1

Prof.dr. OMER IBRAHIMAGI]

DR@AVNO-PRAVNIRAZVITAK

BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE

Professor OMER IBRAHIMAGI], Ph.D.

CONSTITUTIONALDEVELOPMENT OF

BOSNIA ANDHERZEGOVINA

CONSTITUTIONALDEVELOPMENT OF

BOSNIA ANDHERZEGOVINA

2

Biblioteka: POSEBNA IZDANJA br. 38

Izdava~:Vije}e Kongresa bo{nja~kih intelektualaca

Redakcija:Ibrahim ^olakhod�i}, Mehmedalija Had�i}, [emsudin Musi}, Avdo Su}eska,

Avdo Hebib, Lamija Had�iosmanovi}, Jusuf @iga, Taib [ahinpa{i}Ismet Grbo, Arif Zuli}, D�evad Saki}

Za izdava~a:Prof. dr. Atif Purivatra

Urednik:Arif Zuli}

Recenzenti:Dr. Atif PurivatraDr. Esad Zgodi}

Prijevod na engleski:Amira Sadikovi}

Prijevod predgovora na engleski:Smail Avdi}

Likovno rje{enje korica i DTP:Zlatan Filipovi}@eljko Filipovi}

Grafi~ka realizacija:graf.ing. Muhamed Tuki}

[tampa:[tampa GIK "OKO"

Tita`:1.500

Sarajevo, septembar 1998.

3

DR@AVNO-PRAVNIRAZVITAK

BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE

Kratak pregled

4

5

PREDGOVOR

Tek predstoji rad na kritièkoj reviziji i demistificiranjumitova i ideolo�kih mistifikacija predrasudne, odnosno,etnocentriène srpske i hrvatske histografije, kad je u pitanjurekonstukcija povijesnog biæa i historijskog bivstvovanja Bosnei Hercegovine.

U jednoj neobièno kondenziranoj formi, koncentracijom nakljuène taèke bosanskohercegovaèke povijesti, iz perspektivedr�avno-pravnog diskursa, �to implicintno a �to u eksplicitnimformulacijama, demistificirajuæi hegemonistièke dr�avno-politièke i nacionalne koncepcije spram Bosne, u tomnastojeæem pregnuæu participira i knjiga prof. dr. OmeraIbrahimagiæa "Dr�avno-pravni razvitak Bosne i Hercegovine".

U tom kontekstu, knjiga zastupa temeljnu tezu da postojikontinuitet u bivstvovanju, povije�æu uoblièenog, kulturno-obièajnog, politièkog i dr�avno-pravnog individualiteta Bosne.Naravno, ovaj se individualitet u knjizi, primarno, promatrau njegovoj dra�avno-pravnoj sadr�ini. No, od posebne jeva�nosti i to �to prof. Ibrahimagiæ podcrtava da se kontinuitetu povijesnoj individualnosti Bosne temeljio i na kontinuitetunjenog teritorijal-nog integriteta.

Pored kritièkog diskursa spram povijesnih falsifikata kojeproducira tradicionalna predrasudna historijografija, u knjizise nalaze vrijedni doprinosi razbijanja predrasuda premanovijoj bosanskohercegovaèkoj povijesti nastalih na tlu slomaevro-azijatskog i balkanskog socijalizma. Rijeè je o autorovomnastojanju, u kojem uspijeva, da osvijetli i kritièki vrjednuje iperiod obnove dr�avnosti Bosne i Hercegovine, i to bez ikakvihstarih ili aktuelnih ideolo�kih kli�ea ili predubjeðenja.

6

Upravo po ovoj bezpredrasudnosti ova knjiga predstavljaznaèajan doprinos razvoju na�e demokratske politièke kultureispunjene respektom povijesnih istina bez pragmatiènihkozmetiza-cija na�e povijesti.

Uoèljivom vrlinom ove knjige smatramo i to �to se na malomprostoru, jasno, razgovjetno, edukativno pregledno,identificiranjem magistralnih tendencija i markiranjemprijelomnih dr�avno-pravnih i politièkih èinjenica formirajedna slika kontinuiteta dr�avno-pravnog razvoja Bosne iHercegovine.

Njeno �tampanje na bosanskom i engleskom jezikudoprinijet æe da domaæa i meðunarodna znansvena i politièkajavnost dobije jedan historiografski i znanstveno meritoran ivjerodostojan izvor za vlastito razumijevanje povijesnog bitkaBosne i Hercegovine.

Dr. Esad Zgodiæ

7

U V O D

Od vremena kada se "Zemlja Bosna" prvi put spominje upisanim historijskim izvorima u djelu "De administrando im-perio", bizantskog cara Konstantina Porfirogeneta sredinomX stoljeæa (1), Bosna je do dana�njeg vremena prolazila krozrazlièite dr�avne i politièke oblike organiziranja vlasti i tomeodgovarajuæe pravne sisteme.

Politièka organizacija sredsnjovjekovne Bosne poèela je sdoseljavanjem Avara i Slavena s kraja VI i poèetka VII stoljeæa.Ako se uzme postojanje javne vlasti za prepoznavanjepolitièkog individualiteta neke zemlje, a ne nazivi vladara, dali je ban, kralj ili car, onda se mo�e reæi da je u Bosni bilaostvarena politièka vlast prije nego kod Srba i Hrvata. Èinjenicada nisu poznati izvori o oblicima te vlasti sve do XII st. neznaèi da u prethodnim stoljeæima u Bosni javne vlasti nije bilo.Zato se mo�e reæi da je Bosna (bosanske zemlje) imala svojsamostalni politièki razvitak kad i one zemlje koje su zaposjelikasnije Hrvati i Srbi koje Bosnu okru�uju (2).

8

9

BANOVINA BOSNA

1. Banovina Bosna. Ugarski dokument o Bosni iz 1137. potvrðujeda je Bosna poèetkom XII st. samostalna dr�ava. Bosna se u tomdokumentu spominje kao "bosnensis ducatus" (3). Prvi poznatidr�avni oblik vlasti u Bosni bio je banovina, koji naziv ima svojeporijeklo jo� iz vremena vladavine Avara na ovim prostorima (bani �upan su rijeèi avarskog, a ne slavenskog porijekla).

Ban Boriæ prvi je po imenu poznati bosanski vladar. O Bosni iliBoriæu postoje dva odlomka iz Cinamova djela (Epitome): "Bosnanije potèinjena arhi�upanu Srba, nego narod u njoj ima posebannaèin �ivota i upravljanja" (4).

U vrijeme bana Kulina historijski izvori potvrðuju da postoji"veæ izgraðen dr�avni aparat u Bosni", da ban ima svoju "dvorskukancelariju" i "prilièno velike prihode", a Bosna do�ivljava zavidan"kulturni napredak" (5). Izdavanje poznate povelje Dubrovèanimaiz 1189. potvrðuje da je Bosna samostalna dr�ava koja dubrovaèkimtrgovcima garantuje slobodu kretanja i trgovanja u njoj. Kulinovogospodstvo nad Bosnom bilo je jaèe nego �to u sebi sadr�i naslovban. Papinski izvori Kulina nazivaju gospodarem Bosne za vrijemenjegovog prisustva zboru na Bilinom polju 1203. "presente banoCulino domino Bosnae" (6).

U vrijeme banskog oblika vlasti u Bosni, izvor podataka, da jeBosna samostalna a ne vazalna dr�ava, jesu papina pisma vladarimasusjednih zemalja i povelje koje su izdavali bosanski banovi,najèe�æe Dubrovèanima, jer je Dubrovnik bio najbolja veza Bosnesa svijetom. Tako ban Ninoslav svojom poveljom (1234) garantujeDubrovèanima slobodu kretanja, oslobaða ih poreza i daje im za�tituu sluèaju rata s ra�kim odnosno srpskim vladarom (7).

Pomanjkanje izvora o Bosni u drugoj polovini XII st. ne mo�ebiti dokaz da Bosna u to doba nema samostalan politièki polo�aj,veæ da je tobo�e, osvojena od Ugarske. Moglo bi se reæi obrnuto,buduæi da Arpadoviæi nisu Bosnu uèinili podlo�nom svojoj vlasti,

10

u bogatom diplomatskom materijalu nije se saèuvao trag o Bosniosim u ispraznim titulama (8).

Ova ocjena se odnosi i na zvuène vladarske naslove Bribiraca(braæe �ubiæ), koji nisu znaèili i ostvarenu vlast nad bosanskimzemljama. Hrvatin, velika� Donjih Krajeva je jedini priznavao Pavla,bana Hrvatske. Ali je on smatran od ostalih bosanskih velika�aizdajicom, koji nije priznavao vlast bosanskog bana Stjepana I (9).Historijski je utvrðena jedino vlast "hrvatskog gospodina" u dvije�upe Donjih krajeva: Banici i Vrbanji, dakle, u oblasti koju jekontrolirao Hrvatin (10). Mladinova titula bosanskog bana je prazannaslov.

Za svoje vladavine Stjepan II je Humsku zemlju sa Krajinomizmeðu Neretve i Cetine i Zavr�ja stavio pod bosanski suvereni-tet (11). Poglavari bosanske crkve su stajali èvrsto uz bosanskevladare, podupiruæi njihovu politiku. U tu skladnu zajednicubosanskih vladara i predstavnika bosanske crkve nisu izvana mogliprodrijeti niti Bribirci (�ubiæi), niti Arpadoviæi ili An�uvinci. Tu jebila njihova zajednièka snaga koja je branila Bosnu (12). U tomduhovnom dvojstvu bosanskih vladara u XIII i XIV st. le�i, po svojprilici, jedna od tajni njihovog uspjeha. Sudeæi prema podacimajedne isprave (13), vladari su kod kuæe èvrsto stajali uz crkvubosansku, ali su prema vani, izvan svoje zemlje, uvijek djelovali inastupali kao pravovjernici (14). Èlanovi bosanske crkve nisuulazili u dr�avno vijeæe, a bosanski (katolièki) biskupi su bili dalekood Bosne (u Ðakovu, u Slavoniji). Bosna je tada bila u usponusvoje najveæe moæi, kada je porazila i srpskog cara Du�ana "silnog"1350, kada je bio udario na Bosnu (15).

Taj uspon Bosna je nastavila dolaskom Tvrtka I na banskoprijestolje. U tada�njoj Bosni postoje dva sudska i politièka tijela:dvor i vladanje (kraljevstvo ili rusag, orsag, dr�avno vijeæe), kojijednako odluèuju o raznim pravnim poslovima (16). Zatim, postojevrlo zanimljive sankcije, prijetnje onima koji bi porekli svojuzakletvu. U Bosni je bila uobièajena skupnovlada, kakva je bila, naprimjer, u vrijeme bana Stjepana II, sa bratom Vladislavom. Napoèetku Tvrtkove vladavine bilo je èetvero skupnovladara:Vladislav (otac), Jelena (majka) i oba sina Tvrtko i Vukac. Ona se

11

mijenjala. Poslije Vladislavove smrti, na djelu je trojstvo (majke ioba njena sina). To se naroèito ogledalo u potpisivanju raznihpovelja, darovnica, potvrdnica i sl. (17).

Poslije pobjede nad Ludovikom 1363. Tvrtko oduzima bratuVukcu bansku èast i sam se progla�ava "banom èitave Bosne" (18).Tim èinom u Bosni definitivno prestaje u upravljanju dr�avnimposlovima svaki oblik skupnovlade, prelazeæi tako iz porodiènogoblika upravljanja dr�avom, kao nekom vrstom privatne ba�tine, izprivatnopravne sfere u javnopravnu sferu. Upravljanje dr�avom uBosni postaje javnopravni èin u okviru tada�njih dru�tvenih,odnosno obièajnih pravila vladanja i upravljanja javnim poslovima.

12

13

KRALJEVSTVO BOSNA

2. Bosansko kraljevstvo (kraljevina) je slijedeæi oblikorganizirane dr�avne vlasti u srednjovjekovnoj Bosni. Tvrtko I,jedan od najuspje�nijih bosanskih vladara, kruni�e se 1377. za kraljaBosne. Uzeo je za sebe ime Stjepan (Stefan), odabrav�iprvomuèenika Stjepana za za�titnika svoga roda. Od tada æe svibosanski kraljevi ispred svoga imena nositi i ime Stjepan (Stefan).Njegovi pretci su porodiènim vezama bili vezani za dinastijuNemanjiæa koja je smræu cara Uro�a 1371. izumrla i po bakiJelisaveti Tvrtko je polagao najvi�e prava na srpsku krunu. On setada potpisivao kao: "Stefan Tvrtko v hrista Boga kral Srbljem iBosne i Primorju" (19).

Stjepan Tvrtko je podr�av�i 1386. ustanak hrvatskih idalmatinskih velika�a protiv ugarske krune, ubrzo zavladao 1390.Hrvatskom i Dalmacijom i proglasio se kraljem hrvatsko-dalmatinskim od Velebita do Cetine i od Cetine do Kotora. Time jepro�irio granice bosanske srednjovjekovne dr�ave na naj�iri prostorkoji do tada i poslije njega nije uspjelo ni jednom srednjovjekovnomju�noslavenskom vladaru.

Naèelo Tvrtkove vladavine je bilo: "da je Bosna tim jaèa, jeslabija Ugarska, i obratno". (20).

Poslije bana Stjepana II i kralja Tvrtka, dva bosanska vladarakoja su najdu�e i najuspje�nije vladala Bosnom, Bosna je ulazila ukrizu vladanja, nad kojom vi�e nije bilo znaèajnijeg vladara donjenog pada pod suverenitet Osmanlija 1463. Njegovi nasljednicinisu imali harizmu koja je mogla motivirati bosanske velika�e najedinstvo zemlje i efikasnost vladanja koju je on imao. To suiskoristili gospodari bosanskih zemalja (Usore, Soli, Donji Kraji,Zapadne strane (Zavr�je), Hum, Podrinje i Primorje) i ne obziruæise na kraljevu vlast, silno se uzdigli. Upravljali su svojim posjedima(oblastima) kao samostalni gospodari, imajuæi svoj dvor, svojuvlastelu, dijeleæi poèasti i izdavajuæi svoje povelje. Vlastela rusagabosanskog (dr�avnog vijeæa) je odluèivala s kraljem o najva�nijim

14

dr�avnim poslovima, a odluèivala je i o tome ko æe iz dinastijeKotromaniæa doæi na kraljevsko prijestolje Bosne (21).

Meðusobne borbe meðu bosanskim velika�ima doprinijele suukupnom slabljenju moæi zemlje. Slabljenju moæi zemlje doprinijelasu i stalna nastojanja njenih susjeda, prije svega Ugarske, da Bosnupotèine pod svoju vlast. To je olak�alo turska osvajanja u Bosni irascjep meðu velmo�ama na one koji su suraðivali sa Ugarskom ione koji su suraðivali sa Turskom u svojim meðusobnimrazraèunavanjima. Definitivna najava propasti srednjovjekovneBosne nastala je kada su njena dva posljednja kralja, otac i sin,Stjepan Toma� i Stjepan Toma�eviæ, otpoèeli progone pripadnikabosanske vjere u svome narodu i njihovo prisilno prevoðenje nakatolièku vjeru. Tada je nastalo ono stanje koje se mo�e svesti naparolu: "Bosnu nije imao ko da brani". Stjepan Toma�eviæ koji jesudbinu Bosne vezao za Ugarsku i rimskog papu koji su ga samoverbalno podr�avali, padom Bosne 1463. i sam je platio glavom.

3. Bosanska srednjovjekovna dr�ava funkcionirala je prematada�njim standardima obièajnog prava i dr�avnim protokolimakarakteristiènim za sve dr�ave toga doba. Bosansko pravo nije bilozakonom kodificirano. Ali je zato bosansko obièajno pravo imalorazlièite pisane oblike. Ono je obavezivalo i vladare i velmo�e isvaki od njih kada je dolazio na prijestolje, prvo �to je uradio jesteda svojom poveljom potvrdi ranija prava koja je garantirao njegovprethodnik. Kategorije kao �to su "vjerna slu�ba", "vjeragospodska", "plemenita ba�tina", su bile osnove na kojima se gradioprivatnopravni i javnopravni odnos u bosanskoj srednjovjekovnojdr�avi.

15

OSMANSKI AJALET BOSNA

4. Osmanska provincija Bosna. Padom bosanske srednjovje-kovne dr�ave 1463. pod Osmansko carstvo, Bosna je izgubilamoguænost svoga vlastitog dr�avnopravnog razvitka. Ali nikada njennarod Bo�njani, odnosno Bo�njaci, nisu izgubili svijest ohistorijskom postojanju bosanske srednjovjekovne dr�ave vi�e odpola milenija u predislamskom periodu. Ta historijska svijest o svombosanskom i bo�njaèkom identitetu doprinijela je da se u buduænosti,kako u Osmanskom carstvu, tako i u Austro-Ugarskoj Monarhiji,pa i u Kraljevini Jugoslaviji, oèuva teritorijalni i politièki integritetprostora koji je predstavljao historijsku Bosnu.

Bosna nije odmah cijela pala pod osmanlijsku vlast. Od prvihupada Turaka u Bosnu, do uspostavljanja "Bosanskog kraji�ta" kaoprivremenog oblika vojno-teritorijalne organizacije osmanske vlastiu Bosni proteklo je vi�e od 50 godina (1451) (22). A od vremenapada Bosne 1463., kada je bio uspostavljen i bosanski sand�ak kaoprvi stalni oblik vojno-administrativne i politièke organizacijeosmanske vlasti u Bosni, pa do uspostavljanja bosanskogbeglerbegluka ili ajaleta 1580. kao zasebne provincije Osmanskogcarstva, proteklo je jo� oko 117 godina. Do tada bosanski,hercegovaèki i kli�ki sand�aci koji su bili uspostavljeni bili su usastavu beglerbegluka Rumelija, kako se nazivao evropski dioOsmanskog carstva, dok je Zvornièki sand�ak od 1541. bio u sastavubeglerbegluka Budim.

U meðuvremenu Osmanlijama nije uspjelo da za du�e vrijemeuspostave renegatsko "bosansko kraljevstvo", koje bi bilo okrenutoneprijateljski prema dvjema ugarskim banovinama u Bosni (jajaèkoji srebrenièkoj). Kada je namje�teni "bosanski kralj" poku�ao da selegitimira i kod Ugara, Osmanlije su tom minijaturnom bosanskomkraljevstvu uèinile kraj (1476) (23).

5. Bosanski beglerbegluk ili ajalet osnovan je 1580. godine.Nastao je kao potreba za dalju ekspanziju i odbranu od Austrije iVenecije. Drugi razlog je potreba za veæom eksploatacijom

16

podanika, koja se mogla ostvariti s razvijenijim i pojaèanimbirokratskim aparatom. Bosanski beglerbegluk je osnovanizdvajanjem bosanskog, hercegovaèkog, kli�kog, pakraèkog i krèkogsand�aka iz rumelijskog, te zvornièkog i po�e�kog sand�aka izbudimskog beglerbegluka. Sredni�nji sand�ak ovog ajaleta postaoje raniji bosanski sand�ak. Kako je bosanski ajalet obuhvatao mnogo�ire podruèje od podruèja nekada�njeg kraljevstva, tako je i pojamBosne postao mnogo �iri u tom vremenu.

Prvim beglerbegom bosanskog ajaleta bio je imenovan dotadanjisand�akbeg bosanskog sand�aka (1574-1580) Ferhad-begSokoloviæ, koji je time automatski dobio rang pa�e sa sjedi�tem uBanja Luci.

Nakon Karlovaèkog mira 1699. teritorija bosanskog ajaleta sesvela skoro na granice iz XV st. Tako se bosanski ajalet do potkrajXVIII st. sastojao od èetiri sand�aka: bosanski, hercegovaèki,zvornièki i kli�ki. Ne �eleæi da im Mleèani budu susjedi, Dubrovèanisu tada dobrovoljno ustupili Osmanlijama (Bosni) Klek ili Neumna sjeveru i Sutorinu na jugu. Tako je Bosna dobila dva izlaza namore.

Novopazarska oblast, koja je bila neke vrste corpus separatumu bosanskom sand�aku od poèetka osmanlijske vlasti u Bosni,izdvojena je poslije 1790. iz bosanskog sand�aka i pretvorena uposeban novopazarski sand�ak. (24).

6. Osmanlije prilikom sprovoðenja svoje upravne organizacijeu Bosni nisu bez naroèitih razloga kako vojno-politièkih, takostrate�kih i ekonomskih, vr�ili bitne izmjene upravne podjele kojusu zatekli u zaposjednutim oblastima. Gdje god je to bilo moguæezadr�avali su ranije stanje. To je grubo poreðenje, jer su se konkretnegranice ovih sand�aka vremenom mijenjale, zavisno od vojno-administrativnih i politièkih promjena diktiranih sreæom na boji�tui mirovnim ugovorima. Kasnijim ukljuèivanjem Bihaæa (1592) injegovog sand�aka postepeno su se oblikovale granice Bosne kojeæe biti potvrðene Karlovaèkim mirom (1699) i skoro se u cijelostitada�nja upravna podjela zadr�ati do 50-tih godina XX-tog stoljeæa.

17

Tako je bosanski beglerbegluk (1580), nakon Karlovaèkog mirabio sveden na prostor bosanskog kraljevstva iz XV st. Bosanskibeglerbegluk doprinio je kasnije oèuvanju cjelovitosti historijskogpolitièkog prostora Bosne. Znaèaj osnivanja bosanskog beglerbe-gluka je upravo u tome, �to je on u sebi ujedinio sve sand�ake nabosanskom historijskom prostoru (bosanski, hercegovaèki,zvornièki i kli�ki sand�ak) koji su ranije pripadali rumelijskom ibudimskom beglerbegluku. Time je bila sprijeèena teritorijalna ipolitièka dezintegracija ranijeg dr�avnog prostora srednjovjekovneBosne.

Najni�e upravne jedinice u osmanskoj administraciji bile sunahije, koje su u Bosni nastale najèe�æe pretvaranjem starihsrednjovjekovnih �upa ili vlasti, gdje god su te �upe odnosno vlastipostojale. Od ovih nahija treba razlikovati tzv. vla�ke (stoèarske)nahije sa unutra�njom samoupravom, s mnogim povlasticama iposebnom vojnom organizacijom, koje su bile direktno podreðenesultanu, beglerbegu ili sand�akbegu s vojvodama na èelu igraðanskim knezovima kao starje�inama.

