansive and authoritarian use of power, burdening the country with a series of unlawful impositions

Therefore, condemning Republika Srpska’s actions without first addressing Mr. Schmidt’s unlawful interventions is not only misleading but dangerously one-sided.

Allow me to state our position plainly:

1.We remain fully committed to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina as defined by Dayton.

2. As for the mandate of the High Representative, we seek to place it back on its legal foundation, which is Annex 10, and prepare for the closure of the OHR’s  

3. We reject unilateral decrees that rewrite the treaty, criminalize debate, persecute political opponents through a weaponized judicial system, discriminate political parties or suspend the will of voters.    

A legal reset in Bosnia is a logical next step if we want to prevent escalation or successive future crises.

Therefore, I respectfully call on this Council to take some immediate steps:

1. Schedule a formal vote on Mr. Schmidt’s confirmation. If he cannot pass the vote, let us find another candidate who can and who will be appointed in accordance with annex 10.

2. Establish an independent legal review, under Security Council auspices, of the conformity of the so-called “Bonn powers” with Annex 10 and the UN Charter.

3. Encourage all BiH stakeholders to engage in a dialogue aimed at preventing further crises and revitalizing functional governance.

We are prepared to participate constructively, transparently, and in good faith.

Mr President, members of the Council,

The Dayton Agreement ended a devastating war and laid the foundation for our constitutional system. It deserves respect, not manipulation and breach of its procedures.

Let us together ensure that Bosnia’s future is written not by decree, but by law.

On a separate but critical note, I want to clarify an issue. As a member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, I have been forced to engage directly with your missions due to obstruction by the BiH Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This ministry selectively restricts my diplomatic correspondence while granting unrestricted access to my Bosniak colleague. This bias extends even to Bosnia’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations.

Such actions demonstrate the reality of the state we are being asked to accept—a system where power is centralized, constitutional rights are disregarded, and even the fundamental ability to communicate is manipulated for political ends.

I thank you for your attention and remain at your disposal for any questions.