Bosanska srednjovjekovna dr�ava nije poznavala sudske iupravne jedinice izmeðu �upe i oblasnih velika�a. U osmanskojBosni izmeðu sand�aka i nahija postojali su kadiluci (kaze) kaoredovna upravna jedinica, koja je bila najèe�æe i sudska. To je bioteritorij na koji se protezala stvarna i teritorijalna nadle�nost jednogkadije. Kadije su pored sudske imale �iroke i upravne nadle�nosti,èime je kadiluk predstavljao i stvarnu redovnu upravnu jedinicu usvim oblastima u kojima je bilo muslimana. Tamo gdje su muslimanibili rjeðe naseljeni kadiluk se mogao poklapati i sa teritorijomèitavog sand�aka. Kadiluci (kaze) su bile anticipacija kasnijihmudirluka odnosno muselimluka, a kasnije srezova i kotareva.

7. Poèetkom XIX st. bosanski ajalet je izgubio neke teritorijena desnoj strani Drine. Bosanski sand�ak se pro�irio 1817.ukidanjem novopazarskog sand�aka, a 1826. ukidanjem kli�kogsand�aka i 1832. ukidanjem zvornièkog sand�aka. Tako su ubosanskom ajaletu ostali samo bosanski i hercegovaèki sand�ak.Kako su namjesnici bosanskog ajaleta u�ivali hercegovaèki sand�akkao lenski prihod (arpaluk), to je praktièno veæ tada postojala skoro

18

jedinstvena vojno-administrativna i politièka jedinica - bosanskiajalet.

Poslije ugu�ivanja autonomnog pokreta Bo�njaka pod voðstvomHusein Kapetana Grada�èeviæa (1832), ukinute su kapetanije iprovedena upravna podjela na muselimluke (kotareve), koji su seuglavnom podudarali sa ranijim kadilucima (1835).

Da bi �to vi�e razbili snage otpora centralnoj vlasti i zadovoljilisvoje priv�enike u Hercegovini (Ali-pa�u Rizvanbegoviæa)Osmanlije su iz bosanskog ajaleta izdvojili (1833) hercegovaèkisand�ak i pretvorili ga u poseban mutesafirluk koji mu je povjerenna upravu (25).

U vrijeme namjesni�tva (vezirovanja) Omer-pa�e Latasa (1850-1852) definitivno je skr�ena politièka moæ bo�njaèkog plemstva uBosni. Izvr�ena je temeljna reorganizacija politièke uprave u Bosni.Bosna je tada bila podijeljena na kajmakamluke. U Bosni:sarajevski, travnièki, banjaluèki, bihaæki, zvornièki i novopazarski.U Hercegovini: mostarski, trebinjski i pljevaljski. Ovakvo ureðenjeje ostalo do 1865.

8. Uredba o ureðenju bosanskog vilajeta (Bosna vilayetnizamnamesi) publikovana je 7. novembra 1864., a u Bosni jeprovedena 1865. i 1866. Èlanom 2. ove Uredbe od bosanskog ajaletai hercegovaèkog mutesafirluka osnovan je jedan bosanski vilajetkao jedinstvena pokrajina na èijem se èelu nalazio valija ili valipa�a(guverner) koga je imenovala centralna vlast. Njegova ovla�æenjasu bila taksativno navedena u Uredbi, i time bila ogranièena uodnosu na raniji period. Ustanovljeno je i Vilajetsko vijeæe koje sesastajalo jednom godi�nje.

Sudstvo nije bilo vi�e iskljuèivo u rukama kadije, jer su pored�erijatskih uvedeni i graðanski sudovi. Ovom uredbom kajma-kamluci su pretvoreni u sand�ake (live), a trebinjski i mostarskikajmakamluk sjedinjeni su u jedan hercegovaèki sand�ak. Tako jebosanski vilajet imao sedam sand�aka: sarajevski, zvornièki (Tuzla),travnièki, banjaluèki, bihaæki, hercegovaèki i novopazarski(Sjenica). Sand�acima su upravljali kajmakami, izuzev sarajevskogkojim je upravljao sam valija. Ova organizacija bosanskog vilajetauz neznatne promjene ostala je na snazi do 1878., s tim �to je

19

novopazarski sand�ak 2. februara 1877. definitivno izdvojen izbosanskog vilajeta i prikljuèen kosovskom vilajetu. U vrijemehercegovaèkog ustanka 1875. gataèki kadiluk je privremenopretvoren u istoimeni sand�ak, da bi od 1878. bosanski vilajet sesastojao od �est okru�ja: sarajevskog, travnièkog, bihaækog,banjaluèkog, tuzlanskog i mostarskog (26).

9. Osnovni izvori pravnog sistema Osmanskog carstva bili su�erijatski zakon i dr�avni (sultanski) zakon koji se zvao kanun. UBosni i Hercegovini va�ila je tzv. hanefijska pravna �kola, po imenuEbu Hanifi. �erijatsko pravo je �iroko primjenjivano samo uodnosima izmeðu muslimana. Za sluèajeve gdje se nisu mogla naæipravna rje�enja u Kur'anu i hadisima, �iroko su primjenjivane fetve.Fetve su izdavale muftije koji su bili u kadilucima, a postojao je ijedan veliki muftija za èitavo carstvo (�ejhulislam). Izvjesni elementi�erijatskog prava oèuvali su se u Bosni i Hercegovini sve do 1945.,naroèito u porodiènim i nasljednim pravima muslimana. Pored�erijatskog prava, primjenjivano je u Bosni i vjersko pravo pojedinihvjerskih zajednica (mileta) tzv. miletsko pravo, a ponegdje i obièajnopravo.

Pored �erijatskog, jedan od najva�nijih pravnih izvora, bilo jedr�avno ili sultansko pravo, odnosno kanuni, ili kanunsko pravo.Dr�avno pravo se objavljivalo i u posebnim naredbama (fermanima),a kasnije i u sveèanim poveljama (hati�erif). Dr�avnim pravom bilisu regulirani odnosi koji nisu bili obuhvaæeni �erijatskim pravomili su samo djelimièno bili obuhvaæeni, kao npr. organizacija vlasti,odnosi u timarskom sistemu, poresko pravo i sl. Zbornici zakonasu se zvali kanuni ili kanun - name. Poznate su bile kanun - nameMehmeda II i Sulejmana Velikog (Zakonodavca).

Pored opæih izdavane su i posebne kanun - name za pojedinesand�ake, najèe�æe kao sastavni dijelovi deftera. Saèuvane subosanske kanun - name, bosanskog, zvornièkog, hercegovaèkog ikli�kog sand�aka. Ali su one èesto bile mrtvo slovo na papiru. Zatoje Tanzimatskim reformama 1839. to pravo ukinuto i sultani supoèeli odnose da ureðuju posebnim zakonima, kao �to su biliRamazanski zakon, Muharemski zakon, Krivièni zakonik itd.

20

U drugoj polovini XIX st. pojavio se neslu�beni zbornikcjelokupnog imovinskog prava u Osmanskom carstvu pod nazivomMed�ela, koji nije bio formalno zakon, ali je u�ivala autoritet uprimjeni. Med�ela je bila predviðena za svo stanovni�tvo bez obzirana vjersku i stale�ku pripadnost (27).

21

AUSTROUGARSKI CORPUS SEPARATUM

10. Austrougarski corpus separatum. Austrougarska vlast u BiHs dr�avnopravnog stanovi�ta razlikuje se na dva nivoa: prvi je od1878. do aneksije 1908. (oko 30 godina), kada je njena vlast u BiHprivremena, pod mandatom meðunarodne zajednice, kada jo� turskisultan ima formalni suverenitet nad Bosnom i drugi nivo, od 1908.do 1918., kada je Bosna aneksijom postala kolonija Austro-Ugarske,koja nad njom ima puni dr�avni suverenitet, s jedne strane, i oblikepolitièke organizacije vlasti u kojim aktivno uèestvuje i domaæestanovni�tvo, pod èvrstom kontrolom i ovla�æenjima centralne vlastiu Beèu.

Znaèajni elementi vojne uprave i ogranièena graðanska pravabili su prisutni za cijelo vrijeme austrougarske vladavine. Bosna iHercegovina nije bila sastavni dio austrougarske dr�avne strukture.

Osnovni meðunarodnopravni akti koji su odreðivali polo�ajBosne i Hercegovine poslije 1878. su èlan XXV Berlinskog ugovorai Carigradska konvencija (1879).

Sporazum o pokrajinama Bosni i Hercegovini u Berlinskomugovoru (èlan XXV) je glasio:

"AUSTRO-UGARSKA ÆE ZAPOSJESTI POKRAJINEBOSNU I HERCEGOVINU I UPRAVLJAT ÆE NJIMA. KAKOAUSTROUGARSKA VLADA NE �ELI DA PRIMA NA SEBEUPRAVU NOVOPAZARSKOG SAND�AKA, KOJI SE PROSTI-RE IZMEÐU SRBIJE I CRNE GORE U PRAVCU NA JUGO-ISTOK, DO IZA MITROVICE (Kosovske), TO ÆE U NJEMU IDALJE OSTATI TURSKA UPRAVA. PA IPAK, DA BI SE SJEDNE STRANE OSIGURALO NOVO POLITIÈKO STANJE,A S DRUGE STRANE SLOBODA I SIGURNOST SAOBRA-ÆAJNIH PUTEVA, AUSTROUGARSKA ZADR�AVA ZA SEBEPRAVO, DA NA CIJELOM OVOM PROSTORU STAROGBOSANSKOG VILAJETA DR�I SVOJE GARNIZONE I DA U

22

SVOJOJ VLASTI IMA NJEGOVE VOJNIÈKE I TRGOVAÈKEPUTEVE".

"AUSTRIJSKA I TURSKA VLADA ZADR�AVAJU DA SESPORAZUMIJU O POJEDINOSTIMA O OVOJ STVARI".

Punomoænik Turske, po�to je za to dobio naroèito ovla�æenjeod svoje vlade, dao je takoðer pristanak naknadno u poèetku sjedniceod 4. jula ovim rijeèima:

"Otomanska carska vlada je uzela u vrlo ozbiljno razmatranjemi�ljenje, koje je kongres izrekao u pogledu sredstava za umirenjeBosne i Hercegovine; ona u njega ima potpuno povjerenje, meðutimsebi zadr�ava pravo, da se u tom pogledu prethodno i neposrednosporazumije sa beèkim kabinetom".

Na to se grof Andra�i izjasnio da je zadovoljan ovom izjavom, apredsjednik sesije je na to objavio, da je time dat Austro-Ugarskojmandat u ime svih sila, koje su zastupljene na kongresu.

Na sam dan potpisivanja ugovora 13. jula 1878., osmanski del-egati su poslije upornog insistiranja, uspjeli da od austrougarskihpredstavnika dobiju pismenu izjavu da "suverena prava NJ. C. Vel.Sultana na pokrajine Bosnu i Hercegovinu neæe pretrpjeti nikakvepovrede faktom zaposjedanja... i da æe se zaposjedanje smatratikao privremeno" (28).

11. Veæ 5. juna 1878., dakle prije poèetka Berlinskog kongresa13. juna, u Sarajevu je formiran Narodni odbor koji je javno djelovaoi pripremao otpor austrougarskim jedinicama. Narodni odbor jetek 7. jula iznudio ostavku Veli pa�e, vojnog komandanta Bosne.Narodni odbor je veoma sporo djelovao, sa nedovoljnom odluèno�æuprema Osmanlijama i bez prave podr�ke Bo�njaka drugih konfesija.

Narodni odbor je 27. jula 1878. zbacio osmanlijsku vlast uSarajevu i formirao svoju Narodnu vladu, u kojoj su vojni poslovipovjereni Smail-begu Selmanoviæu - Taslid�aku i MuhameduHad�ijamakoviæu, policija Abidagi Gaèaninu i Ahmedu Naki, auprava telegrafa �erifu Zild�iæu.

Poèetkom avgusta, komandant Bosne Smail Haki Selmanoviæizdao je Objavu u kojoj poziva sve njene �itelje: "Islame, Hristjane

23

i Latine" da se "slo�no odupru neprijateljima". U objavi se pominjesamo Bosna, njeno stanovni�tvo i pro�lost, dok o Turskoj i sultanunema ni rijeèi. Time se, oèigledno, �eljelo istaæi da je Bosnasamostalna i da se sama brani. Kao �to je poznato ovaj otpor jeskr�en. Prvi organ nove austrougarske vlasti u Bosni i Hercegovinibio je vojni sud, koga je glavnokomandujuæi Filipoviæ uspostaviojo� u Doboju 4. avgusta 1878.

Andrassy, ministar vanjskih poslova je govorio: "NovopazarskiSand�ak je za Bosnu isto �to i posjedovanje Bosfora za Crno More".Naknadni pregovori izmeðu Austro-Ugarske i Turske uspje�no suokonèani 21. aprila 1879. godine, kada je zakljuèen i potpisansporazum u Carigradu.

12. Pravni polo�aj BiH nakon zaposjedanja i u odnosu nadotada�nje meðunarodnopravne norme, predstavljao je jednu pravnuanomaliju. Sultan je legitimni suveren Bosne i Hercegovine, ali sestvarna vlast i uprava nalaze u rukama Austro-Ugarske. Polo�ajBosne i Hercegovine je bio neodreðen prema dotada�njimstandardima. Sultan jest teoretski nosilac suvereniteta, ali bezznaèaja i djelovanja, prosti privid prava. S druge strane, BiH nijenerazdvojni dio Austro-Ugarske, veæ joj je samo prikljuèena(zaposjednuta) voljom evropskih sila i saglasno�æu Turske. Ona,dakle, nije bila okupirana jednostranim aktom.

Austro-Ugarska uprava u Bosni i Hercegovini bila je ogranièenasa tri èinioca koja su proiza�la iz Berlinskog ugovora: (1) ciljevimaevropskog mandata, da uvede red i mir, (2) neprekidno�æusuvereniteta Porte nad Bosnom, �to je obavezivalo austro-ugarskuupravu u Bosni da lokalne propise sankcionira sultan i (3)odredbama osnovnih meðunarodnih ugovora, iz èega proizlazi daje rijeè o privremenoj upravi. Meðutim, po�to su stvarne namjereAustro-Ugarske bile trajno zaposijedanje BiH radi strate�kogosiguranja Dalmacije i Istre s te�njom njenog trajnog prisajedi-njenja, to se nije u praksi ni moglo uskladiti sultanova pravasuvreniteta nad Bosnom i Hercegovinom sa istorijskom stvarno�æu.To su podr�avale evropske sile, koje ni u jednom sluèaju nisuprotestirale protiv raznih mjera Austro-Ugarske kojima se vrijeðao

24

suverenitet sultana. Austro-Ugarska je u BiH imala "samo pravovr�enja unutra�njeg suvereniteta" (29).

Èlanom IV Carigradske konvencije predviðeno je zakljuèivanjeposebnog sporazuma o spoljnom suverenitetu, odnosno zastupanjuBosanaca u inostranstvu, ali takav sporazum nikada nije sklopljen.

Stanovnike Bosne i Hercegovine te�ko mo�emo ubrojati upunopravne dr�avljane jedne ili druge zemlje. Naime, stanovniciBiH nisu u�ivali niz graðanskih i politièkih prava, koja su imaligraðani Austro-Ugarske, a i Osmanske carevine. Bo�njaci sve trikonfesije su "u�ivali" vojnu obavezu, ali su izmeðu Bosne iMonarhije postojale mnoge demarkacione linije. Njihov neodreðenpolo�aj mo�da najbolje izra�ava formula "zemaljskog pripadni�tva",mada je ona ostala nedefinirana.

13. Sa poèecima osmanskog slabljenja i povlaèenja iz srednjeEvrope, Habsbur�ka Monarhija je samim tim u svojim temeljimapostala, takoðe, ugro�ena, jer vi�e nije postojala svrha okupljanjarazlièitih zemalja u njoj zbog Osmanske prijetnje.

Sa ustavne taèke gledi�ta najlak�e je bilo ostaviti u Bosni vojnuupravu po�to je vojska bila zajednièka ustanova. Vojna uprava je,meðutim, odbaèena prije svega iz finansijskih razloga, ali i iz jednogpolitièkog razloga: dvorski krugovi su zaposjedanje Bosne odpoèetka shvatili kao inkorporaciju Bosne u Monarhiju. Pokazalose da je vojna uprava, koja se u prvoj fazi nije mogla izbjeæi, dalekoskuplja od graðanske uprave (30).

Otuda se u diskusijama voðenim u Beèu nakon okupacijeiskristaliziralo mi�ljenje da Bosnu i Hercegovinu treba tretirati kaojedan sui generis organizam, u èijoj æe upravi neposrednouèestvovati predstavnici tri razlièita ministarstva (vojske, spoljnihposlova i finansija) i obiju vlada Monarhije, kao i da se u principubosanska uprava finansira iz prihoda koji se ostvare u Bosni iHercegovini. (31).

Parlamenti Austrije i Ugarske izglasali su Zakon o upravljanjuBosnom i Hercegovinom, 22. februara 1880. Ovaj Zakon je potvrdioda Zajednièkoj vladi pripada nadzor nad privremenom upravom uBosni i Hercegovini i sudjelovanje u utvrðivanju pravaca i naèelate uprave koja svoje tro�kove treba da pokrije vlastitim prihodima.

25

Vanredne izdatke odobravat æe parlamenti oba dijela Monarhije.Ova zakonodavna tijela su nadle�na i za dono�enje propisa ocarinama, indirektnim porezima i novcu, a bez njihove jednoglasnesaglasnosti ne mo�e se promijeniti odnos u kome se prema Monarhijinalazi Bosna i Hercegovina.

Car je, odmah poslije dono�enja Zakona, 26. februara 1880. naprijedlog Zajednièke vlade, odluèio da vrhovnu civilnu upravu uBiH povjeri Zajednièkom ministarstvu finansija. Odluke ovogministarstva neposredno je provodila èinovnièka Zemaljska vladau Sarajevu, osnovana naredbom od 29. oktobra 1880. Pored cara iZajednièke vlade (Ministarstva finansija) zakonska ovla�æenja dobilisu i parlamenti i vlada Austrije i Ugarske, da uèestvuju u upraviBosne i Hercegovine. Bosna se mo�e oznaèiti kao opæedr�avnopodruèje Monarhije, kojim je ona upravljala po mandatu Evrope iuz saglasnost sultana koji je nad BiH zadr�ao svoj formalnisuverenitet.

Bosna do 1908. nije bila austro-ugarska kolonija, jer ona nadnjom nije imala pravno neogranièenu vlast, ali je Monarhija u Bosnivodila kolonijalnu ekonomsku politiku. A nakon aneksije 1908.Bosna je i formalno postala austrougarska kolonija, jer su prestalaona ogranièenja iz evropskog mandata, a sultan je svoj formalnisuverenitet prodao Austro-Ugarskoj za dva i po miliona funtisterlinga i tako produ�io legitimitet austrougarske uprave uBosni. (32).

Ni poslije aneksije BiH 1908. (izvr�ene poslije mladoturskerevolucije u Turskoj) nije bilo rije�eno pitanje ukljuèivanja BiH udr�avne strukture u odnosu na druge sastavne dijelove Monarhije.

14. Prelaz sa osmanskog na novi austrougarski pravni sistemnije izvr�en naglo, nego vrlo oprezno i postepeno. Mo�e se reæi daje u oblasti pravnog sistema u velikoj mjeri odr�an kontinuitetizmeðu stare osmanske i nove austrougarske vlasti. Austrougarskaje zadr�ala mnoge pravne ustanove iz dotada�njeg osmanskogpisanog i bosanskog obièajnog prava, posebno u graðanskom pravu.Uporedo s tim austrougarska uprava poèela je od prvog dana donositisvoje mnogobrojne propise (33). Od 1910. kada je car sankcioniraobosanski Ustav, kao nova grupa izvora prava javljaju se zakoni koje

26

je u okviru svoje nadle�nosti predlagao novouspostavljeni Bosanskisabor.

U toku cijele austrougarske uprave, u Bosni i Hercegovini suva�ili razlièiti propisi iz islamskog i osmanskog prava. Propisi�erijata su regulirali porodiène, nasljednopravne, vakufske i vjerskeodnose muslimana. Pored �erijata su praktièno va�ili i mnogi kanuni(zakoni), naroèito oni koji su regulirali zemlji�ne odnose i koji sudugom primjenom postali element bosanskog obièajnog prava.

Austrougarski pravni sistem u Bosni i Hercegovini ostao jenedograðen, pa je kao i cjelukupna austrougarska uprava imaoprovizorni karakter, i do kraja ostao nejedinstven i potèinjen, a èestoi u raskoraku sa dru�tvenim odnosima na koje se moraoprimjenjivati.

27

BOSNA U DR@AVI SHS

15. Bosna i Hercegovina u dr�avi SHS. Politièki �ivot u Bosni iHercegovini je potpuno zamro poslije atentata na austrijskogprestolonasljednika Franju Ferdinanda 28. juna 1914. Tada jeonemoguæen i dalji rad Bosanskog sabora.

Vojnièki slom Centralnih sila uslovio je konkretne akcijepolitièkih grupa i stranaka, koje su veæ 24. septembra 1918. uZagrebu objavile memorandum u kome su izjavile da ne priznajucarsku i kraljevu vladu Austro-Ugarske i oduzimaju joj pravo da ihzastupa prilikom zakljuèenja mira. Odmah iza toga 6. oktobra uZagrebu je osnovano Narodno vijeæe Slovenaca, Hrvata i Srba.Odcjepljenje ju�noslavenskih zemalja od Austro-Ugarske i njihovoosamostaljenje izvr�eno je 29. oktobra 1918.

Prvog novembra 1918. zemaljski poglavar Bosne i Hercegovinepredao je vlast u ruke Narodnog vijeæa. Odmah zatim je Narodnovijeæe BiH, na prijedlog Glavnog odbora, izabralo narodnu bosanskuvladu u koju su u�li predstavnici Srba, Hrvata i Bo�njaka.

Osnivanjem Narodnog vijeæa Slovenaca, Srba i Hrvata, teformiranjem narodne vlade Bosne i Hercegovine, Slovenije iDalmacije s vladom Hrvatske, do�lo je do konstituiranja noveDr�ave Slovenaca, Hrvata i Srba na podruèju ju�noslavenskihzemalja koje su bile pod Austro-Ugarskom vla�æu. Pri tome je do�aodo izra�aja federativni princip kao osnovica ureðenja nove dr�av.Centralnu vlast preuzelo je predsjedni�tvo vijeæa, a pokrajuinskevlade, meðu kojima i vlada Bosne i Hercegovine, imale su unadle�nosti poslove pokrajinskog znaèaja.

28

29

BOSNA U KRALJEVINI SHS

16. Bosna i Hercegovina u Kraljevini SHS. Pod uticajemunutra�njih i vanjskih faktora, Narodno vijeæe SHS, 29. oktobra1918. objavilo je da Dr�ava SHS nije osnovana s ciljem da se du�eodr�i, veæ da se ujedini s ostalim ju�noslovenskim zemljama.Postojala su dva stanovi�ta o ujedinjenju: centralistièko ifederalistièko. Centralisti su bili u veæini i 24. novembra 1918.done�en je zakljuèak da se pristupi ujedinjenju Dr�ave SHS saKraljevinom Srbijom i Crnom Gorom u jedinstvenu dr�avu SHS.Delegacija Narodnog vijeæa SHS je 1. decembra 1918. u Beogradu,pred regentom Aleksandrom Karaðorðeviæem proèitala svoju"Adresu", po kojoj bi vladarsku vlast imao kralj Petar, odnosno unjegovoj zamjeni regent Aleksandar, s parlamentarnom vladom.Aleksandar je uzvratio svojom "Adresom" kojom je proglasioujedinjenje u "jedinstveno Kraljevstvo Srba, Hrvata i Slovenaca".Tom prilikom ni u jednoj "adresi" nisu bile sadr�ane "upute" datedelegaciji Narodnog vijeæa SHS, a posebno da "konaènuorganizaciju nove dr�ave mo�e odrediti samo sveopæa narodnaustavotvorna skup�tina svega ujedinjenog naroda Srba, Hrvata iSlovenaca s veæinom od dvije treæine glasova". Time je veæ napoèetku nastala klica buduæeg nezadovoljstva nesrpskih naroda saJugoslavijom i uzrokom njenog prvog raspada 1941., jer nijeostvarena ravnopravnost za sve ju�noslovenske narode (34).

Bosna i Hercegovina je privremeno zadr�ala neke oblikedr�avnosti. Narodno vijeæe BiH prestalo je funkcionirati31.12.1918., a Narodna vlada BiH, mjesec dana kasnije. Umjestonje obrazovana je Zemaljska vlada za BiH odgovorna centralnojvladi u Beogradu sa su�enim djelokrugom svojih ovla�æenja.Umjesto ranijih deset, imala je samo èetiri povjereni�tva: zaunutra�nje poslove, pravosuðe, poljoprivredu, prosvjetu i vjerskeposlove. Ovaj sastav vlade ostao je sve do 28. juna 1921. kada jedone�en tzv. Vidovdanski ustav, koji je po�ao od stanovi�tanacionalnog unitarizma i dr�avnog centralizma: "jedan narod, jedna

30

dr�ava". Jugoslovenska muslimanska organizacija uspjela je da seu Ustav ugradi èlan 135. kojim æe se u sluèaju regionalne podjelezemlje saèuvati teritorijalna cjelovitost Bosne i Hercegovine unjenim historijskim granicama.

31

BOSNA U KRALJEVINI JUGOSLAVIJI

17. Bosna i Hercegovina u Kraljevini Jugoslaviji. KraljAleksandar je 6. januara 1929. objavio Proklamaciju kojom jeukinuo Vidovdanski ustav (1921), raspustio Narodnu skup�tinu,proglasio sebe jedinim nosiocem suvereniteta i vrhovne vlasti udr�avi i kao program svoje apsolutistièke vlasti proglasio "èuvanjedr�avnog i narodnog jedinstva". Raspustio je politièke stranke iobrazovao vojnu vladu. Iste godine, 3. oktobra, donesen je Zakon onazivu i podjeli kraljevine na upravna podruèja, kojim je odreðenoda je slu�beni naziv dr�ave: Kraljevina Jugoslavija. Po tom zakonuopæa uprava se vr�i po banovinama, srezovima i opæinama. Dr�avaje podijeljena na devet banovina, koje su dobile ime po rijekama.Ovom podjelom razbijen je historijski teritorijalni okvir Bosne iHercegovine na èetiri banovine, s tim da je samo Vrbaska banovina(Banjaluka) izuzev Dvora na Uni u cjelini bila na bosanskoherce-govaèkom teritoriju. Ostali dijelovi Bosne i Hercegovine podijeljenisu na Drinsku (Sarajevo), Zetsku (Cetinje) i Primorsku (Split)banovinu, koje su duboko zadirale u teritorije susjednih zemalja.Toliko duboko koliko je trebalo da Bo�njaci ni u jednoj ne buduveæinski narod.

Tako je Bosna i Hercegovina prvi put u svojoj hiljadugodi�njojhistoriji bila teritorijalno podijeljena na administrativno-upravnejedinice kojim se razbijao njen historijski teritorij. Tako je poredukidanja svakog vida pokrajinske vlasti, BiH bila i teritorijalnorazbijena (35).

Do sporazuma Cvjetkoviæ-Maèek, do�lo je 26.avgusta 1939.Tada je objavljena Uredba o Banovini Hrvatskoj, kojom su Savskai Primorska banovina i 13 srezova u BiH (Brèko, Gradaèac,Derventa, Travnik, Fojnica, Bugojno, Stolac, Mostar, Ljubu�ki,Livno, Konjic, Duvno i Prozor) spojeni u jednu banovinu.

18. Bosna i Hercegovina, s obzirom na svoj polo�aj u Jugoslavijiizmeðu dva svjetska rata nije imala svoj samostalni pravni sistem.U njoj je primjenjivan pravni sistem Jugoslavije. Pravni sistem

32

Jugoslavije poèeo je da se razvija formalnopravno dono�enjemUstava Kraljevine Srba, Hrvata i Slovenaca 28. juna 1921. Periodod 1918. do 1921. protekao je u autonomnom ureðivanju pravnihodnosa zemalja koje su u�le u sastav nove dr�ave, uz sna�nu kontrolucentralne vlade i njenu uredbodavnu aktivnost.

Poslije ukidanja Vidovdanskog ustava 1929. godine i kraljevogoktroiranja novog ustava iz 1931. godine, u uslovima apsolutnevlasti, u BiH je nastao jedan improviziran ustavnopravni poredakbez legitimiteta. Poku�aji njegovog legitimiranja na izborima 1935.i 1938. godine, u uslovima primjene represivnih metoda i progonaopozicije samo je uèvr�æivano jedno nelegitimno stanje koje je takvoostalo do rata i razbijanja Jugoslavije od strane Njemaèke, Italije injihovih satelita iz okru�enja 1941. godine i nastanka kvislin�kihtvorevina Paveliæeve Hrvatske i Nediæeve Srbije.

33

FEDERALNA BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA

19. Obnova dr�avnosti u obliku Federalne Bosne i Hercegovine.Kada je u septembru 1943. poslije kapitulacije Italije, veæ bilaizvjesna pobjeda saveznièkih snaga, poèele su pripreme zakonstituiranje centralne vlasti u Bosni i Hercegovini. To se uskoroi desilo u Mrkonjiæ Gradu (Varcar Vakufu) 25. novembra 1943. naPrvom zasjedanju ZAVNOBiH-a (Zemaljskog antifa�istièkog vijeæanarodnog osloboðenja Bosne i Hercegovine). Ovaj se datum uzimakao dan obnove bosanske dr�avnosti i uspostavljanja modernebosanske dr�ave na demokratskim principima i po�tivanju ljudskihi graðanskih prava (36).

Vojna podloga za obnovu dr�avnosti Bosne i Hercegovine bilaje ta �to je krajem 1943. godine od ukupno 27 divizija tada�njeNarodnooslobodilaèke vojske Jugoslavije, Bosna i Hercegovinadavala 11 divizija i vi�e samostalnih odreda van sastava divizija(37). Politièka podloga za obnavljanje dr�avnosti Bosne iHercegovine bilo je masovno opredjeljenje sva tri bosanska narodaza politièku autonomiju BiH u demokratskoj i federativnojJugoslaviji (DFJ), kao zasebna federalna jedinica. Historijskapodloga za obnovu dr�avnosti Bosne i Hercegovine bila je bosanskasrednjovjekovna dr�ava i postojanje jedinstvenog bosanskog naroda(Bo�njana, Bo�njaka, Bosanaca) koji su i pored polumilenijumskogpotpadanja pod tuðinsku vlast saèuvali svijest o svom posebnompolitièkom i kulturnom identitetu i svojoj dr�avnosti i Bosni kaosvojoj dr�avi, èiju su politièku posebnost uspjele saèuvati svegeneracije Bosanaca u njenom hiljadugodi�njem postojanju. S tomrazlikom �to su od druge polovine XIX stoljeæa pod uticajempolitièke propagande iz susjedstva i crkvenih vlasti, bosanski katolicipoèeli da se nacionalno osjeæaju Hrvatima, a bosanski pravoslavcida se nacionalno osjeæaju Srbima. Bosanski muslimani, iako im jepredodreðeno bilo da se nacionalno opredijele kao Srbi ili kaoHrvati, ostali su politièki sljedbenici tradicije srednjovjekovnihBo�njana (Bo�njaka). Dok su ekstremni Bosanski Srbi te�ili da

34

Bosnu pripoje Srbiji, a ekstremni Bosanski Hrvati, da je pripojeHrvatskoj, Bo�njaci su jo� od turskog vremena te�ili ka politièkojautonomiji Bosne i obnovi njene dr�avnosti. Iako su bili muslimaninikada nisu sebe smatrali Turcima u nacionalnom smislu, veæBo�njacima (38).

AVNOJ je na Drugom zasjedanju (29.11.1943) donio Odluku oizgradnji Jugoslavije na federativnom principu, kojom je naèelnoodreðen i polo�aj ZAVNOBiH-a kao nosioca dr�avno-pravnihfunkcija u federalnoj jedinici Bosni i Hercegovini. U taè. 3. oveodluke ka�e se da "U skladu sa federativnom izgradnjom Jugoslavijejeste èinjenica da veæ sada osnovne organe narodne vlasti kodpojedinih naroda Jugoslavije predstavljaju narodnooslobodilaèkiodbori i zemaljska antifa�istièka vijeæa narodnog osloboðenja" (39).

Pravni akti usvojeni na Drugom zasjedanju ZAVNOBiH-a (1944)reguliraju jedinstven pravni sistem Bosne i Hercegovine na novimdemokratskim osnovama. U tom smislu je i�la i izgradnja organauprave i izgradnja organa sudske vlasti na principima izgradnjesistema jedinstva vlasti u Federalnoj Bosni i Hercegovini. Uputamaje odreðeno da se sudska vlast izgradi na principima: demokrati-ènosti izbora sudija, zbornosti sudija, vi�estepenosti sudova,nezavisnosti u dono�enju odluka, javnosti rada i odgovornosti zarad pred narodom (40).

35

NARODNA REPUBLIKABOSNA I HERCEGOVINA

20. Narodna Republika Bosna i Hercegovina. Ubrzano je vr�enai izgradnja bosanskohercegovaèke dr�avnosti. Poslije osloboðenjaSarajeva sazvano je Treæe zasjedanje ZAVNOBiH-a koje je odr�ano26. aprila 1945. (41). Na ovom zasjedanju donesene su slijedeæeodluke i zakoni: (1) Odluka o odobrenju rada Predsjedni�tvaZAVNOBIH-a izmeðu dva zasijedanja; (2) Odluka o izmjeni idopuni Odluke o konstituiranju Zemaljskog antifa�istièkog vijeæanarodnog osloboðenja Bosne i Hercegovine u najvi�e zakonodavnoi izvr�no narodno predstavnièko tijelo Federalne Bosne iHercegovine; (3) Zakon o zakletvi narodnih poslanika Narodneskup�tine Bosne i Hercegovine i (4) Zakon o narodnoj vladi BiH(60). Na ovom zasjedanju ZAVNOBiH se pretvorio u Narodnuskup�tinu Bosne i Hercegovine. Zatim je izabrana vlada Bosne iHercegovine. Predsjedni�tvo ZAVNOBiH-a postalo je Predsjedni-�tvo Narodne skup�tine.

Nakon provedenih izbora prvo zasjedanje Ustavotvorneskup�tine sazvano je za 11. novembar 1946. (42). Ustavotvornaskup�tina je na ovom prvom zasjedanju potvrdila: (1) Sve odlukeZAVNOBiH-a donesene na Drugom i Treæem zasjedanju, (2) Sveakte koje je donijela Narodna skup�tina na ovom zasjedanju27. i28. aprila 1945., kao i Narodna skup�tina NR Bosne i Hercegovineod aprila 1945. do prvog zasjedanja Ustavotvorne skup�tine, (3)Odluke i druge akte Predsjedni�tva Narodne skup�tine. Navedenimaktima je ovo narodno predstavnièko tijelo izabrano na slobodnimizborima legitimiralo sve odluke koje su done�ene do prvogzasjedanja Ustavotvorne skup�tine.

Na sjednicama Ustavotvorne skup�tine, odr�anim 28. do 31.decembra 1946. done�en je Ustav Narodne Republike Bosne iHercegovine, progla�en na sjednici od 31. decembra 1946. (43).

Ako se izuzme Uredba o bosanskom vilajetu koju je sankcioniraosultan u novembru 1864. i Statut (Ustav) za Bosnu i Hercegovinu

36

koji je sankcionirao u februaru 1910. austrijski car i ugarski kraljFranjo Josif, taèno nakon 483 i po godine, od gubljenja dr�avnosti1463., bosansko suvereno narodno predstavnièko tijelo, izabranona slobodnim izborima , donijelo je Bosni i Hercegovini prvi Ustavu njenoj historiji.

U èlanu prvom Ustava ureðeno je da je Narodna Republika Bosnai Hercegovina narodna dr�ava republikanskog oblika. Tomodredbom definitivno je ureðen status Bosne i Hercegovine kaodr�ave. Èlan drugi Ustava ureðuje da se Bosna i Hercegovina,koristeæi se svojim pravom na samoopredjeljenje ujedinila saSrbijom, Hrvatskom, Slovenijom, Makedonijom i Crnom Gorom usaveznu dr�avu FNRJ i prenijela na FNRJ samo ona prava koja susaveznoj dr�avi data Ustavom FNRJ.

37

SOCIJALISTI^KA REPUBLIKABOSNA I HERCEGOVINA

21. Socijalistièka Republika Bosna i Hercegovina. Ustav iz 1963.ovako definira socijalistièku republiku: "dr�avna socijalistièkademokratska zajednica" (èlan 108. stav 1.). Dok je Ustav iz 1946.govorio o suverenosti republika, Ustav iz 1963. govori o "suverenimpravima" naroda tamo gdje propisuje da ta prava �titi Federacija(èlan 114.). Tako se isprepliæu "dr�avnost" republike i "suverenaprava" naroda. Sve to mo�e imati svoju naèelnu politièku vrijednosti svoje politièko znaèenje, ali s ustavnopravnog aspekta mo�e sesumnjati u te njihove atribute, s obzirom da su bili samo deklarativni.Prema Ustavu iz 1946., Ustavnom zakonu iz 1953. i Ustavu iz 1963.Jugoslavija je bila centralizirana dr�ava u pogledu ureðivanjadru�tveno-ekonomskog i politièkog sistema i u dobroj mjeri, u timsferama odnosa i subordinirana. To je proizlazilo iz èinjenice da jesam Savez komunista bio tako organiziran, tzv. demokratskicentralizam, sa vrlo malo demokratije, a sa puno centralizma. Iakoje Jugoslavija bila savezna dr�ava sastavljena od autonomnihfederalnih jedinica, u bitnim pitanjima dr�avnog ureðenja nije serazlikovala od unitarno ureðenih dr�ava. Jugoslavija je bila samodeklarativno federalizirana, a stvarno se njome upravljalo iz centra(sovjetski model).

Ustavom 1974. SFRJ je definirana da je: "savezna dr�ava kaodr�avna zajednica dobrovoljno ujedinjenih naroda i njihovihsocijalistièkih republika, kao i socijalistièkih autonomnih pokrajinaVojvodine i Kosova koje su u sastavu SR Srbije".

Najznaèajnija odredba Ustava iz 1974. godine koja je promijenilateorijski koncept jugoslavenske federacije kao dr�ave sa punimsuverenitetom jeste ustavna odredba o postupku revizije Ustava iz1974. U èlanu 402. stav 1. stoji: "Promjena Ustava SFRJ usvojenaje kad se sa tekstom koji je usvojilo Savezno vijeæe Skup�tine SFRJsaglase skup�tine svih republika i autonomnih pokrajina, odnosnoskup�tine ovih republika". Saglasnost skup�tina svih republika i

38

pokrajina nije ni�ta drugo veæ ugovor meðu njima da doðe dopromjene Ustava. A znamo da ugovor mogu potpisati samo suverenedr�ave. Jugoslavija se u tom elementu iskazuje kao konfederacija,a ne federacija.

Prije toga je u èlanu 400. ureðeno da Savezno vijeæe mo�epokrenuti postupak promjene Ustava samo uz prethodno postignutusaglasnost skup�tina svih republika i autonomnih pokrajina, odnosnoskup�tina republika, ako je rijeè da se mijenjaju samo odredbe kojimse ureðuje polo�aj republika i meðusobni odnosi federacije irepublika. I ovaj stav potvrðuje da je Jugoslavija bila u su�tiniugovorna zajednica, samo �to se taj ugovor formalno nazivao Ustav.

22. Pravni sistem Bosne i Hercegovine je bio u neposrednojvezi sa pravnim sistemom biv�e Jugoslavije. Ustav Jugoslavije iz1946. odredio je pravac razvoja pravnog sistema cijele zemlje.Narodna skup�tina FNRJ donijela je u periodu do 1953. godineveliki broj zakona. Posebno su bili znaèajni: Zakon o neva�nostipravnih propisa donijetih prije 6. aprila 1941. godine kojim seformalnopravno prekida kontinuitet unutra�njeg prava, "starog" i"novog" pravnog poretka Jugoslavije, zatim, Zakon o narodnimodborima (1946, 1949,1952), Zakon o upravnom sporu, Kriviènizakonik i dr.

Ovo razdoblje razvoja pravnog sistema znaèajno je bio i zauspostavljanje novih dru�tveno-ekonomskih odnosa, u kom pogledusu posebno znaèajni bili akti kojim je izvr�ena konfiskacijaneprijateljske imovine i imovine narodnih neprijatelja, oduzimanjeratne dobiti, a zatim nacionalizacija industrijskih preduzeæa, banakai trgovine 1946. i 1948. godine. Dr�avna svojina je bila pretpostavkaza planiranje u privredi, koje je takoðer bilo regulirano zakonom odr�avnom planiranju.

Dono�enje Zakona o upravljanju dr�avnim privrednimpreduzeæima i vi�im privrednim udru�enjima od strane radnihkolektiva (Zakona o radnièkom samoupravljanju) juna 1950. godinei brojnih uredbi predstavljalo je poèetak novog razdoblja u razvojupravnog sistema.

Ovo se razdoblje uobièajeno naziva - period radnièkogsamoupravljanja. Njegov poèetak vezuje se za dono�enje Zakona o

39

radnièkom samoupravljanju, odnosno za dono�enje Ustavnogzakona od 1953. godine. Sa formalnopravnog stanovi�ta dono�enjeovih pravnih akata znaèilo je stvaranje novih organizacionih jedinicavan sastava dr�avnih organa - radnièkih savjeta i upravnih odbora -i u sastavu dr�avnih zakonodavnih organa - vijeæa proizvoðaèa.Tako je poèela decentralizacija zakonodavne funkcije i uspostav-ljanje novog oblika svojine - dru�tvene svojine sredstava zaproizvodnju. Ustavni zakon izrièito je proklamovao naèelo suvere-nosti radnog naroda i postavio je za osnove dru�tvenoekonomskogureðenja: dru�tvenu svojinu sredstava za proizvodnju, samouprav-ljanje u privredi i samoupravljanje u op�tini, gradu i srezu. Done�enje potom veæi broj zakona koji "uvode" samoupravljanje uvanprivredne djelatnosti, �to je kasnije sankcionirano Ustavom od1963. godine. Ustav od 1963. god. postavio je ustavnopravnemoguænosti za dalji razvoj samoupravljanja u sadr�inskom smislu- kao prava radnog èovjeka i kao prava odreðenih organizacionihjedinica u samoupravnom sistemu, a, �to je posebno znaèajno,obogatio je sadr�inu liènih prava èovjeka.

U periodu poslije dono�enja ovog Ustava, odreðene promjene usferi ideolo�kopolitièkih i ekonomskih odnosa zahtijevale sudono�enje amandmana (44).

Dono�enje Ustava 1974. godine postavlja dalju izgradnjupravnog sistema u pravcu obezbjeðenja i za�tite polo�aja èovjeka,s jedne strane, i obezbjeðenja dominacije radnièke klase jaèanjemsamoupravne organizacije udru�enog rada, s druge strane. Uostvarenju ovog drugog cilja posebno je znaèajan Zakon oudru�enom radu od 1976. godine.

Sredinom 1981. usvojeni su ustavni amandmani kojima sereguli�e du�ina mandata i sastav izabranih kolegijalnih organa tzv.kolektivno rukovoðenje. Slijedeæa znaèajna promjena Ustavaizvr�ena je amandmanima 1989. kojim je najavljena reformaekonomskog i politièkog sistema, a potom i dono�enje novih ustavau republikama 1990. i 1991. kada je otvoren proces disolucijeJugoslavije (45).

23. Disolucija Jugoslavije. Srbija nezadovoljna modelomJugoslavije koji je uveden Ustavom SFRJ iz 1974. od poèetka je

40

imala prigovor i tra�ila da pokrajine budu vi�e politièki integriraneu Srbiju. Sa objavljivanjem Memoranduma Srpske akademije nauka1986. ovaj zahtjev je pro�iren sa pokrajina i na republike u kojimasu Srbi bili znatnije zastupljeni u strukturi stanovni�tva. OsimSlovenije, to se odnosilo na sve druge republike, posebno na Bosnui Hercegovinu i Hrvatsku - radi ostvarivanja velikosrpske politièkeideje: Svi Srbi u jednoj dr�avi.

Prvo je Srbija donijela svoj Ustav septembra 1990. kojim jeukinut ustavni polo�aj Kosova i Vojvodine, dviju jugoslavenskihpokrajina u sastavu Srbije, koje su imale u svemu identièan polo�ajkao i republike, samo �to nisu imale status dr�ava. Ovakvimustavnim rje�enjem pokrajina, Srbija je poèela prva od republikada ru�i ustavnopravni poredak SFRJ. Ustavom Srbije bio jepovrijeðen ustavni polo�aj ovih pokrajina ureðen Ustavom SFRJ.Zbog opstrukcije sudija srpske nacionalnosti Ustavni sudJugoslavije u toku 1991. godine nije uspio donijeti presudu kojombi se povratio raniji ustavnopravni status pokrajinama, kakav jebio prijedlog ovog autora koji je bio Sudija izvjestioc. Potom susvoje ustave donijele Slovenija, Hrvatska i Makedonija i provelereferendume o razdru�ivanju iz Jugoslavije. Bosna i Hercegovinanije donijela novi Ustav, ali je usvojila ustavne amandmane31. jula1990. godine i tako je pored Crne Gore koja je slijedila politièkuopciju Srbije, bila jedina republika koja nije donijela potpuno novustav.

Ubrzo zatim je u Bosni do�lo do odr�avanja parlamentarnihizbora (18.11.1990) na kojim su bili pobijeðeni reformiranikomunisti, a pobjedu su izvojevale tri nacionalne stranke SDA(Bo�njaci), SDS (Srbi) i HDZ (Hrvati). U svim drugim republikamaiste godine su bili takoðer odr�ani izbori na kojima su pobijedilegraðanske i nacionalne opcije koje su tra�ile vi�e politièkeautonomije svojih republika u Jugoslaviji ili nezavisnost od nje,nasuprot srpskom stanovi�tu da se oèuva federalna Jugoslavija saznaèajnim porastom centralnih funkcija u odnosu na stanje premaUstavu iz 1974. pod devizom pravljenja nove "moderne federacije".Kada joj to nije uspjelo, poku�ala je uz pomoæ JNA da zavedevanredno (ratno) stanje marta 1991. Predsjedni�tvo Jugoslavije je

41

taj prijedlog odbacilo zahvaljujuæi glasu bosanskog èlanaPredsjedni�tva. To je ubrzalo proces srbiziranja JNA, potajnonaoru�avanje srpskog stanovni�tva u Hrvatskoj i Bosni iHercegovini pripremajuæi se za vojnu opciju. Nasuprot tome, umeðuvremenu u Jugoslaviji je prevladao koncept nacionalnihsuverenih dr�ava i tra�io se modus oèuvanja Jugoslavije, kao savezasuverenih nezavisnih dr�ava, èemu su se Srbija i Crna Gorasuprotstavile. Tako je nastao jedan spontani proces unutra�njegraspada Jugoslavije na nove nezavisne i suverene dr�ave. To jekonstatovala i Arbitra�na komisija o Jugoslaviji koju je obrazovalaEvropska zajednica: "1. Komisija je u svom mi�ljenju br. 1. od 29.novembra 1991. godine, koje je objavljeno 7. decembra konstatiralada se Socijalistièka Federativna Republika Jugoslavija nalazi uprocesu raspadanja".

Dok je Slovenija veæ u decembru 1990. na referendumu izrazila�elju za razdru�ivanjem u Jugoslaviji i najavila taj èin za 25. juni1991., Hrvatska je svoj referendum organizirala tek 30. maja 1991.,a razdru�ivanje najavila takoðer za juni iste godine. Makedonija jereferendum organizirala u septembru 1991., a odmah potom 17.novembra donijela svoj novi Ustav kojim se razdru�ila odJugoslavije.

Bosna i Hercegovina izvr�ila je znaèajne ustavne promjenenavedenim ustavnim amandmanima iz 1990. godine.Ovimamandmanima izvr�ene su promjene u dru�tvenoekonomskimodnosima, otvaranjem prema tr�i�noj ekonomiji i promjene upolitièkom sistemu otvaranjem moguænosti da se dotada�njijednopartijski sistem zamijeni sa vi�epartijskim sistemom ipluralistièkom demokratijom. Takoðer je dotada�nji skup�tinskisistem vlasti sa jedinstvom dr�avne vlasti, zamijenjen parlamen-tarnim sistemom, sa podjelom dr�avne vlasti na zakonodavnu,izvr�nu i sudsku vlast.

Jedna od najznaèajnijih odredaba tada va�eæeg ustavnogamandmana LX na Ustav Socijalistièke Republike Bosne iHercegovine bila je ona �to daje novu definiciju Bosne iHercegovine koja je bila uz provedeni referendum osnovni pravniargument za meðunarodnopravno priznanje Bosne i Hercegovine

42

kao nezavisne dr�ave. U njoj se Bosna i Hercegovina definira kao:"demokratska suverena dr�ava ravnopravnih graðana, naroda BiH- Muslimana, Srba i Hrvata i pripadnika drugih naroda i narodnostikoji u njoj �ive". Ovom definicijom trajno su bili definiranidr�avnopravni odnosi u Bosni i Hercegovini i njeni prema drugima.

S obzirom na strukturu svoga stanovni�tva Bosna i Hercegovinaje èinila takve poteze da ne doprinese zao�travanju politièkih odnosau Jugoslaviji, veæ naprotiv, da se oni demokratskim putemrazrje�avaju mehanizmima koje je Ustav SFRJ predvidio. Ali je usvom Memorandumu (Pismo o namjerama) od 14. oktobra 1991.godine jasno rekla i svoju politièku poziciju u sluèaju raspadaJugoslavije: "Bosna i Hercegovina neæe prihvatiti nikakvo ustavnorje�enje buduæe jugoslovenske zajednice u kojoj ne bi istovremenobila Srbija i Hrvatska". Ona je to obja�njavala postojeæomnacionalnom strukturom svoga stavnovni�tva i ekvidistancom uodnosu na obje zemlje ("Slu�beni list SR BiH, broj 32, od 16.oktobra 1991.).

U meðuvremenu je meðunarodna zajednica obrazovalaKonferenciju o Jugoslaviji, sa zadatkom da pomogne rje�avanjepolitièkih odnosa izmeðu njenih republika u procesu disolucijeJugoslavije. Da bi olak�ala proces disolucije i da bi ga stavila podkontrolu, Evropska zajednica i njene zemlje èlanice su na Savjetuministara EZ u Briselu 16. decembra 1991. godine donijeleDeklaraciju o Jugoslaviji i Deklaraciju o smjernicama o priznavanjudr�ava u Istoènoj Evropi i Sovjetskom Savezu.

43

REPUBLIKA BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA

24. Bosanski zahtjev za priznavanje suverenosti i nezavisnosti.Odgovarajuæi na navedene Smjernice, Vlada Bosne i Hercegovineje donijela 20. decembra 1991. Odluku o priznavanju dr�avnosti,odnosno nezavisnosti Bosne i Hercegovine. U Odluci se izra�ava�elja da se BiH prizna "kao nezavisna dr�ava" i da BiH "prihvatasve obaveze" sadr�ane u Smjernicama. Zatim da BiH "prihvata NacrtHa�ke konvencije ukljuèujuæi svakako i poglavlje II koje se odnosina za�titu ljudskih prava, nacionalnih i etnièkih grupa". Vlada usvojoj odluci navodi rezultate posljednjeg popisa stavnovni�tva(1991): Hrvati 17,27%, Muslimani (Bo�njaci) 43,74% i Srbi31,33%. Zatim 5,51% Jugoslovena i 2,15% pripadnika ostalihetnièkih grupa. Vlada se zala�e da se "pitanje odnosa meðujugoslovenskim republikama treba rje�avati mirnim putem". Potomse vlada obavezuje "da Bosna i Hercegovina nema niti æe kaonezavisna dr�ava imati ikakvih teritiorijalnih pretenzija prema bilokojoj susjednoj dr�avi i da neæe voditi nikakve neprijateljskepropagandne aktivnosti protiv bilo koje susjedne dra�ve". Stogamoli Evropsku zajednicu i njene dr�ave èlanice da "priznajusuverenitet i nezavisnost Bosne i Hercegovine" (46).

Odlukom od 8. januara 1992. godine vlada SR BiH prihvata iobavezuje se da primjenjuje Povelju UN, Zavr�ni akt iz Helsinskija,Parisku povelju, Univerzalnu deklaraciju o pravima èovjeka,Meðunarodni pakt o graðanskim i politièkim pravima i sve drugemeðunarodne akte koji garantuju prava èovjeka i slobode i dapo�tuje ranije preuzete obaveze SFRJ na planu razoru�avanja ikontrole naoru�anja. Komisija dalje konstatuje:

- Va�eæi Ustav SR BiH garantuje jednaka prava "narodima Bosnei Hercegovine - Muslimanima, Srbima i Hrvatima - i pripadnicimadrugih naroda i etnièkih grupa koji �ive na njenoj teritoriji".

- Va�eæi Ustav SR BiH garantuje po�tovanje prava èovjeka, ivlasti Bosne i Hercegovine su dostavile Komisiji listu va�eæihzakona kojima se potvrðuju ti principi. Osim toga, pru�ile su

44

Komisiji uvjeravanja da æe novi ustav, trenutno u pripremi, upotpunosti garantovati prava i slobode èovjeka.

Vlasti Bosne i Hercegovine takoðe su pru�ile uvjeravanjaKomisiji da ova republika nema nikakve teritorijalne pretenzijeprema susjednim zemljama i da je spremna da bude garant njihovogteritorijalnog integriteta. Ali i tra�ila da nova zajednica sadr�inajmanje Srbiju i Hrvatsku i da istovremeno bude potpisanakonvencija o priznavanju suvereniteta SR BiH u njenim postojeæimgranicama. Predsjedni�tvo SR BiH obavijestilo je Komisiju da ovaperspektiva ni�ta ne mijenja u pogledu zahtjeva za priznavanjesuvereniteta i nezavisnosti SR BiH.

Prema Ustavu Bosne i Hercegovine koji je modifikovanamandmanom LXVII, graðani ostvaruju svoja prava posredstvompredstavnièke skup�tine ili putem referenduma.

Po mi�ljenju Predsjedni�tva i Vlade SR BiH, pravnu osnovuzahtjeva za priznavanje predstavlja amandman LX koji je dodatUstavu Bosne i Hercegovine 31. jula 1990. godine. Ovaj amandmanodreðuje da je Republika Bosna i Hercegovina "suverenademokratska dr�ava ravnopravnih graðana, naroda Bosne iHercegovine - Muslimana, Srba i Hrvata - i pripadnika drugih narodai narodnosti koji �ive na njenoj teritoriji". Ovaj amandmanpredstavlja znaèajnu novinu u odnosu na ranije pravno stanje.

Osim toga, izvan institucionalnog okvira SR BiH, "srpski narodu Bosni i Hercegovini" se 10. novembra 1991. godine izjasnio putemplebiscita za "zajednièku jugoslovensku dr�avu", 21. decembra1991. godine "Skup�tina srpskog naroda u Bosni i Hercegovini"izglasala je rezoluciju koja te�i formiranju "Srpske Republike Bosnei Hercegovine" u okviru savezne dr�ave Jugoslavije, ukoliko bimuslimanske i hrvatske zajednice u Bosni i Hercegovini odluèileda "promijene stav o Jugoslaviji", 9. januara 1992. godine taskup�tina je proglasila nezavisnost "Srpske Republike Bosne iHercegovine".

U takvim okolnostima Arbitra�na komisija smatra da seizra�avanje volje stanovni�tva Bosne i Hercegovine da se SR BiHkonstitui�e kao suverena i nezavisna dr�ava, treba da provjeri

45

eventualno putem referenduma na koji bi bili pozvani da uèestvujusvi graðani SR BiH bez razlike i pod meðunarodnom kontrolom.

25. Odluka referenduma za suverenu i nezavisnu Bosnu iHercegovinu. Slijedeæi mi�ljenje Arbitra�ne komisije, Skup�tinaSR Bosne i Hercegovine donijela je Odluku o raspisivanjureferenduma, po kojoj æe se referendum odr�ati 29. februara i 1.marta 1992. godine. Referendumsko pitanje o kojem æe se graðaniizjasniti glasilo je: Jeste li za suverenu i nezavisnu Bosnu iHercegovinu, dr�avu ravnopravnih graðana, naroda Bosne iHercegovine - Muslimana, Srba i Hrvata i pripadnika drugih narodakoji u njoj �ive?

Rezultati glasanja saopæeni su 6. marta 1992. Od ukupnog brojaglasaèa 3.253.847 na republièki referendum za utvrðivanje statusaBosne i Hercegovine iza�lo je i glasalo 2.073.568 graðana sa pravomglasa ili 64,31% i to prema izvodima iz op�tih biraèkih spiskova1.989.786 i na osnovu potvrda o upisu u op�ti biraèki spisak 83.535.glasaèa.

Va�eæih glasaèkih listiæa bilo je 2.067.969 ili 64,14%. Odukupnog broja va�eæih listiæa "ZA" je bilo 2.061.932 glasaèa, ili99,44%, dok je "PROTIV" glasalo 6.037 ili 0,29%, a neva�eæihglasaèkih listiæa bilo je 5.227 ili 0,25%.

Dakle, od ukupnog broja (2.073.568) graðana koji su glasali narepublièkom referendumu za utvrðivanje statusa Bosne iHercegovine 29. februara i 1. marta 1992. godine, ZA SUVERENUI NEZAVISNU BOSNU I HERCEGOVINU, DR�AVU RAVNO-PRAVNIH GRAÐANA, NARODA BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE -MUSLIMANA, SRBA, HRVATA I PRIPADNIKA DRUGIHNARODA KOJI U NJOJ �IVE izjasnilo se 2.061.932. graðana ili99,44%.

26. Pravo na samoopredjeljenje i pitanje dr�avnih granica. Sobzirom da je proces raspada Jugoslavije postao nezaustavljiv,Republika Srbija je poku�ala, na posredan naèin diplomatskimkanalima da utièe na taj proces postavljajuæi razlièita pitanjaArbitra�noj komisiji. Jedno od tih pitanja bilo je da li srpski narodu Bosni i Hercegovini i u Hrvatskoj ima pravo na samoopredjeljenje,dok se drugo pitanje odnosilo na dr�avne granice, odnosno da li se

46

unutarnje linije razgranièenja izmeðu republika mo�e smatratidr�avnim granicama. Komisija je odgovorila da ove republikemoraju èlanovima tih zajednica i etnièkih skupina garantirati pravaèovjeka i temeljnih sloboda priznatih meðunarodnim pravom,ukljuèujuæi, u tom sluèaju, pravo na biranje njihovog dr�avljanstva.

Komisija smatra, da bile ma kakve okolnosti, pravo nasamoopredjeljenje ne mo�e dovesti do izmjene granica koje postojeu trenutku nezavisnosti (uti possidetis juris), osim da sezainteresirane dr�ave dogovore suprotno. U vezi s unutarnjimgranicama, Hrvatske i Srbije, te Srbije i Bosne i Hercegovine,Komisija smatra da u smislu meðunarodnog javnog prava, ovegranice dobivaju karakter granica za�tiæenih meðunarodnim pravomu sluèaju stjecanja nezavisnosti, te da se mogu mijenjati jedinozajednièkim sporazumom (Mi�ljenje broj 3.).

Ako u sklopu jedne dr�ave postoji jedna ili vi�e konstitutivnihgrupa, jedna ili vi�e etnièkih, vjerskih, jezièkih zajednica, ove grupeimaju, u skladu s meðunarodnim pravom, pravo na priznavanjenjihovih identiteta. Dr�ave su du�ne osigurati po�tovanje pravamanjina. S tim u vezi Komisija smatra da srpsko stanovni�tvo izBosne i Hercegovine i Hrvatske treba u�ivati sva prava koja suprema va�eæim meðunarodnim konvencijama priznata manjinama,kao i nacionalna meðunarodna jamstva u skladu s naèelimameðunarodnog prava. Pravo na samoopredjeljenje je naèelo kojimse �tite prava èovjeka. Na temelju toga prava svako ljudsko biæemo�e zahtijevati slobodu izra�avanja svoje pripadnosti, etnièkoj,vjerskoj ili jezièkoj zajednici po svom izboru. Prema mi�ljenjuKomisije, srpsko stanovni�tvo u Bosni i Hercegovini i Hrvatskojima pravo u�ivati sva priznata prava manjinama i etnièkim grupama,meðunarodnim pravom i odredbama Nacrta konvencije za mir uJugoslaviji od 4. novembra 1991. Republike su obavezne u sluèajupotrebe njima priznati pravo na nacionalno opredjeljenje, �to nijeisto �to i nacionalno samoopredjeljenje.

�to se tièe granica Komisija je mi�ljenja da æe se problem granicamorati rje�avati u skladu sa slijedeæim kriterijima:

Prvo - vanjske granice æe se morati po�tovati u svim sluèajevima,u skladu sa naèelom na koje se podsjeæa u Povelji UN, deklaracijom

47

koja se odnosi na naèela meðunarodnog prava koji se tièu odnosaprijateljstva i suradnje izmeðu dr�ava, u skladu s Poveljom UN,Rezolucija 2625 (XXXV) Generalne skup�tine UN i u skladu saZavr�nim aktom iz Helsinkija (1975), kojom je inspiriran èlan 11.Beèke konvencije od 23. avgusta 1978. godine o sukcesiji dr�avena planu ugovora.

Drugo - demarkacija linija izmeðu Hrvatske i Srbije ili izmeðuSrbije i Bosne i Hercegovine ili, eventualno, izmeðu drugihsusjednih nezavisnih dr�ava, moæi æe se mijenjati samo putemslobodnog i meðusobnog dogovora.

Treæe - ako se ne dogovori suprotno, prija�nje granice poprimajukarakter granica koje �titi meðunarodno pravo. To je zakljuèak nakoji navodi naèelo po�tovanje teritorijalnog "status quo". Naèelokoje ima opæi karakter kako je saopæio Meðunarodni sud pravde(pitanje pograniènog spora Burkina Faso - Republika Mali, kojemiruje od 22. decembra 1986. godine; Zbornik 1986. Paragraf, 20strana 565). Ovo naèelo ima za cilj sprjeèavanja bratoubilaèke borbe,kako se ne bi dovela u opasnost nezavisnost i stabilnost novih dr�ava.

Ovo naèelo je utoliko lak�e bilo primjeniti izmeðu jugosloven-skih republika - �to je - na osnovu alineja 2. i 4. èlana 5. UstavaSFRJ - odluèeno da se konzistentnost teritorija i republika ne mogumijenjati bez njihove saglasnosti (Mi�ljenje broj 3.)

27. Datumi sukcesije za nove nezavisne dr�ave. U skladu saopæe prihvaæenom definicijom sadr�anom u Beèkim konvencijamaiz 1978. i 1983. godine o sukcesiji dr�ava, "datum sukcesije dr�ava"znaèi datum na koji je dr�ava nasljednica zamijenila dr�avuprethodnicu u odgovornosti za meðunarodne odnose teritorije nakoju se odnosi sukcesija dr�ava.

Dr�ava prethodnica Socijalistièka Federativna RepublikaJugoslavija (SFRJ) je prestala da postoji i, kao �to je Arbitra�nakomisija ustanovila u svom mi�ljenju N0.9, nijedna od dr�avanasljednica ne mo�e tvrditi da je jedina dr�ava - produ�etak.

Drugo, prestanak postojanja SFRJ, za razliku od drugih nedavnorazdjeljenih dr�ava (SSSR, Èehoslovaèka) rezultirao je, ne izsporazuma izmeðu strana, nego iz procesa dezintegracije koja jetrajala neko vrijeme, poèev�i, po mi�ljenju Komisije, 29. novembra

48

1991. godine, kad je Komisija izdala Mi�ljenje N01 i zavr�avajuæi4. jula 1992. godine, kad je izdala Mi�ljenje N0. 8.

Arbitra�na komisija je bila svjesna praktiènih problema kojimogu slijediti iz odreðivanja vi�e od jednog datuma dr�avnesukcesije zbog dugotrajnog i razvuèenog procesa kojim je do�lo dodisolucije SFRJ. Jedna implikacija je da bi se razlièiti datumiprimjenjivali za prenos dr�avne imovine, arhiva i dugova i drugihprava i interesa na nekoliko dr�ava nasljednica SFRJ. Meðutim,dr�ave su slobodne da rije�e pote�koæe koje mogu slijediti iznjihovog primjenjivanja zakljuèivanjem sporazuma koji bi dozvolilipravièan ishod.

Arbitra�na komisija je u vezi s tim zauzela mi�ljenje: da datumikad su dr�ave koje su nastale iz SFRJ naslijedile SFRJ slijedeæi: 8.oktobar 1991. godine, u sluèaju Republike Hrvatske i RepublikeSlovenije; 17. novembar 1991. godine, u sluèaju Biv�e Jugoslove-nske Republike Makedonije; 6. mart 1992. godine u sluèajuRepublike Bosne i Hercegovine i 27. april 1992. godine u sluèajuSavezne Republike Jugoslavije (Srbija i Crna Gora). Ukoliko sezainteresirane dr�ave drukèije ne dogovore, ovo su datumi kadadr�avna imovina, aktiva i razlièita prava, arhivi, dugovi i razlièiteobaveze biv�e SFRJ prelaze na dr�ave nasljednice (Mi�ljenje broj11, Pariz, 16. juli 1993. godine).

28. Meðunarodnopravno priznanje Bosne i Hercegovineuslijedilo je na sjednici Savjeta ministara Evropske zajednice uBriselu 6. aprila 1992., s tim da ono poèinje teæi od 7. aprila 1992.godine. Ovaj detalj je posljedica diplomatskog prigovora izBeograda, zbog koincidencije sa 6. aprilom 1941. godine., kada jenapadom Njemaèke i njenih saveznika do�lo do razbijanjaKraljevine Jugoslavije.

Meðunarodnopravnim priznanjem Bosna i Hercegovina je iformalno prestala biti u sastavu SFRJ. Time je ona postalasamostalni i nezavisni meðunarodnopravni subjekt. Politièko-administrativne granice ranije republike kao jedne od �est federalnihjedinica SFRJ, postale su meðunarodne dr�avne granice, a SFRJ jepostala biv�a dr�ava. Njenim raspadom biv�e federalne jedince supovratile svoj suverenitet kojeg su prilikom ulaska u Demokratsku

49

Federativnu Jugoslaviju, na Drugom zasjedanju AVNOJ-a 29.novembra 1943. godine, bile prenijele na saveznu dr�avu. Srbija iCrna Gora su 27. aprila 1992. u�le u sastav treæe Jugoslavije,donijev�i novi ustav. Tako se dr�ava Bosna i Hercegovina danas,ne mijenjajuæi svoje ranije granice, sa istoka granièi sa Jugoslavijom(Srbija i Crna Gora), sa zapada i jugozapada sa Hrvatskom, a nasjeveru rijekom Savom koja je postala meðunarodna rijeka kojadijeli Hrvatsku od Bosne i Hercegovine.

Po�to je na Bosnu i Hercegovinu otpoèela agresija Srbije i CrneGore i biv�e JNA, Predsjedni�tvo je 8. aprila 1992. godine donijeloOdluku o progla�enju neposredne ratne opasnosti, kojom je sastavPredsjedni�tva, u skladu s Ustavom BiH, pro�iren sa predsjednikomskup�tine, vlade i komandantom Teritorijalne odbrane Republike.Tom odlukom Predsjedni�tvo je ovla�æeno da u vrijeme neposredneratne opasnosti mo�e donositi uredbe sa zakonskom snagom, kao iodluke o izboru ili imenovanju i razrje�enju, koje æe podnijeti napotvrdu Skup�tini èim ona bude u moguænosti da se sazove (47).

Na istoj sjednici Predsjedni�tvo je promijenilo nazivSocijalistièke Republike Bosne i Hercegovine u novo ime dr�ave:"Republika Bosna i Hercegovina". Potom je obrazovalo novi �tabteritorijalne odbrane Bosne i Hercegovine, postavilo novu komandui utvrdilo zvanièni privremeni znak pripadnika teritorijalne odbrane:stari bosanski grb �titastog oblika plave boje presjeèen bijelomdijagonalom sa po tri zlatno�uta ljiljana u svakom polju .

Potom je Predsjedni�tvo donijelo Uredbu sa zakonskom snagomo preuzimanju i primjenjivanju zakona biv�e SFRJ koji se u Bosnii Hercegovini primjenjuju kao republièki zakoni. Izvr�en jeselektivni izbor zakona iz oblasti privrede, finansija, poljoprivrede,�umarstva i vodoprivrede, saobraæaja i veza, ekonomskih odnosasa inostranstvom i inostranih poslova, dr�avne uprave, unutra�njihposlova, pravosuða, zdravstva, radnih odnosa, penzijskog iinvalidskog osiguranja, socijalna i djeèija za�tita, boraèka iinvalidska za�tita, obrazovanja, nauke, kulture i sporta i ostalihpropisa. Posebnom uredbom Predsjedni�tvo je selektiralo saveznepropise koji se neæe primjenjivati, kao i propise za njihovoizvr�avanje na teritoriji Bosne i Hercegovine ("Slu�beni list RBiH",

50

broj 2, 11. aprila 1992.). Predsjedni�tvo je za èitavo vrijeme agresijedonosilo i druge uredbe sa zakonskom snagom, dok nije biouspostavljen normalan rad Skup�tine, ukidanjem neposredne ratneopasnosti i ratnog stanja.

Predsjedni�tvo je posebnom uredbom sa zakonskom snagomutvrdilo privremeni grb i zastavu Republike Bosne i Hercegovine.Grb je �titastog oblika plave boje podijeljen na dva poljadijagonalnom gredom bijele boje sa po tri ljiljana zlatno�ute boje usvakom polju. Zastava je pravougaonog oblika sa grbom RepublikeBosne i Hercegovine u sredini na bijeloj podlozi sa jedan premadva ("Slu�beni list RBiH", br. 4, 20. maj 1992.). Posebnom uredbomje regulirana upotreba grba i zastave Bosne i Hercegovine ("Slu�benilist RBiH", br. 15, 5. septembar 1992.).

U cilju uspostavljanja diplomatskih i konzularnih odnosaRepublike Bosne i Hercegovine sa drugim dr�avama, Predsjedni�tvoje ratificiralo one meðunarodne konvencije koje se odnose na tumateriju.

Nakon �to je agresor na Bosnu i Hercegovinu okupirao oko 70%teritorije dr�ave, ubio preko 40 hiljada ljudi, prisilno raselio okomilion i 400 hiljada stanovnika, a njih preko 60 hiljada odveo ukoncentracione logore i nastavio organizirano da razara civilne,privredne, vjerske i druge objekte, a polazeæi od prava na odbranukoje je priznato po meðunarodnim zakonima, Predsjedni�tvo je tek20. juna 1992.. dakle, nakon dva i po mjeseca od poèetka agresije,donijelo Odluku o progla�enju ratnog stanja. Taj èin agresije utvrðenje od strane Savjeta sigurnosti Ujedinjenih nacija, Rezolucijom broj752 od 18. maja 1992. Predsjedni�tvo je kao agresora navelo:Republiku Srbiju, Republiku Crnu Goru, Jugoslavensku armiju iteroriste Srpske demokratske stranke.

Bosna i Hercegovina se odluèno oduprla agresiji i time �to se zaèitavo vrijeme najstra�nijih ratnih djelovanja i genocida provoðenognad njenim stanovni�tvom, maksimalno zauzimala za oèuvanjemlegitimiteta i legaliteta svojih institucija. Na kraju u tome je i uspjela.Legalne vlasti Bosne i Hercegovine: Skup�tina, Predsjedni�tvo,Vlada i sudovi su radili u skladu sa postojeæim ustavom i zakonima,a politièki sistem je funkcionirao u uslovima ratnog stanja. Tako su

51

ove institucije, èiji je rad bio prilagoðen uslovima rata, u skladu saustavom, doèekale i uspostavljanje mira u Bosni i Hercegovinipotpisanog 14. decembra 1995. godine, utvrðenog u Dejtonu 21.novembra 1995. godine.

Na osnovu ovog mirovnog sporazuma Republika Bosna iHercegovina nastavila je svoj kontinuitet pod imenom Bosna iHercegovina. Time je Bosna i Hercegovina nastavila svoj �ivot kaocjelovita suverena i nezavisna dr�ava, sa oèuvanim meðunaro-dnopravnim subjektivitetom u odnosima sa drugim dr�avama ièlanstvom u meðunarodnim organizacijama. Iz njenog Ustava kojije sastavni dio mirovnog sporazuma (Aneks 4.) proizlazi da Bosnai Hercegovina ostaje u svojim meðunarodnopravno priznatimgranicama i teritirijalno nedjeljiva po etnièkim zajednicama, u kojojæe svaki Bosanac na cijeloj njenoj teritoriji biti svoj na svome.

52

53

DR@AVA BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA

29. Dr�ava Bosna i Hercegovina. Na osnovu ovog mirovnogsporazuma Republika Bosna i Hercegovina nastavila je svojkontinuitet pod imenom Bosna i Hercegovina. Time je Bosna iHercegovina nastavila svoj �ivot kao cjelovita suverena i nezavisnadr�ava, sa oèuvanim meðunarodnopravnim subjektivitetom uodnosima sa drugim dr�avama i èlanstvom u meðunarodnimorganizacijama. Iz njenog Ustava koji je sastavni dio mirovnogsporazuma (Aneks 4.) proizlazi da Bosna i Hercegovina ostaje usvojim meðunarodnopravno priznatim granicama i teritirijalnonedjeljiva po etnièkim zajednicama, u kojoj æe svaki Bosanac nacijeloj njenoj teritoriji biti svoj na svome (48).

Sama èinjenica da je u Aneksu 4. sadr�an Ustav Bosne iHercegovine koji predstavlja njen najva�niji i najvi�i pravni aktgovori o njegovom izuzetnom znaèaju za oèuvanje dr�ave Bosne iHercegovine i stabiliziranja poratnih politièkih prilika u njoj, uzpuno po�tivanje i pravnu za�titu ljudskih prava i sloboda èovjeka igraðanina.

Strukturu Ustava saèinjava njegov uvodni odnosno sveèani dio(preambula), op�te odredbe o Bosni i Hercegovini, odredbe koje setièu ljudskih prava, odredbe kojima je utvrðena nadle�nost i odnosiizmeðu institucija Bosne i Hercegovine i njenih entiteta, odredbekoje odreðuju organe vlasti Bosne i Hercegovine, njihov sastav inadle�nost, te odredbe koje se tièu amandmanske procedure odnosnomoguænostima za izmjenu ovog Ustava, prelazne odredbe te AneksiI i II koji èine sastavne dijelove Ustava Bosne i Hercegovine.

Posebno je znaèajna je ona odredba Ustava Bosne i Hercegovinekojom je propisana obaveza entiteta da svoje ustave usklade saUstavom Bosne i Hercegovine, kao i uspostavi ustavne kontrolekoju æe vr�iti Ustavni sud Bosne i Hercegovine, posebno da li suustavi i zakoni entiteta u skladu s Ustavom Bosne i Hercegovine.Ovakve ustavne odredbe unose optimizam u oèuvanje cjelovite,suverene i nezavisne dr�ave Bosne i Hercegovine kao subjekta

54

meðunarodnog prava i èlanice brojnih meðunarodnih organizacija,meðu kojima Ujedinjenih nacija, OSCE i dr.

Bosna i Hercegovina se nalazi pred vratima evropskih politièkihintegracija i partnerstva za mir NATO saveza, a takoðer ostajeotvorena za saradnju i udru�ivanje napora za uspostavu mira i sasvim dr�avama koje to �ele kao i drugim meðunarodnimorganizacijama.

55

R E Z I M E

Od vremena kada se "Zemlja Bosna" prvi put spominje u djelu"De administrando imperio", bizantskog cara KonstantinaPorfirogeneta sredinom X stoljeæa, Bosna je do danas prolazila krozrazlièite dr�avne i politièke oblike organiziranja vlasti i tomeodgovarajuæe pravne sisteme.

Bosna ima vi�estoljetnu tradiciju susretanja i mije�anja razlièitihcivilizacija i kultura koje su se sintetizovale u specifiènojduhovnosti koja se ne mo�e naæi u njenih susjeda: Hrvatskoj, Srbijii Crnoj Gori. Zato oni Bosnu ne razumiju i vr�e nad njom nasilje.Upravo ta njena specifièna duhovnost èini bosansko dru�tvospecifiènom i nedjeljivom politièkom zajednicom i dr�avom. Tojoj je pomoglo da pre�ivi do danas.

Avari i Slaveni na prostoru dana�nje Bosne krajem VI i poèetkomVII st zatekli su ostatke Ilira i Romana. Bila je uspostavljenadvjestogodi�nja avarska politièka organizacija vlasti èiji je spomenostao u nazivima ban i �upan. Time se pretpostavlja da su i prijePorfirogenetova pomena Bosne, na njenom prostoru postojali oblicijavne vlasti o kojima nije ostalo dovoljno izvora, prije nego �to seBosna pominje kao banovina poèetkom XII st.

U srednjovjekovnoj Bosni poznata su dva oblika dr�avne vlasti:banovina (do 1377) i kraljevstvo (do 1463) godine. U oba ova oblikadr�avne vlasti Bosna je samostalna dr�ava. Sa banom Stjepanom IIi kraljem Tvrtkom I Bosna je do�ivjela svoj najveæi uspon.Dominantno pravo u srednjovjekovnoj Bosni je obièajno pravo.Od pisanih izvora saèuvani su meðunarodni ugovori, vlasteotskepovelje i tekstovi na steæcima. Nije bilo pisanih zakona.

Padom Bosne pod vlast Osmanskog carstva 1463., Bosna jeteritorijalno organizirana po sand�acima u okviru rumelijskogbeglerbegluka. No i tada je najveæi i najznaèajniji dio bosanskogprostora organiziran u bosanskom sand�aku, a njeni perifernidijelovi su organizirani u hercegovaèki, zvornièki i kli�ki sand�ak.

56

Tek nakon 117 godina takvog stanja, Bosna je uspostavljenakao zasebna provincija 1580. (ajalet), na prostoru koji je obuhvataoi dijelove susjednih zemalja. Poslije Karlovaèkog mira 1699. prostorbosanskog ajaleta je sveden u historijske granice bosanskogkraljevstva iz XV stoljeæa. Osnivanje bosanskog ajaleta na prostoruhistorijske Bosne, doprinijelo je oèuvanju narodne svijesti opolitièkom i kulturnom kontinuitetu Bosne sa srednjovjekovnombosanskom dr�avom, oèuvanju njene cjelovitosti i kasnijoj obnovibosanske dr�avnosti (1943.).

U prvoj polovini XIX st. sticajem politièkih i historijskihokolnosti pored bosanskog ajaleta bio je uspostavljen hercegovaèkimutesafirluk (1833) da bi 1866. ponovo bila objedinjena ujedinstveni bosanski vilajet. Za èitavo vrijeme 415-godi�njeosmanske uprave u Bosni, Bosnom su upravljali sand�akbezipodreðeni rumelijskom beglerbegu, a kada je postala zasebnaosmanska provincija (ajalet) njom su upravljali sultanovi namjesniciodnosno veziri.

Specifiènost dr�avnopravnog i politièkog polo�aja Bosne podOsmanlijama proizlazila je iz njenog kraji�kog karaktera,prela�enjem na islam velikog dijela njenog stanovni�tva koje senazivalo Bo�njanima razlièitih konfesija i postojanjem ustanovekapetanija.

U Bosni je u vrijeme Osmanlija va�io osmanski pravni sistemkoji se sastojao od �erijatskog prava (Kur'an i hadisi) i dr�avnog(sultanskog) prava, odnosno kanonskog prava kojim su ureðivaniodnosi koji nisu bili ureðeni ili su bili nepotpuno ureðeni �erijatskimpravom. Pred kraj osmanske uprave pored �erijatskih uvedene su igraðanske pravne institucije i done�eni zakoni.

Bosna i Hercegovina je u periodu 1878-1918. imala dr�avno-pravnu egzistenciju sui generis. Osmanlije su formalno zadr�alesuverenitet nad njom, a stvarnu upravu je imala Austro-Ugarska uzsaglasnost Evrope i Turske.

Aneksijom Bosne i Hercegovine 1908., Austro-Ugarska jenelegitimno preuzela suverenitet od Osmanlija kr�eæi Berlinskiugovor. Da bi legitimirala aneksiju, Austro-Ugarska je za dva i pomiliona funti sterlinga kupila od Turske svoja prava u Bosni i

57

Hercegovini, pretvoriv�i je u koloniju. Bosna i Hercegovina je uèitavom tom periodu ostala izvan Austro-Ugarske dr�avnopravnestrukture.

Ustav 1910. i sabor koji su Bosni oktroirani od strane cara, nisupromijenili njen polo�aj zavisne zemlje. Zahvaljujuæi èinjenici daje Bosnom upravljala kruna, odnosno zajednièka vlada, da nije,dakle, bila podijeljena izmeðu Austrije i Ugarske, propa�æu Austro-Ugarske, Bosna i Hercegovina je ostala teritorijalno cjelovita usvojim historijskim granicama.

U vrijeme Austro - Ugarske uprave u Bosni je va�io austrougarskipravni sistem u èijim su se temeljima nalazili instituti rimskog prava.Zatim su primjenjivani propisi koji su dono�eni samo za Bosnu.Iako je imala svoj Ustav (1910) i svoj Sabor, Bosna nije imalaautonomna prava da samostalno donosi svoje zakone. U vrijemeaustrougarske uprave, u Bosni je za bosanske muslimane va�ilo�erijatsko pravo u nasljednim i porodiènim odnosima.

Bosna i Hercegovina je zajedno s drugim ju�noslavenskimzemljama koje su bile u sastavu Austro - Ugarske, uèestvovalapunopravno u stvaranju nove dr�ave SHS, koja nije �ivjela ni dvapuna mjeseca ( od 6.oktobra do kraja novembra 1918), koja je 1.decembra 1918. s Kraljevinom Srbijom konstituirala novu dr�avnuzajednicu, Kraljevinu SHS. U Kraljevini SHS Bosna je zahvaljujuæièlanu 135. Vidovdanskog ustava iz 1921. oèuvala teritorijalnucjelovitost u svojim historijskim granicama u kojim je bila podaustrougarskom upravom. Imala je elemente autonomne vlasti sasjedi�tem u Sarajevu do definitivnog uspostavljanja centralistièkevlasti nove dr�ave. Od ujedinjenja 1918. do januara 1929. mo�e sereæi da je Bosna, u èijem je sastavu bilo �est oblasnih uprava, �ivjelau uslovima legitimnog ustavnog stanja.

Diktatura kralja Aleksandra 1929. prvi put od 1463. godinerazbija teritorijalno jedinstvo Bosne i Hercegovine podjelom njenogprostora na èetiri banovine koje su obuhvatale i dijelove teritorijanjenih susjeda. Ovim je bio razbijen bosanski politièki prostor unjegovim historijskim granicama s ciljem da Bo�njaci ni u jednojbanovini ne budu veæinski narod. Tada je uèinjen najveæi udaracBosni kao jedinstvenom teritorijalno-politièkom prostoru u cijelojnjenoj dotada�njoj hiljadugodi�njoj politièkoj historiji. Sljedeæi

58

udarac je bio sporazum Cvjetkoviæ - Maèek od 26. avgusta 1939.kojim je dogovorena teritorijalna podjela

Bosne i Hercegovine izmeðu Srbije i Hrvatske na raèunbo�njaèkog naroda. Ovaj sporazum zbog zapoèinjanja Drugogsvjetskog rata nije bio pro�ao parlamentarnu proceduru i slu�benose smatra nepostojeæim.

Kraljevina Jugoslavija, kao prisilna unitarna dr�ava, od 1929.do 1945. bila je nelegitimna tvorevina Oktroiranog ustava iz 1931.sa improviziranim pravnim sistemom nastalim upotrebom sile ipolitièkim ucjenama dvorske kamarile. Zbog nelegitimnosti iprovizornosti tadanjeg pravnog poretka bilo je moguæe da se aktuelnire�im politièki neodgovorno odnosi prema Bosni i Hercegovini iBo�njacima 1939. godine i njena tri naroda.

Zahvaljujuæi politièkim promjenama 1941. i aktivnom uèe�æusva tri bosanska naroda u Narodnooslobodilaèkom pokretu 1941-1945., i njegovoj politièkoj odluci da se nova Jugoslavija organizirana federalnom principu, Bosna i Hercegovina je nakon 480 godina,25. novembra 1943. u Varcar Vakufu (Mrkonjiæ Gradu) na Prvomzasijedanju ZAVNOBIH-a obnovila svoju dr�avnost. Nakon èetiridana na Drugom zasijedanju AVNOJ-a 29. novembra,, predstavnicisva tri bosanska naroda prenijela su odluku ZAVNOBIH-a, da Bosnai Hercegovina kao jedna od �est ravnopravnih federalnih jedinicabude konstituent nove Demokratske Federativne Jugoslavije.

Tada nije bilo odluèivano kakvo æe biti politièko ureðenje novedr�ave. Tek nakon odr�anih izbora (11.novembra), na zasijedanjuUstavotvorne skup�tine, 29. novembra 1945., odluèeno je da seJugoslavija definira kao "federativna narodna republika". Tako je iBosna i Hercegovina, kao federalna jedinica, imala narodno-republikanski oblik vlasti. Bosna i Hercegovina je kao dr�avauèestvovala sa drugim federalnim jedinicama s punim politièkimlegitimitetom u vr�enju vlasti savezne dr�ave kao nosiocemdr�avnog suvereniteta i meðunarodnopravnog subjektiviteta.

Sa intenzivnijim uno�enjem elemenata socijalistièke ideologijeu njeno unutra�nje ureðenje, posebno uvoðenjem radnièkogsamoupravljanja, Bosna i Hercegovina prerasta iz narodnogrepublikanskog oblika u socijalistièki republikanski dr�avni oblik,

59

u kome je dominantan jednopartijski sistem vlasti, kao �to je bio i uprethodnom obliku "narodne republike".

Socijalistièki pravni sistem sastojao se od dr�avnog isamoupravnog prava. Ovaj se sistem izgraðivao u zajednièkomsaveznom parlamentu i vladi i subordinirao je dr�avne organe Bosnei Hercegovine prema saveznim organima u pitanjima u kojima jesavezna dr�ava bila nadle�na. Ali je postojala i znaèajna"republièka" i "samoupravna" regulativa, naroèito u sferi privredei dru�tvenih djelatnosti kojom se mogla izraziti i dr�avnopravnaspecifiènost Bosne i Hercegovine i samouprava lokalnih zajednica,preduzeæa i ustanova.

Poku�aj da se uspostavi takva dr�avna zajednica u kojoj æe Bosnai Hercegovina, kao i druge federalne jedinice kao dr�ave imati vi�eautonomije, a odluke na saveznom nivou donositi konsenzusom,kao �to je bilo uspostavljeno Ustavom iz 1974., nije uspio kaotrajno rje�enje, zbog èega se Jugoslavija raspala 1991/92. godinena vi�e nezavisnih dr�ava. Tako je Bosna i Hercegovina, nakon529 godina, od kada je 1463. izgubila svoju nezavisnost, 6. aprila1992. ponovo meðunarodnopravno priznata kao politièki nezavisnai suverena dr�ava kada je stekla i svoj puni meðunarodnopravnisubjektivitet.

Politièkim i dru�tveno-ekonomskim promjenama koje su potomnastale poèinju se gubiti socijalistièki atributi iz njenog dr�avnogureðenja, a time je izgubila i "socijalistièki" predznak ispred svogaimena. U njenom nazivu ostaje samo "Republika Bosna iHercegovina". Dejtonskim sporazumom potpisanim u Parizu 14.decembra 1995. nestaje i atribut "republika" i slu�beni naziv dr�aveje samo "Bosna i Hercegovina", u èijem su sastavu dva entiteta sa�irokom politièkom autonomijom.

Bosni i Hercegovini je mirovnim sporazumom zagarantiranateritorijalna cjelovitost u meðunarodnopravno priznatim granicama,dr�avni suverenitet kojeg vr�e najvi�i organi Bosne i Hercegovinei meðunarodnopravni subjektivitet, kao i èlanstvo u meðunarodnimorganizacijama. Dana�nji pravni sistem kreiran je Ustavom BiH(Aneks IV) Mirovnog sporazuma, kome je pridodato 15meðunarodnik konvencija i ugovora koje u pravnom sistemu BiH

60

imaju snagu ustavne norme. Pravni sistem BiH èine i pravni sistemientiteta, kantona i opæina.

Po�to Bosna i Hercegovina ima dugu historijsku i politièkutradiciju regionalnog organiziranja, njoj najbolje odgovara da budeureðena kao federacija �upanija ili kantona na cijelom svommeðunarodnopravno priznatom prostoru, bez nacionalnihpredznaka. Stoga sada�nju podjelu na entitete treba razumjeti kaoprolazno stanje. Pojam Bosne kao dru�tva i dr�ave u sebipodrazumijeva etnièki i vjerski izmije�ano stanovni�tvo na cijelomnjenom dr�avnom teritoriju uz puno po�tivanje nacionalnih,graðanskih i ljudskih sloboda i prava. Bez toga, to nije Bosna, kakvuhistorija poznaje.

Kolonijalni naziv dr�ave "Bosna i Hercegovina", koji je nastaou vrijeme austro-ugarske uprave treba zamijeniti, i na�oj dr�avivratiti njeno historijsko ime - BOSNA.

61

N A P O M E N E

1. Konstantin Porfirogenet, O upravljanju carstvom, izd. August Cesarec iAGM, 1994, Zagreb, str. 92.

2. Nada Klaiæ, Srednjovjekovna Bosna, izd. Eminex, 1994, Zagreb, str. 5,19, 20, 21.

3. Ante Babiæ, Iz istorije srednjovjekovne Bosne, Sarajevo, 1972, str. 79.4. Miju�koviæ, Vizantijski izvori IV, 1971., str. 1-1065. Diniæ, Historija naroda Jugoslavije I, str. 562, 563.6. Smièiklas, Codex diplomaticus regni, II, str. 24 i N.K. Srednjovjekovna

Bosna, str. 79.7. Srednjovjekovna Bosna, 117.8. Srednjovjekovna Bosna, str. 124-143.9. Iz problematike, Prilozi br. 14-15, Sarajevo, 1978. str. 64.10. Srednjovjekovna Bosna, str. 160.11. Srednjovjekovna Bosna, 174-180.12. Istra�ivanja, str. 404-405, Srednjovjekovna Bosna, 181).13. Istra�ivanja, Glasnik zemaljskog muzeja BiH, st. XVIII, 1906. 404-405.14. Srednjovjekovna Bosna, 182.15. Srednjovjekovna Bosna, 182, 183.16. Srednjovjekovna Bosna, str. 215.17. Srednjovjekovna Bosna, str. 213, 216.18. Srednjovjekovna Bosna, 248, 249.19. Srednjovjekovna Bosna, 262-264.20. Klaiæ, Poviest Bosne, 193 - 194.21. Dr. Pavao Anðeliæ, Barones regni i dr�avno vijeæe srednjovjekovne Bosne,

Prilozi, broj 11-12, Sarajevo, 1975-1976.22. �abanoviæ, Bosanski pa�aluk, str. 35.23. Bosanski pa�aluk, str. 49.24. Preuzeto od �abanoviæa, Bosanski pa�aluk, 77-81, 92-94, 229-231.25. "Bosna i Hercegovina od najstarijih vremena do kraja drugog svjetskog

rata", Sarajevo 1994.26. Vidi: �abanoviæ, Bosanski pa�aluk, 77-81, 92-94, 229-231, 101, 109-114,

95-98, 233-234, 88-91.

62

27. Vidi: Avdo Suæeska, Dr�avnopravni razvitak Bosne i Hercegovine,Sarajevo, 1995; Halil Inald�ik, Osmansko Carstvo, 99-197.

28. Imamoviæ, str. 15, bilj. 17: Ova klauzula je smatrana tajnom, a prvi jeobjavio njen sadr�aj biv�i francuski ministar spoljnih poslova GabrijelAnoto (Hanotaux), oktobra 1908., Beograd, èasop. "Delo" 49/1908..

29. �ivojin Periæ, O pravnom polo�aju Bosanaca i Hercegovaca u stranimdr�avama, Bgd. 1906, str. 31; M. Imamoviæ, Pravni polo�aj i unutra�njo-politièki razvitak BiH d 1878. do 1914, str. 5,15,17,18,19,23,24.

30. Peter Sugar, Induzstrialization of Bosnia-Herzegovina 1878-1918., Seatle1963.

31. D�evad Juzba�iæ, O nastanku paralelnog austrijskog i ugarskog zakona oupravljanju Bosnom i Hercegovinom iz 1880., Radovi ANUBiH,XXXI/1967.

32. Tako je npr. dr. Jozo Sunariæ na 5. sjednici Bosanskog sabora 23.VII1910. uputio protest Zemaljskoj vladi �to je beèki prof. Friedrich Teznerpisao 1909. u knjizi "Der Kaiser" da je BiH kolonija. Stenografskiizvje�taji, I/1910.

33. Imamoviæ, Pravni sistemi i zakonodavstvo Bosne i Hercegovine 1878-1914, Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, br. 1-3/1972; Laszlo Szalay,Bosznia et Hercegovina, Magyar Gofi Lexikon, II, Budapest 1899, 255;Vojislav Bogiæeviæ, Aneksija Bosne i Hercegovine i jugoslavensko pitanje,Historijski pregled, br. 4/1959, str. 337, Sadr�aj rasprava o aneksijiobjavio je H. Kapid�iæ u Glasniku arhiva i Dru�tva arhivista BiH, IV-V/1964-65, str. 133-188; Imamoviæ, Pravni polo�aj i...., str. 27-36; Vidi: M.Imamoviæ, Pravni sistem i zakonodavstvo Bosne i Hercegovine, str. 245-246.

34. Dr.Ferdo Èulinoviæ, Dokumenti, str. 118 i 119.35. Ferdo �i�iæ, Dokumenti, str. 280.36. Vojnoistorijski institut. Beograd, Fond NDH br. 85-38/14-1; Zbornik

NOR-a, tom IV, knj. 2. str. 213; Josip Broz Tito, Borba narodaJugoslavije, Zbornik NOR-a, tom II, knj. 12, str. 330; Arhiv Savezakomunista BiH, tom III, knj., Istorijsko odjeljenje CK SK BiH, Sarajevo,1952., str. 12; "1941. u istoriji naroda Bosne i Hercegovine"; izd. VeselinMasle�a, Sarajevo, 1973. str. 166; Peti kongres KPJ, Kultura, Beograd,1948.

37. Pero Moraèa, "NOP u Bosni i Hercegovini u vrijeme osnivanjaZAVNOBiH-a, "Prilozi" br. 4., str.. 247.

38. Avdo Humo, "Narodnooslobodilaèka borba u Bosni i Hercegovini iAVNOJ - 1942-1943., "Rad" Beograd 1974; ZAVNOBiH, knj. I, str. 58-69; Hasan Brkiæ, U matici �ivota, "Svjetlost" Sarajevo, str. 37-81;Rodoljub Èolakoviæ, Izabrani govori i èlanci, knj. I, "Svjetlost", Sarajevo1960., str. 47-192, 197-211.

63

39. "Prvo i Drugo zasjedanje AVNOJ-a", str. 208,231-242.40. ZAVNOBiH, knj. I, str.. 170-171; 233-234;237.41. ZAVNOBiH, knj. II, str. 321; 483-487.42. "Slu�beni list NR BiH", br. 8/46; 46/46.43. Uporedi: dr.Drago Borovèanin, Izgradnja bosanskohercegovaèke

dr�avnosti u uslovima NOR-a, Svjetlost, Sarajevo 1979, str. 80-268.44. Uporedi: Lukiæ - Grebo Osnovi pravnog sistema SFRJ, str. 257-262).45. Amandmani na Ustav SR BiH, od 31. jula 1990.46. "Slu�beni list SR BiH", 23. decembar 1991.47. "Slu�beni list RBiH", broj 1, 9. aprila 1992.48. Ustav Bosne i Hercegovine, Aneks 4 Opæeg sporazuma za mir u Bosni i

Hercegovini, od 14. decembra 1995.

64

65

CONSTITUTIONALDEVELOPMENT OF

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

A Short Survey

CONSTITUTIONALDEVELOPMENT OF

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

A Short Survey

66

67

PREFACE

When the reconstruction of the historical being and his-torical existence of Bosnia and Herzegovina is in question, itis just forthcoming the work on revision and demystificationof the myths and ideological mystifications of the prejudicial,more exactly, ethnocentric Serbian and Croatian historiography.

In an unusually condensed form, by concentration on thekey points of the history of Bosnia and Herzegovina, from theperspective of the state-legal discourse, not only implicitly butexplicitly, hegemonic state-political and national conceptionstoward Bosnia are being demystified. In that increasing en-deavour also participates the prof. dr. Omer Ibrahimagiæ�s booktitled State-Legal Development of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The book represent a fundamental thesis that there exists acontinuity in the existence, by history shaped, cultural-usual,political and state-legal individuality of Bosnia. Of course,this individuality in the book is being, primarily, observed inits state-legal contents. But, of special significance is also thatwhat prof. Ibrahimagiæ underlines that the continuity in thehistorical individuality of Bosnia used to be founded as wellas on the continuity of its territorial integrity.

Beside the critical discourse toward the historical falsifi-cations produced by the traditional prejudiced historiogra-phy, in the book there are valuable contributions to knockingto pieces of the prejudices toward the more modern history ofBosnia and Herzegovina emerged on the very ground of thefailure of the Eurasian and Balkan socialism. It is a word ofthe author�s effort, in which he succeeds, to illuminate andalso critically evaluate a period of the statehood of Bosnia

68

and Herzegovina, and that without any old and actual ideo-logical stereotypes or preconvictions.

The author, without a prejudice, by this book represents asignificant contribution to the development of our democraticpolitical culture filled with the respect of the historical truthswithout pragmatic cosmetics of our history.

As a noticeable virtue of this book we also consider thefact that on a small space, clearly, distinctly, educationally,clear, identifying the main tendencies and marking the cru-cial state-legal and political facts is being formed a picture ofthe continuity of the state-legal development of Bosnia andHerzegovina.

The printing of this book in the Bosnian and English lan-guage will make a contribution giving the domestic and inter-national scientific and political public a historiographic andscientifically competent and authentic source for own under-standing the historical being of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Dr. Esad Zgodiæ

69

INTRODUCTION

Since it was first mentioned as �The Land of Bosnia� in �Deadministrando imperio� by the Byzantine emperor ConstantinePorphirogenet in mid-tenth century (1), Bosnia has gonethrough different state and political forms of rule and its cor-responding legal systems.

Political organisation of medieval Bosnia started with thearrival of Avars and Slavs at the end of VI and in early VIIcenturies. If the existence of public authority is the element ofrecognition of political identity of a country, rather than thetitle of a ruler, be it a vice-roy, a king, or an emperor, one maysay that Bosnia had political rule before either Serbs or Croats.Absence of sources to confirm these forms of authority priorto XII century does not mean that there was no such authorityin Bosnia. Thus one may say that Bosnia (the lands of Bosnia)had its own political development at the same time as the landssurrounding it, later occupied by Serbs and Croats (2).

70

71

BANATE OF BOSNIA

1. Banate of Bosnia. A Hungarian document from 1137 con-firms that Bosnia was and independent state in early XII century.This document refers to Bosnia as �bosnensis ducatus� (3). Thefirst recorded form of authority in Bosnia was banate [vice-roy�scountry], a name originating from the Avars� rule in this region(ban and zupan are words of Avar rather than Slavic origin).

The first ruler of Bosnia known by name was Ban Boric. Thereare two passages from Cinam�s work (Epitomes) referring to Bosniaand Boric: �Bosnia is not subordinated to the arch-zupan of Serbs,its people has its own way of life and governance�(4).

Historic sources confirm the existence of �a state apparatus inBosnia� during the rule of Ban Kulin, as well as the existence of �acourt chamber�, �very high income�, and �a considerable culturaldevelopment� of the country (5). The famous charter for the peopleof Dubrovnik from 1189 confirmed Bosnia as an independent stateguaranteeing freedom of passage and trade for merchants fromDubrovnik in its territory. Kulin�s leadership was stronger than in-dicated in the title of ban. During a gathering at Bilino Polje in1203, Holy See referred to Kulin as the master of Bosnia, �presentebano Culino domino Bosnae� (6).

During the bans� rule in Bosnia, the best sources to confirmBosnia�s status as that of an independent state rather than a domin-ion were the Pope�s letters to rulers of neighbouring countries aswell as charters issued by the bans of Bosnia to merchants, mainlyfrom Dubrovnik, since Dubrovnik was Bosnia�s best link with theworld. Thus, in his charter from 1234, ban Ninoslav guaranteedfreedom of passage for the merchants from Dubrovnik, exemptedthem from taxation, and offered them protection in cases of warwith the ruler of Raska, i.e. Serbia (7).

Lack of sources on Bosnia from the second half of XII centurycannot be proof of the fact that Bosnia was not an independentstate, and that it was allegedly conquered by Hungary. It was rather

72

the opposite, since the Arpadovic did not subject Bosnia to theirrule, and there was no other trace of Bosnia in the rich diplomaticmaterial from the time, except for references to mere titles (8).

This also applies to the pompous titles of Bribiraca (the Subicbrothers), which never meant true rule over the lands of Bosnia.Hrvatin, the leader of Donji Krajevi, was the only one to recognisePaul, the ban of Croatia. However, other Bosnian leaders saw himas a traitor who did not recognise Stjepan I, the ban of Bosnia (9).It has been confirmed that the �Croatian lord� ruled in only tworegions of Donji Krajevi: Banica and Vrbanja, i.e. the areas ruledby Hrvatin (10). Mladin�s title of the ban of Bosnia is just a title.

During his rule, Stjepan II placed Humske zemlje [regions ofHum] together with Krajina between the rivers Neretva, Cetina andZavrsje, under Bosnian sovereignty (11). Leaders of the Church ofBosnia firmly supported the rulers and their policy. This harmoni-ous unity of Bosnia�s rulers and its religious leaders could not bepenetrated by neither Bribirci (the Subic) nor the Arpadovic, northe Anjouvians. this was their common strength in the defence ofBosnia (12). This spiritual duality of Bosnian rulers in XIII andXIV centuries was probably the secret of their success. Judging byan old document (13), the rulers were with the church at home, butspoke and acted as the true believers abroad (14). Members of theChurch of Bosnia did not enter the state council, and Bosnian (catho-lic) bishops were far from Bosnia (in Djakovo, Slavonia). Bosniawas at the peak of its power, after defeating the Serbian emperorDusan �the mighty� in 1350, following his attack on Bosnia (15).

This ascent of Bosnia continued under Tvrtko I. At the time,there were two legal and political bodies in Bosnia: the court andthe rule (kingdom or rusag, orsag, state council) with equal powersin decision-making in legal matters (16). There were also interest-ing sanctions and threats for those who violated their oath. Jointrule was common in Bosnia, such as the one, for example, duringthe rule of Stjepan II together with his brother Vladislav. Therewas a four-fold rule at the beginning of Tvrtko�s rule: Vladislav(father), Jelena (mother), and two sons, Tvrtko and Vukac. Then itchanged. After Vladislav�s death, there was three-fold rule (of the

73

mother and two sons). It was reflected in the signatures of differentcharters, confirmations, etc. (17)

After winning over Ludovic in 1363, Tvrtko removed powersfrom his brother Vukac and declared himself the �ban of all ofBosnia� (18) This action ended all forms of joint rule in Bosnia,thus moving from a kind of family rule over private property, underprivate law, into the realm of public law. Rule in Bosnia became apublic law activity within social and customary rules in public af-fairs from the time.

74

75

THE KINGDOM OF BOSNIA

2. The kingdom of Bosnia was the subsequent form of organisedstate rule in medieval Bosnia. Tvrtko I, one of the most successfulrulers, was crowned in 1377 as the king of Bosnia. He chose thename Stjepan, selecting martyr Stephen as the protector of his or-der. After that, all the rulers were to bear the name Stjepan beforetheir own. His ancestors had family ties with the Nemanjic dy-nasty, which ended with the death of emperor Uros in 1371. By hisgrandmother Jelisaveta, Tvrtko held the right to succession for thecrown of Serbia. At the time, his signature read: �Stefan Tvrtko vhrista Boga kral Srbljem i Bosne i Primorju� [Stefan Tvrtko, theking of Serbia, Bosnia, and lands by the sea, before Christ] (19).

After supporting the uprising of Croatian and Dalmatian lead-ers against the Hungarian Empire in 1389, Tvrtko became the rulerof Croatia and Dalmatia in 1390. He declared himself the king ofCroatia and Dalmatia, from Velebit to Cetina, and from Cetina toKotor. He thus expanded the borders of medieval Bosnia to thewidest region ever to be held by any medieval South Slav ruler.

Tvrtko�s principle of rule was �the stronger Bosnia is, the weakerit makes Hungary, and vice versa� (20).

After ban Stjepan II and king Tvrtko, the two most successfulrulers of Bosnia, the country entered a crisis of governance, withno significant rulers until the fall of the country to the Ottomans in1463. His successors did not have the charisma to motivate theleaders to be united and efficient. this was used by the lords of thelands of Bosnia (Usora, Soli, Donji Kraji, Zapadna strana (Zavrsje),Hum, Podrinje, Primorje), and irrespective of the royal rule, theyascended. They ruled their estates (regions) as sovereign rulers,with their own courts, nobility, privileges and charters. The nobil-ity of the Bosnian rusag (the state council), together with the king,decided on the state matters including the person from theKotromanic dynasty to succeed to the throne of Bosnia (21).

76

Fights amongst the leaders lead Bosnia to an overall weakness.The weakening was contributed to by continuous efforts of itsneighbours, primarily Hungary, to subject Bosnia to their own rule.This facilitated Turkish conquest of Bosnia, and divided leadersinto those who collaborated with Hungary and those who collabo-rated with Turkey. The definite announcement of disaster for me-dieval Bosnia was when its two last kings, father and son, StjepanTomas and Stjepan Tomasevic, launched expulsions of the follow-ers of the Bosnian faith and forceful conversions to Catholicism.The situation boiled down to the motto: �There was no one to de-fend Bosnia�. Stjepan Tomasevic, who linked the destiny of hiscountry to Hungary and the Pope, both supporting him just ver-bally, died during the fall of Bosnia in 1463.

3. Medieval Bosnian state functioned in accordance with thestandards of customary law and state protocols typical of the time.Bosnian law was not encoded in a statute. However, Bosnian cus-tomary law had different written forms. It was binding for leadersand nobility. If they took the throne, the first thing to do was toissue a charter confirming all the rights guaranteed earlier by theirpredecessors. Categories such as �faithful service�, �faith of thelord�, �noble property�, were the basis for building private andpublic law relations in the medieval Bosnian state.

77

THE OTTOMAN AYALET OF BOSNIA

4. The Ottoman province of Bosnia. With the fall of the medi-eval state to the Ottomans in 1463, Bosnia lost the possibility todevelop its own state and legal system further. However, its people,Bosnians or Bosniaks, never lost an awareness of the historicalexistence of the medieval Bosnian state for more than half a mil-lennium in the pre-Islamic period. This historical awareness ofBosnian identity contributed to maintaining territorial and politicalintegrity of the historical Bosnian territory both during the Otto-man Empire as well as the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

Initially, Bosnia did not fall to the Ottomans entirely. More than50 years passed between the first Turkish attack and the establish-ment of �Bosansko krajiste� as an interim form of military andterritorial organisation of the Ottoman rule in Bosnia (1451)(22).And 117 years passed from the fall of Bosnia in 1463, when thefirst sanjak was established as the first independent form of mili-tary, administrative and political form of organisation of Ottomanrule in Bosnia, until the establishment of the Bosnian beglerbeglukor ayalet [province] as a separate province of the Ottoman Empirein 1580. By then, the sanjaks of Bosnia, Herzegovina and Klis wereestablished within the Rumeliya beglerbegluk, the name of theEuropean part of the Ottoman Empire. The Zvornik sanjak waspart of the Budim beglerbegluk from 1541.

In the meantime, the Ottomans failed to establish a renegade�Bosnian kingdom� with clear animosity towards the two remain-ing Hungarian dominions in Bosnia (Jajce and Srebrenica). Whenthe puppet �Bosnian king � tried to present his credentials to theHungarians, the Ottomans terminated this miniature Bosnian king-dom (1476)(23).

5. Bosnian beglerbegluk or ayalet was established in 1580. Itwas created as a tool of further expansion and defence against Aus-tria and Venice. The second reason was the need to further exploitthe subjects, to be achieved through a stronger bureaucratic appa-

78

ratus. The Bosnian beglerbegluk was established by excluding thesanjaks of Bosnia, Herzegovina, Klis, Pakrac and Krk from theRumeliya one, and the sanjaks of Zvornik and Pozega from theBudim one. The former Bosnian sanjak became the central sanjakof this ayalet. As the Bosnian ayalet covered territory wider thanthe one covered by the old kingdom, thus the term Bosnia becamemuch wider at the time.

The first beglerbeg of the Bosnian ayalet was the formersanjakbey of the Bosnian sanjak (1574-1580) Ferhad-bey Sokolovic,who automatically assumed the title pasha and was seated in BanjaLuka.

After the Karlovac peace treaty in 1699, the territory of theBosnian ayalet was reduced to its XV century borders. Thus, at theend of XVIII century, the Bosnian ayalet consisted of four sanjaks:Bosnia, Herzegovina, Zvornik and Klis ones. Trying to avoid hav-ing Venetians for neighbours, Dubrovnik voluntarily awarded Kleki.e. Neum in the North, and Sutorina in the South, to the Ottomans.Thus Bosnia acquired two points of access to sea.

The Novi Pazar region, a form of corpus separatum in theBosnian sanjak since the beginning of the Ottoman rule, was fi-nally excluded from it in 1790 and transformed into a separate NoviPazar sanjak (24).

6. When organising its administration in Bosnia, the Ottomansnever carried out significant changes in the divisions they had foundon the ground, unless there were valid military, political, economicor strategic reasons. Wherever possible, they maintained the oldstate of affairs. This is a rough comparison, since the sanjak fron-tiers changed over time, depending on military and administrativechanges caused by good fortune in the battlefield and in peace trea-ties. Later inclusion of Bihac (1592) and its sanjak gradually con-tributed to the shape of Bosnia to be confirmed later, in the Karlovacpeace treaty (1699), and the administrative division from the timewas maintained almost entirely until mid-XX century.

Thus, after the Karlovac peace treaty, the Bosnian beglerbeglukwas reduced to the XV century borders of the Bosnian kingdom.The Bosnian beglerbegluk later contributed to the preservation of

79

integrity of Bosnia�s historic and political space. The significanceof its establishment is in the fact that it united all the sanjaks inBosnia (the Bosnia, Herzegovina, Zvornik and Klis ones), whichhad been parts of either the Rumeliya or the Budim beglerbegluks.This prevented territorial and political disintegration of the terri-tory of the Bosnian medieval state.

The lowest units of Ottoman administration were nahiyas, cre-ated by the transformation of medieval Bosnian parishes whereverthey had existed. There should be a distinction between these andthe so-called Vlaske (cattlemen�s) nahiyas, which had self-gover-nance, many privileges and a separate military organisation, andwere directly subordinated to the sultan, the beglerbey, or thesanjakbey, and were headed by dukes or civil princes.

The medieval Bosnian state did not recognise judicial or ad-ministrative units between parishes and regional leaders. In Otto-man Bosnia, a regular administrative unit, normally judicial, be-tween the sanjak and the nahiya was kadiluk (kaza). This was theregion of real and territorial jurisdiction of a kadi [judge]. In addi-tion to judicial, kadis held administrative authority as well. Thus,kadiluk was a real administrative unit wherever there were Mus-lims. In areas with few Moslems, kadiluk often overlapped withthe entire sanjak territory. Kadiluks were an anticipatory form oflater mudirluks or muselimluks, and later still, of districts and coun-ties.

7. In early XIX century, the Bosnian ayalet lost some of its ter-ritories on the right bank of river Drina. the Bosnian sanjak ex-panded in 1817 with the abolishment of the Novi Pazar sanjak, theabolishment of the Klis sanjak in 1826, and the abolishment of theZvornik sanjak in 1832. Thus the Bosnian ayalet kept only thesanjaks of Bosnia and Herzegovina. As the rulers of the Bosnianayalet enjoyed income from taxes (arpaluk) from the Herzegovinasanjak, this was practically almost entirely unified administrativeand political unit.

After the defeat of the autonomous Bosniak�s unity movementlead by Husein Captain Gradascevic (1823), kapetanijas were abol-

80

ished and a division into muselimluks was enforced. It mainly cor-responded to old kadiluks (1835).

In order to break the resistance to central authority and to sat-isfy their supporters in Herzegovina (Ali-pasha Rizvanbegovic),the Ottomans excluded the Herzegovina sanjak from the Bosnianayalet (1833) and transformed it into a separate mutesafirluk underRizvanbegovic�s rule (25).

During the rule of Omer-Pasha Latas (1850-1852), the politicalwill of Bosniak nobility was definitely broken. There was a thor-ough reorganisation of political administration in Bosnia. The coun-try was divided into kajmakamluks. In Bosnia: kajmakamluks ofSarajevo, Travnik, Banja Luka, Bihac, Zvornik and Novi Pazar. InHerzegovina: those of Mostar, Trebinje and Pljevlja. This divisionremained until 1865.

8. Decision on the Administration of the Bosnian vilayet [re-gion] (Bosna vilayet nizamnamesi) was published on November 7,1864, and implemented in Bosnia in 1865 and 1866. Article 2 ofthis Decision transformed the Bosnian ayalet and the Herzegovinamutesafirluk into a single Bosnian vilayet as a province headed byvaliya or vali-pasha (governor), appointed by the central authority.His authority was listed in the Decision, thus limiting it in com-parison with the previous period. The Council of the vilayet wasalso established and it met once a year.

The judiciary was no longer under exclusive authority of thekadi, since civil courts were added to the sharia ones. This Deci-sion transformed kajmakamluks into sanjaks (livas), and thekajmakamluks of Trebinje and Mostar were unified into a singleHerzegovina sanjak. Thus the Bosnian vilayet had seven sanjaks:Sarajevo, Zvornik (Tuzla), Travnik, Banja Luka, Bihac, Herzegovinaand Novi Pazar (Sjenica). Sanjaks were governed by kajmakamis,except for the Sarajevo one, governed by the valiya himself. Thisorganisation was maintained until 1878 with minimal changes. OnFebruary 2, 1877, the Novi Pazar sanjak was definitely excludedfrom the Bosnian sanjak and annexed to the Kosovo vilayet. Dur-ing the Herzegovina uprising in 1875, the kadiluk of Gacko wastemporarily transformed into a sanjak of the same name. As of 1878,

81

the Bosnian vilayet consisted of six districts: Sarajevo, Travnik,Bihac, Banja Luka, Tuzla and Mostar (26).

9. The main authorities for the Ottoman legal system were thesharia law and the state (sultan) law called kanun. The Hanefianlaw tradition, called after Abu Hanefi, was followed in Bosnia andHerzegovina. Sharia law was in wide application only in relationsamong Muslims. In cases where there was no solution found in theQoran or the khadises, fatwas were used. Fatwas were issued bymuftis in kadiluks, but there was also a grand mufti for the entireEmpire (shaikh-al-Islam). Certain elements of sharia law were pre-served in Bosnia and Herzegovina until 1945, especially in familyand inheritance rights of the Moslems. In addition to sharia, lawsof other religious communities (millets) was also applied, as wellas occasionally the customary law.

In addition to sharia, one of the main legal authorities was thestate (sultan�s) law, kanuns or the kanun law. State laws were pub-lished in special orders (ferman) and later in charters (hatisharif).State law regulated relations not covered or partly covered by sharialaw, such as administration, hierarchy, taxes, etc. Gazettes werecalled kanun-name. The most famous ones were the kanun-nameby Mehmed II and Suleyman the Great (The Legislator).

In addition to general ones, there were also separate kanun-namefor individual sanjaks, usually as parts of defters. Copies of theBosnian kanun-name of the sanjaks of Bosnia, Zvornik, Herzegovinaand Klis have been preserved. However, they were often just dec-larations. That is why this law was abolished in the Tanzimat re-forms in 1839, and sultans started to enact their own laws such asthe Ramandan Law, the Muharrem Law, the Criminal Code, etc.

An unofficial compilation of the entire property law of the Ot-toman Empire, called Majala , appeared in the second half of XIXcentury. It was not a formal statute, but it enjoyed authority in ap-plication. Majala was applied for the entire population irrespectiveof their religion and status (27).

82

83

THE AUSTRO-HUNGARIANCORPUS SEPARATUM

10. The Austro-Hungarian corpus separatum. From the legalpoint of view, the Austro-Hungarian rule in B&H can be dividedinto two levels: the first, from 1878 to the 1908 annexation (app.30 years), when its rule was interim, under the mandate of the in-ternational community, while the sultan still held formal sovereigntyover Bosnia; and the second, from 1908 until 1918, when Bosniawas annexed and transformed into a colony of Austro-HungarianEmpire, with its full state sovereignty held by the Empire, and cer-tain forms of political authority with participation of the local popu-lation, but under control and authorisation of the central authorityin Vienna.

Significant elements of military rule and limited civil rights werepresent throughout the Austrian rule. Bosnia and Herzegovina wasnever an integral part of the Austro-Hungarian state structure.

The main legal documents determining the status of Bosnia andHerzegovina after 1878 were Article XXV of the Berlin Treaty andthe Istanbul Convention (1879).

An agreement on provinces in Bosnia and Herzegovina in theBerlin Treaty (Article XXV) read:

�Austro-hungarian Empire will occupy the provinces of Bosniaand herzegovina and will govern them. as the austro-hungarianGOVERNMENT does not wish to assume governance over the novipazar sanjak, on the south-east between serbia and montenegro, asfar as mitrovica (kosovo), turkish rule will be maintained. how-ever, to ensure a new political state of affairs on one hand, andfreedom and SAFETY of roads on the other, the Austro-HungarianEmpire maintains the RIGHT to hold its troops THROUGHOUTthe territory of the former bosnian vilayet, and to control its mili-tary and trade roads.�

�the austro-hungarian and the turkish governments maintain theright to agree on the details of this matter.�

84

The Turkish representative, after being authorised by his gov-ernment to do so, gave his agreement at the beginning of the meet-ing on July 4, by saying:

�The Royal Ottoman government gave serious consideration tothis opinion expressed by this congress, relating to ways of easingthe situation with Bosnia and Herzegovina. We have full confi-dence; however, we do maintain the right to reach agreements inthis matter directly and immediately with the Vienna cabinet.�

Count Andrassy stated that he was pleased with this statement,and the chair of the session announced that thus the Austro-Hun-garian Empire was given the mandate by all the forces representedat the congress.

On the eve of the signing of this agreement on July 13, 1878,after insisting on it, the Ottoman representatives obtained a writtenstatement from the Austro-Hungarian representatives, confirmingthat �sovereign right of H.R.H. the Sultan over the provinces ofBosnia and Herzegovina will suffer no breaches caused by occupa-tion... and that occupation is to be considered temporary�(28).

11. As early as June 5, 1878, prior to the commencement of theBerlin Congress on June 13, a National Board was established inSarajevo. It acted publicly and prepared armed resistance againstAustro-Hungarian troops. On July 7, the National Board forced theVeli-pasha, the military commander of Bosnia, to resign. The Na-tional Board acted slowly, with insufficient decisiveness towardsthe Ottomans, and with no real support of Bosniaks of other reli-gions.

On July 27, 1878, the National Board removed Ottoman rulefrom Sarajevo and established its own National Government, as-signing military affairs to Smail-bey Selmanovic-Taslidzak andMuhamed Hadzijamakovic, police affairs to Abidaga Gacanin andAhmed Nako, and telegraph communications to Serif Zildzic.

In early August, Smail Haki Selmanovic, the commander ofBosnia, issued a Declaration inviting the entire population: �Islams,Christians and Latines� to �resist the enemy jointly�. The Decla-ration referred to Bosnia, its population and its past, while therewas no mention of Turkey or the sultan. Obviously, the intention

85

was to indicate that Bosnia was independent and that it was de-fending itself. This resistance was crushed. The first body of thenew Austro-Hungarian authority in Bosnia and Herzegovina was amilitary court, established in by chief commander Filipovic in Dobojon August 4, 1878.

Andrassy, the minister of foreign affairs, used to say: �Control-ling the Novi Pazar sanjak in Bosnia is the same as condolingBosphorus in the Black Sea�. Additional negotiations between theAustro-Hungarian and the Turkish Empires ended successfully onApril 21, 1879, and an agreement was reached and signed in Istanbul.

12. The legal position of B&H after the occupation was ananomaly in comparison with the then legal norm. The sultan wasthe legitimate sovereign ruler of B&H, but the real power restedwith the Austro-Hungarians. According to the standards, the posi-tion of B&H was unclear. Theoretically the sultan held sovereignty,but in a legal illusion, with no significance in actions. On the otherhand, B&H was not an integral part of the Austro-Hungarian Em-pire, but rather an annexed (occupied) territory, thanks to the willof Europe and the agreement by Turkey. It was not an one-sidedoccupation.

The Austro-Hungarian rule in B&H was limited by three fac-tors arising from the Berlin Treaty: (1) objectives of the Europeanmandate to introduce peace and order; (2) continuous sovereigntyof the Ottoman Empire in Bosnia, obliging the Austro-Hungarianadministration to submit all its laws to the sultan for approval; (3)provisions of the basic international contracts, showing that theadministration was interim. However, since the Real intentions ofthe Austro-Hungarian Empire were to occupy B&H permanentlyas a strategic access to Dalmatia and Istria, with an intention offurther expansion, it was not possible to reconcile the sultan�s sov-ereign rights in Bosnia and historical realities. This was supportedby the European forces, never protesting different measures under-taken by the Austro-Hungarians to insult the sultan. The Austro-Hungarian Empire held �only the right to internal sovereignty� inB&H.(29)

86

Article IV of the Istanbul Convention foresaw a special agree-ment on external sovereignty, i.e. representation of Bosnians abroad,but this agreement was never made.

The population of Bosnia and Herzegovina could have hardlybeen considered equal citizens of either of the states. The popula-tion of B&H did not enjoy many civil and political rights held bythe citizens of both Empires. Bosniaks of all three religions �en-joyed� military draft, but there were many delineations betweenBosnia and the Monarchy. Their unresolved status was probablybest expressed by the �affiliation to land� formula, although eventhat remained undefined.

13. As the Ottomans began to weaken and withdraw from Cen-tral Europe, the Habsburg Monarchy began to weaken, since therewas no longer a need to gather different countries to fight the Otto-man threat.

From the constitutional point of view, the easiest rule to estab-lish in Bosnia was the military one, since the military was a com-mon institution. However, military rule was abandoned, mainly forfinancial, but also for political reasons: the royal circles under-stood the occupation of Bosnia to be an actual incorporation ofBosnia into the Monarchy. It turned out that military rule, howeverunavoidable in the first phase, was actually much more expensivethan the civil one (30).

The discussions in Vienna after the occupation concluded thatBosnia and Herzegovina should be treated as a sui generis organ-ism, to be administered immediately by representative of threedifferent ministries (military, foreign affairs and finance), and bothgovernments of the Monarchy, and that the Bosnian administrationwas to funded from revenues within Bosnia and Herzegovina (310.

The Parliaments of Austria and Hungary enacted a Law on Ad-ministration of Bosnia and Herzegovina on February 22, 1880. ThisLaw confirmed that the Joint Government was in charge of theinterim administration of B&H and was to take part in determiningdirections and principles of the administration, which was to coverits expenses through its own revenues. Additional expenditure wasto be approved by the Parliaments of both parts of the Monarchy.

87

These legislative bodies were in charge of customs regulations,indirect taxes and currency, and no relation of B&H whit the Mon-archy could be changed without their unanimous agreement.

Immediately after this Law had been adopted on February 26,1880, and following a proposal by the Joint Government, the em-peror decided to assign the supreme civilian administration of B&Hto the Joint Ministry of Finance. The decisions of this Ministrywere implemented by the Land Government in Sarajevo, estab-lished by a decree on October 29, 1880. In addition to the emperorand the Joint Government (Ministry of Finance), legal authoritywas given to the Parliaments of Austria and Hungary, to take partin administration of B&H. Bosnia may be defined as joint territoryof the Monarchy, which ruled under the European mandate, andwith an agreement from the sultan who maintained his formal sov-ereignty over B&H.

Until 1908 Bosnia was not an Austro-Hungarian colony, sincethey did not hold unlimited authority, but the Monarchy�s economicpolicy in Bosnia was colonial. After the 1908 annexation, Bosniaformally became an Austro-Hungarian colony, since that was theend of the European mandate, and the sultan sold his sovereigntyto the Austro-Hungarian Empire for two and a half pounds ster-ling, thus extending the legitimacy of their rule in Bosnia (32).

Even after the 1908 annexation of Bosnia (after the Young Turks�revolution in Turkey), the issue of inclusion of B&H into the statestructures was not resolved.

14. Transition from the Ottoman to the new Austro-Hungarianlegal system was not done hastily, but rather cautiously and gradu-ally. Within the legal system, it can be said that continuity wasmaintained between the old and the new rule. The Austro-Hungar-ians maintained many legal institutes of the Ottoman written lawand the Bosnian customary law, especially civil law. At the sametime, the Austro-Hungarian administration began to enact its ownregulations immediately (33). Since 1910, when the emperor sanc-tioned the constitution of Bosnia, laws proposed by the newly-es-tablished Bosnian Parliament within their competence started toappear as new legal authorities.

88

Throughout the Austro-Hungarian rule in B&H, there were dif-ferent rules from Islamic and Ottoman law. Sharia rules regulatedfamily, inheritance, endowments and religious relations of Mos-lems. In addition to sharia, there were different other laws usuallyregulating land relations, and which had been used for so long thatthey had become elements of the Bosnian customary law.

The Austro-Hungarian legal system in B&H remained incom-plete, and it remained interim, just like the entire Austro-Hungar-ian rule, remaining disintegrated and subordinate, often in discrep-ancy with the social relations it was supposed to regulate.

89

BOSNIA WITHIN THE STATE OF SERBS,CROATS AND SLOVENES

15. Political life in B&H was at a standstill after the assassina-tion of the Austrian Arch-Duke Franz Ferdinand of June 28, 1914.The work of the Bosnian Parliament was also prevented.

Military defeats of the Axis Forces allowed political parties andgroups to publish their memoranda in Zagreb on September 1918,stating that they no longer recognised the royal Austro-Hungarianrule, and denying its right to represent them at peace negotiations.Immediately after that, on October 6, the National Council of Serbs,Croats and Slovenes was established. Exclusion of South Slaviclands from the Austro-Hungarian Empire and their declaration ofindependence took place on October 29, 1918.

On November 1, 1918, the ruler of B&H surrendered powers tothe National Council. Then the National Council of B&H, follow-ing a proposal by its Main Board, elected the Bosnian national gov-ernment, which included representatives of Serbs, Croats andBosniaks.

Establishment of the National Council of Serbs, Croats andSlovenes, and establishment of the national governments of B&H,Slovenia, Dalmatia and Croatia, was the establishment of a newState of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs, covering the territory of SouthSlavic lands previously under the Austro-Hungarian rule. The ba-sis of state organisation was the federal principle. Central authoritywas with the presidency of the Council, and regional governments,among them the Bosnian one, were in charge of regional affairs.

90

91

BOSNIA IN THE KINGDOM OF SERBS,CROATS AND SLOVENES

16. Under the influence of internal and external factors, on Oc-tober 29, 1918, the National Council declared that the State had nobeen established for its own sake, but to unite with other SouthSlavic lands. There were two views: the centralist and the federal-ist one. The centralists were the majority, and on November 24,1918, a conclusion was reached to unite the State of Serbs, Croatsand Slovenes with the Kingdoms of Serbia and Montenegro, toform a single state. On December 1, 1918 in Belgrade, before PrinceRegent Alexander Karadjordjevic, the National Council read its�Address�, which state that the rule would be with King Peter, orPrince Regent Alexander in his absence, together with a parlia-mentary government. Alexander replied with his �Address�, de-claring unification into �a single Kingdom of Serbs, Croats andSlovenes�. No �Address� contained �instructions� for the NationalCouncil that the �final organisation of the new state may be deter-mined only by a general constitutional assembly of the unified na-tion of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, with a two-third majority vote�.This was the very beginning of future dissatisfaction of non-Serbpeoples with Yugoslavia, which would result in its first dissolutionin 1941, since there was no equality for all South Slavic peoples (34).

Bosnia and Herzegovina maintained some forms of statehoodfor a while. The B&H National Council ceased to function on De-cember 31, 1918, and the B&H National Government a month later.Instead, the B&H Land Government was established, with respon-sibilities towards Belgrade and a limited scope of competence. In-stead of old ten, it now had only four departments: interior affairs,judiciary, agriculture, education and religious affairs. This govern-ment was maintained until June 28, 1921 and the so-called VidovdanConstitution, which started from the idea of national unitarianismand state centralism: �one people, one state�. The Yugoslav Mos-

92

lem Organisation managed to enter Article 135 into this Constitu-tion, maintaining territorial integrity of B&H in its historical bor-ders in case of regional partition of the country.

93

BOSNIA IN THE KINGDOM OFYUGOSLAVIA

17. On January 6, 1929, King Alexander issued a Proclamation,annulling the Vidovdan Constitution (1921), dismantling the Na-tional Assembly, declaring himself the sole bearer of sovereignty,and declaring �preservation of state and national unity� as theprogramme of his totalitarian rule. He dismissed all political par-ties and introduced military rule. On October, 3 of the same year, alaw was enacted to divide the kingdom into administrative regions,and it included the official name of the country: the Kingdom ofYugoslavia. This law provided administration in banates, countiesand municipalities. The state was divided into nine banates namedafter rivers. This division broke the historical territorial boundaryof Bosnia and Herzegovina into four banates, with only one, theVrbas banate (Banja Luka) remaining within the territory of B&H,except for Dvor na Uni. Other parts of Bosnia and Herzegovinawere divided into banates of Drina (Sarajevo), Zeta (Cetinje),Primorje (Split), which all extended deep into territories ofneighbouring countries. As deep as needed for Bosniaks not to be amajority in any of them.

Thus, for the first time in a thousand years of its history, Bosniaand Herzegovina was divided into administrative units which brokeup its historical territory. In addition to abolishment of all forms ofregional administration, this was a territorial partition of B&H aswell (35).

On August 26, 1939, after the Cvetkovic-Macek agreement, aDeclaration on the Banate of Croatia was issued, uniting the Banateof Sava and Primorje, as well as 13 counties in B&H (Brcko,Gradacac, Derventa, Travnik, Fojnica, Bugojno, Stolac, Mostar,Ljubuski, Livno, Konjic, Duvno and Prozor) into a single banate.

18. In view of its position in Yugoslavia between two worldwards, B&H did not have an independent legal system. Legal sys-tem of Yugoslavia was applied. The legal system of Yugoslavia

94

began to develop with the Constitution of the Kingdom of Serbs,Croats and Slovenes on June 28, 1921. The time between 1918 and1921 passed in the process of autonomous organisation of legalrelations of countries which the new state consisted of, with strongcontrol from the central government and its legislative activities.

After the annulment of the Vidovdan Constitution in 1929, andthe enforcement of the new totalitarian constitution in 1939, therewas and illegal improvised constitutional system in B&H. Attemptsto legitimise it through elections in 1935 and 1938, with applica-tion of repressive methods and persecution of opposition, merelyreinforced the illegal state which continued until the war and thedissolution of Yugoslavia by Germany, Italy and their allies, andthe creation of puppet states, Pavelic�s Croatia and Nedic�s Serbia.

95

FEDERAL BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

19. Renewal of statehood in form of Federal Bosnia andHerzegovina. In September 1943, after Italy surrendered, and thevictory of allied forces was in sight, preparations were launchedfor the establishment of central authority in Bosnia and Herzegovina.This soon took place in Mrkonjic Grad (Varcar Vakuf) on Novem-ber 25, 1943, and the First Session of ZAVNOBIH [Anti-FascistCouncil of People�s Liberation of B&H]. This day is consideredthe date of renewal of Bosnia�s statehood and establishment of thenew Bosnian state, on principles of democracy and respect for hu-man and civil rights (36).

Military basis for renewal of statehood of B&H was in the factthat at the end of 1943, out of a total of 27 divisions of the thenNational Liberation Army of Yugoslavia, 11 divisions and severalindependent units were from Bosnia and Herzegovina (37). Politi-cal basis was mass determination of all three peoples of Bosnia infavour of political autonomy of B&H in the democratic and federalYugoslavia (DFJ), as a separate federal unit. Historical basis wasthe medieval Bosnian state and the existence of a single Bosniannation (Bosnians, Bosniaks) who, despite of half a century of sub-ordination, preserved an awareness of their political and culturalidentity, of their statehood, and of Bosnia as their state, with politi-cal particularities preserved by generations of Bosnians. With anexception, i.e. in the second half of XIX century, under the influ-ences of political propaganda and church authorities, Bosnian Catho-lic developed national feelings as Croats, and Bosnian Orthodoxdid so as Serbs. Bosnian Moslems, although supposed to chosebetween being Serbs or Croats, followed the political tradition ofmedieval Bosnians (Bosniaks). While Bosnian Serb extremistswanted to annex Bosnia to Serbia, and Bosnian Croat extremistswanted to annex it to Croatia, ever since the Ottoman times,Bosniaks had been striving towards autonomy of Bosnia and re-

96

newal of its statehood. Although they were Moslems, they neverconsidered themselves Turkish nationals, but rather Bosniaks (38).

At its Second Session on November 29, 1943, AVNOJ [Anti-Fascist Council of National Liberation of Yugoslavia] issued a De-cision on establishment of Yugoslavia following a federal principle,in principle determining the position of ZAVNOBIH as the holderof legal and state functions of the federal unit of B&H. Article 3 ofthis Decision read: �It is in accordance with the federal develop-ment of Yugoslavia that the already existing bodies of people�sauthority in some peoples in Yugoslavia are represented by nationalliberation boards and anti-fascist councils of peoples� libera-tion�(39).

Legal documents adopted at the Second Session of ZAVNOBIH(1944) regulated a single legal system in B&H based on demo-cratic principles. Development of administration and judiciary onthe principles of a single authority system in Federal Bosnia andHerzegovina followed. Instructions were issued stating that the ju-dicial system should be built on the following principles : demo-cratic selection of judges, competence of judges, courts of severalinstances, independence in decision-making, transparency of workand accountability before the people (40).

97

PEOPLES' REPUBLIC OF BOSNIA ANDHERZEGOVINA

20. B&H statehood was being developed rapidly. After the lib-eration of Sarajevo, the Third Session of ZAVNOBIH was sched-uled and held on April 26, 1945 (41). The following decisions andlaws were enacted: (1) Decision on Approval of Work of theZAVNOBIH Presidency Between Two Sessions; (2) Decision onChanges and Amendments to the Decision on Establishment ofZAVNOBIH as the Highest Legislative and Executive Representa-tive Body in Federal Bosnia and Herzegovina; (3) Law on the Oathof People�s Delegates of the National Assembly of B&H; and (4)Law on the National Government of B&H (60). At this session,ZAVNOBIH was transformed into the National Assembly of B&H.A government was elected. Presidency of ZAVNOBIH became thePresidency of the National Assembly.

After the elections, the first session of the Constitutional As-sembly was scheduled for November 11, 1946 (42). At its first ses-sion, the Constitutional Assembly confirmed: (1) all the decisionsof ZAVNOBIH from the Second and the Firs Session; (2) all thedecisions of this session of the National Assembly of April 27 and28, 1945, as well as of the National Assembly of the People�s Re-public of Bosnia and Herzegovina of April, 1945, until the firstsession of the Constitutional Assembly; (3) decisions and otherdocuments of the presidency of the People�s Assembly. Thus thisrepresentative body elected at free elections legitimised all the de-cisions reached prior to the first session of the Constitutional As-sembly.

At the sessions of the Constitutional Assembly held on Decem-ber 28-31, 1946, the Constitution of the People�s Republic of Bosniaand Herzegovina was adopted and it was put into force on Decem-ber 31, 1946 (43).

Excluding the Decision on the Bosnian vilayet sanctioned bythe sultan in November 1864 and the Statute (Constitution) of

98

Bosnia and Herzegovina sanctioned by the Emperor of Austria andthe King of Hungary Franz Joseph in February 19910, 483 and ahalf years after the loss of statehood in 1463, the Bosnian sover-eign national representative body elected at free elections enactedthe first Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Article 1 of this Constitution stated that the People�s Republicof Bosnia and Herzegovina was a people�s state of republican forms.This provision decided the status of Bosnia and Herzegovina as astate. Article 2 stated that using its right to self-determination,Bosnia and Herzegovina decided to unite with Serbia, Croatia,Slovenia, Macedonia and Montenegro, to form the FNRJ [FederalPeople�s Republic of Yugoslavia], and carried over to FNRJ onlythose rights assigned to a federal state by the Constitution of FNRJ.

99

SOCIALIST FEDERAL REPUBLIC OFBOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

21. This is how the 1963 Constitution defined a socialist repub-lic: �state, socialist, democratic community� (Article 108, Para-graph 1). While the 1946 Constitution referred to the sovereigntyof republics, the 1963 Constitution referred to �sovereign rights�of peoples only where prescribed for those rights to be protectedby the Federation (Article 114). Thus the �statehood� of the repub-lic and the �sovereign rights� of peoples overlapped. All this couldhave had its political value and political significance, but from thelegal point of view, these attributes could be considered suspect,since they were mere declarations. According to the 1946 Consti-tution, the 1953 Constitutional Law and the 1963 Constitution,Yugoslavia was a socially, politically and economically centralisedstate. This was a consequence of the fact that this was how theCommunist Party was organised, with the so-called democraticcentralism, with very little democracy, and a lot of centralism. Al-though Yugoslavia was a federal state comprising of autonomousfederal units, it was not different at all from unitary state in all theimportant issues of state organisation. Yugoslavia did declare itsfederalism, but it was in effect run form the centre (the Sovietmodel).

The 1974 Constitution of SFRY [Socialist Federal Republic ofYugoslavia] defined that: �federal state� is a state community ofunited peoples and their socialist republics, as well as socialist au-tonomous provinces of Vojvodina and Kosovo, integral parts of theSocialist Republic of Serbia�.

The most important provision of the 1974 Constitution, whichchanged the theoretical concept of the Yugoslav federation as astate with full sovereignty is a provision on revision of the 1974Constitution. Article 402, Paragraph 1 read: �Change of the SFRYConstitution is considered adopted when assemblies of all the re-publics and autonomous provinces agree with the text adopted by

100

the Federal Council of the SFRY Assembly�. Agreement of as-semblies of all the republic is simply a contract among them inorder to reach changes of the Constitution. And we know that con-tracts may be signed only by sovereign states. Thus, in this ele-ment, Yugoslavia was in essence a confederation rather than a fed-eration.

Prior to that, Article 400 provides that the Federal Council mayinitiate a procedure of changes of the Constitution only with a pre-viously obtained agreement of assemblies of all the republics andautonomous provinces, if the only change is in provisions dealingwith the position of the republics or relations between the federa-tion and the republics. This also confirmed that Yugoslavia wasessentially a contract-based community, but this contract was for-mally referred to as the Constitution.

22. Legal system of Bosnia and Herzegovina was directly re-lated to the legal system of former Yugoslavia. The 1946 YugoslavConstitution determined the development of the legal system ofthe country. Until 1953, the People�s Assembly of FNRJ adoptednumerous laws. The laws of particular importance were: Law onInvalidity of Legal Regulations Adopted Prior to April 6, 1941,thus formally interrupting the continuity of internal law, the �old�and the �new� legal order of Yugoslavia, then, Law of People�sBoards (1946, 1949, 1952), Law on Civil Proceedings, CriminalCode, etc.

This period of development of the legal system was also impor-tant in the establishment of new social and economic relations, withparticular importance attached to documents implementing confis-cation of enemy property and property of enemies of the people,confiscation of war profits, expropriation of industrial companies,banks and trade in 1946 and 1948. State property was a precondi-tion for agriculture planning, also covered by a law on state plan-ning.

Law on Management of State Enterprises and Other EconomicAssociations by Workers� Teams (Law on Workers� Self-Manage-ment) from June 1950 and numerous related decisions were a be-ginning of a new era in the development of our legal system.

101

This period is usually referred to as - the period of workers�self-management. The beginning is the date of adoption of the Lawon Workers� Self-Management, or the enactment of the 1953 Con-stitutional Law. From the legal point of view. these legal decisionsalso meant the creation of new organisational units outside statebodies - managerial boards and workers� councils - and withinstate bodies - councils of manufacturers. This was the beginning ofdecentralisation of legislative functions and the establishment of anew form of ownership - social ownership over means of produc-tion. The Constitutional Law proclaimed clearly the principle ofsovereignty of workers and established the basis of social and eco-nomic system: social ownership over means of production, self-management in economy and self-management in municipalities,towns, counties. Many subsequent laws �introduced� self-manage-ment into non-commercial fields, and this was later confirmed bythe 1963 Constitution. The 1963 Constitution provided legal pos-sibilities for further development of self-management in its essence- in the form of rights of workers and rights of certain organisationalunits in the self-management system, and most importantly, it en-riched the span of individual rights of man.

After this Constitution was enacted, certain changes in ideo-logical, political and economic relations required amendments toit (44).

The 1974 Constitution represented further development of le-gal system towards ensuring and protecting the position of man onone side, and ensuring domination of labour class by strengtheningself-management in associated labour on the other. The 1976 Lawon Associated Labour was of particular importance for the latter.

Amendments to the Constitution were adopted in mid-1981,regulating duration of mandates and composition of bodies of so-called collective management. The next significant change was with1989 Amendments to the Constitution, announcing reforms of eco-nomic and political system, and later the new Constitutions of re-publics in 1990 and 1991, opening a process of dissolution of Yu-goslavia (45).

102

23. Dissolution of Yugoslavia. Displeased with the 1974 Con-stitution of Yugoslavia and the model it offered, Serbia objected toit and wanted the provinces to be more politically integrated into it.With the publication of the 1986 Memorandum of the Serbian Acad-emy of Arts and Science, this request was expanded to include boththe provinces and all the republics where Serbs presented a consid-erable percentage of the population. With the exception of Slovenia,this applied to all other republics, especially to Bosnia andHerzegovina and Croatia - with the objective of realising theGreater-Serbian political ideal - all Serbs in one state.

First, Serbia enacted its Constitution in September 1990, abol-ishing the constitutional position of Kosovo and Vojvodina, thetwo Yugoslav provinces within Serbia, whose position had beenidentical to that of the republics, except for the state status. Withthis arrangement for the provinces, Serbia was the first republic tobreach the constitutional system of SFRY. The Serbian Constitu-tion violated the constitutional position of the provinces as stipu-lated in the SFRY Constitution. Due to obstructions by Serbianjudges throughout 1991, the Constitutional Court of Yugoslaviawas unable to pass a ruling re-establishing the earlier constitutionalposition of the provinces, as proposed by the author who was theJudge Rapporteur in the case. Subsequently, Slovenia, Croatia andMacedonia adopted their Constitutions and organised referenda ondisassociation from Yugoslavia. Bosnia and Herzegovina did notpass its Constitution, but it did adopt Amendments on 31 July 1009,and thus, in addition to Montenegro which followed the Serbianpolitical option, it was the only republic that did not pass a com-pletely new Constitution.

Soon afterwards, at the parliamentary elections in Bosnia (18November 1990) reformed communists lost to the three nationalparties, SDA (Bosniaks), SDS (Serbs) and HDZ (Croats). Elec-tions were held in all the republics in the same year, and were wonby civic and national parties demanding more autonomy withinYugoslavia or a total independence from it. Contrary to this, Serbpopulation demanded that Yugoslavia be preserved, with centralfunctions strengthened in comparison to those form the 1974 Con-

103

stitution, under the motto of building a �new federation. After thisidea failed, with the assistance of JNA, Yugoslavia tried to intro-duce martial law in March 1991. The Yugoslav Presidency rejectedthis proposal thanks to the vote of the Bosnian member of the Presi-dency. This accelerated the process of Serbian domination of JNAand the secret arming of Serb population in Croatia and Bosnia andHerzegovina, in preparation for a military option. Contrary to this,in the rest of Yugoslavia, the national sovereign state concept pre-vailed and ways were sought to preserve Yugoslavia as a union ofsovereign independent states, opposed by Serbia and Yugoslavia.This initiated a spontaneous process of internal dissolution of Yu-goslavia into new independent and sovereign states. This was alsoconfirmed by the Arbitration Commission for Yugoslavia, estab-lished by the European Union. �1. In its Opinion No. 1, on 29 No-vember 1991, published on 7 December, the Commission notedthat the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was in a processof dissolution.�

Slovenia expressed its desire to disassociate from Yugoslavia ata referendum as early as December 1990, and announced it for 25June 1991, whereas Croatia organised its referendum on 30 May1991, and announced disassociation for June the same year.Macedonia organised its referendum in September 1991, and passedits Constitution on 17 November, thus disassociating from Yugo-slavia.

Bosnia and Herzegovina introduced considerable constitutionalchanges in the above-mentioned Amendments in 1990. The Amend-ments changed socio-economic relations, introduced marketeconomy and changed the political system by creating possibilitiesfor the old one-party system to be changed by pluralist democracyand a multi-party one. The former assembly system with singlestate power was changed into a parliamentary system, with a divi-sion of power into legislative, executive and judicial.

One of the most important provisions of the then valid Amend-ment LX to the Constitution of the Socialist Republic of Bosniaand Herzegovina was that it gave a new definition of Bosnia andHerzegovina which was, in addition to the referendum, the basic

104

legal argument for international recognition of Bosnia andHerzegovina. In it, Bosnia and Herzegovina is defined as a �demo-cratic sovereign state of equal citizens, peoples of B&H - Mos-lems, Serbs and Croats, and members of other peoples and ethnicitiesliving in it�. This was a permanent definition of constitutional rela-tions within Bosnia and Herzegovina and its relations with statesaround it.

In view of the population structure, Bosnia and Herzegovinawas making such moves in order not to contribute to further dete-rioration of political relations in Yugoslavia. On the contrary, itsintention was to ensure that the problems are resolved in a demo-cratic way, through mechanisms provided by the SFRY Constitu-tion. However, in its Memorandum (Letter of Intention) of 14 Oc-tober 1991, it presented clearly its political position in the event ofdissolution of Yugoslavia: �Bosnia and Herzegovina will not ac-cept any constitutional arrangement of a future Yugoslav commu-nity which would exclude either Serbia or Croatia.� It explainedsuch a stand by the existing ethnic structure of its population andthe equidistance in relation to both countries (�Official Gazette ofSRB&H�, No. 32, 16 October 1991).

In the meantime, the international community organised a Con-ference on Yugoslavia, in order to assist in resolving political rela-tions among its republics in the process of dissolution of Yugosla-via. In order to facilitate the dissolution and to keep it under con-trol, at a meeting of the Council of Ministers of the EU in Brusselson 16 December 1991, the EU and its member states passed a Dec-laration on Yugoslavia and a Declaration on Guidelines for Recog-nition of States in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union.

105

REPUBLIC OF BOSNIA ANDHERZEGOVINA

24. The Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina submitted arequest for recognition of sovereignty and independence on De-cember 20, 1991. The Decision expressed a desire to recogniseB&H �as an independent state� and that B&H �excepts all the ob-ligations� contained in the Guidelines. Also, that B&H �exceptsthe Hague Conventions Draft, including Chapter II, referring toprotection of human rights of national and ethnic groups�. In itsdecision, the Government included results of the recent census(1991): Croats 17.27%, Moslems (Bosniaks) 43.74% and Serbs31..33%, Yugoslavs 5.51% and 2.15 of members of other ethnicgroups. The Government believed that �the issue of relations amongYugoslav republics should be resolved peacefully�. Then they con-firmed their obligation that �B&H does not have nor will it haveany territorial pretensions towards any of its neighbouring statesand it will not engage itself in any propaganda against any of itsneighbouring states�. It thus appealed to the European Communityand its member states to �recognise the sovereignty and indepen-dence of Bosnia and Herzegovina� (46).

With its decision of 8 January 1992, the Government of SRB&Haccepted and committed itself to applying the UN Charter, theHelsinki Final Document, the Paris Charter, the Universal Decla-ration on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil andPolitical Rights and all other international documents guarantee-ing human rights and freedoms, and to respecting earlier SFRYcommitments regarding disarmament and arms control. The Com-mission further stated:

* The current SR B&H Constitution guarantees equal rights to�peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina - Moslems, Serbs, Croats -and members of other peoples and ethnic groups living in its terri-tory�.

106

* The current SR B&H Constitution guarantees the respect ofhuman rights, and the B&H authorities have submitted to the com-mission a list of laws in force, confirming those principles. In ad-dition, the Commission received assurances that the new Constitu-tion, under preparation at the moment, will give full guarantee ofhuman rights and freedoms.

The B&H authorities also gave assurances to the Commissionthat this country had no territorial aspirations towards neighbouringcountries and that it was willing to guarantee their territorial integ-rity. But it also requested that the new community contain at leastSerbia and Croatia, and that at the same time a convention be signedon the recognition of sovereignty of SR B&H within its existingborders. The SR B&H Presidency informed the Commission thatthis option would change nothing in relation to the request for rec-ognition of sovereignty of SR B&H.

Pursuant to the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, asmodified by Amendment LXVII, citizens realise their rights throughan assembly of representatives or in a referendum.

In the opinion of the Presidency and the Government of SR B&H,legal basis for the request for recognition is contained in Amend-ment LX, annexed to the Constitution of B&H on 31 July 1990.This Amendment prescribes that the Republic of Bosnia andHerzegovina is a �sovereign democratic state of equal citizens,peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina - Moslems, Serbs, Croats - andmembers of other peoples and ethnic groups living in its territory�.This Amendment was a significant novelty in comparison with theearlier legal status.

Additionally, outside the institutional framework of SR B&H,the �Serb people in Bosnia and Herzegovina� opted for a �commonYugoslav state� at a plebiscite on 10 November 1991, and on 21December 1991, the �Assembly of the Serb people in Bosnia andHerzegovina� adopted a resolution aimed at establishing a �SerbRepublic of Bosnia and Herzegovina� within a federal state of Yu-goslavia, if Moslem and Croat communities in Bosnia andHerzegovina were to decide to �change their stand on Yugoslavia�.

107

On 9 January 1992, that assembly declared independence of the�Serb Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina�.

Under the circumstances, the Arbitration Commission found thatthe expression of will of the population of B&H to establish SRB&H as a sovereign and independent state is to be verified via areferendum, with an invitation for participation by all the citizensof SR B&H with no prejudice and under international control.

25. Decision on referendum for sovereign and independentBosnia and Herzegovina. Following the opinion of the ArbitrationCommission, the SR B&H Assembly passed a Decision on callinga referendum, planning it for 29 February and 1 March 1992. Thereferendum question was: Are you in favour of a sovereign andindependent Bosnia and Herzegovina, a state of equal citizens,peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina - Moslems, Serbs and Croatsand all other peoples living in it?

Results of the referendum were presented on 6 March 1992. Ofthe total number of 3,253,847 voters, 2,073,568 eligible voters, i.e.64.31% voted - 1,989,786 according to general voters lists and83,535 according to certificates of entry into the general voters list.

There were 2,067969 valid ballot papers, i.e. 64.14%. Of thetotal number, 2,061,932 were �IN FAVOUR�, i.e. 94.44%, and6,037, i.e. 0.29% were against. There were 5,227, i.e. 0.25% in-valid ballot papers.

Therefore, out of the total number (2.073,568) of citizens whocaste their vote at the republic�s referendum for determining thestatus of Bosnia and Herzegovina on February 29 and March 1,1992, 2.061,932 citizens, i.e. 99.44% stated that they were in favourof a sovereign and independent Bosnia and herzegovina, a state ofequal citizens, peoples of bosnia and herzegovina - moslems, serbs,croats and members of other peoples who live in it.

26. Right to self-determination and the issue of state borders.Since the process of dissolution of Yugoslavia became unstoppable,the Republic of Serbia tried to influence this process indirectly,through diplomatic channels, by presenting different issues beforethe Arbitration Commission. One of the issues was if the Serb peoplein Bosnia and Herzegovina had the right to self-determination,

108

and the other issue referred to state borders, i.e. could the internalborders of republics be considered state borders. The Commissionresponded that the republics must offer to members of those com-munities and ethnic groups all the guarantees of internationallyrecognised human rights and fundamental freedoms, including, insuch a case, the right to chose citizenship.

The Commission found that, irrespective of circumstances, theright to self-determination may not lead to a change of borders inexistence at the time of recognition of independence (uti possidetisjuris), unless otherwise agreed by the states concerned. In relationto internal borders between Croatia and Serbia and between Serbiaand B&H, the Commission found that in terms of international pub-lic law, in case of independence, these borders were to assume thecharacter of borders protected under international law, and couldbe changed only through an mutual agreement (Opinion No. 3).

If there are, within a state, one or several constituent groups,one or several ethnic, religious or linguistic communities, pursuantto international law, these groups have a right to recognition oftheir identity. States are obliged to ensure respect of the rights ofminorities. In relation to this, the Commission found that the Serbpopulation of B&H was to enjoy the rights recognised as rights ofminorities in the relevant international conventions, as well as na-tional guarantees pursuant to principles of international law. Theright to self-determination is the principle of protection of humanrights. On that basis, any individual may request freedom of ex-pression of his or her affiliation with an ethnic, religious or linguis-tic community of choice. According to the Commission, the Serbpopulation of B&H and Croatia was to enjoy all the rights of mi-norities and ethnic groups as recognised by international law, andprovisions of the Draft Convention for Peace in Yugoslavia of 4November 1991. The Republics, if needed, were to recognise theirright to national determination, which does not equal national self-determination.

As for borders, the Commission found that problems of borderswere to be resolved pursuant to the following criteria:

109

First - external borders were to be respected in all cases, pursu-ant to the principle recalled in the UN Charter, the declaration re-ferring to the international law principle in reference to amicableco-operation between states, pursuant to the UN General Assem-bly Resolution 2625 (XXXV), and pursuant to the Helsinki FinalDocument (1975), recalled in Article 11 of the Vienna Conventionof 23 August 1978 on succession of states on the basis of an agree-ment.

Second - demarcation line between Croatia and Serbia or be-tween Serbia and B&H, or between other neighbouring indepen-dent states, may be changed only through a free mutual agreement.

Third - unless agreed otherwise, former borders were to assumethe character of borders protected under international law. Thisconclusion is also a consequence of the principle of respect of theterritorial �status quo�. The principle is of general nature, as deliv-ered by the International Court of Justice (border dispute betweenBurkina Faso and the Republic of Mali, unchanged since 22 De-cember 1986, Volume for 1986, Paragraph 21, p. 565). This prin-ciple is aimed at preventing conflicts which may endanger inde-pendence and stability of new states.

This principle was even easier to apply to Yugoslav republics -it was decided, pursuant to Paragraphs 2 and 4 of Article 5 of theSFRY Constitution that the consistence of territories and republicsmay not be changed without their consent (Opinion No. 3).

27. Dates for succession of newly independent states. In accor-dance with the generally accepted definition contained in the 1978and 1983 Vienna Conventions on the succession of states, �date ofsuccession of states� is the date when a successor state replacedthe predecessor state in its commitment in international relationsof territories the succession relates to.

The predecessor state, Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia(SFRY) ceased to exist and, as found by the Arbitration Commis-sion in its Opinion No. 9, no successor state may claim to be theonly continuous state.

Second, cessation of SFRY, contrary to other recently dissolvedstates (USSR, Czechoslovakia), was not a result of agreement of

110

parties concerned, but rather of a process of disintegration which,according to the Commission, stated on 29 November 1991, whenthe Commission issued its Opinion No. 1, and ended on 4 July1992, when it issued its Opinion No. 8.

The Arbitration Commission was aware of all the practical prob-lems that could have arisen from more than one date of succession,due to a long and slow process of dissolution of SFRY. One of theimplications was that different dates would be applied to transferof state property, archives, debts and other rights and interests, toseveral states successors of SFRY. However, the states were free toresolve difficulties that may have followed the application by con-cluding agreements to allow a just outcome.

In relation to this, the Arbitration Commission found that thedates of creation of states succeeding SFRY were: 8 October 991for the Republic of Croatia and the Republic of Slovenia; 17 No-vember 1991 for the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia; 6March 1992 for the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and 27April 1992 for the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia andMontenegro). Unless the states concerned agree otherwise, thesewere the dates when state property, assets and various rights, ar-chives, debts and various commitments of SFRY were to be trans-ferred to successor states (Opinion No. 11, Paris, 16 July 1993).

28. International recognition of Bosnia and Herzegovina fol-lowed at a session of the EU Council of Ministers in Brussels on 6April 1992, effective on 7 April 1992. This detail was a conse-quence of a diplomatic objection from Belgrade, due to coincidencewith 6 April 1961, when the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was brokenfollowing an attack by Germany and its allies.

Once internationally recognised, B&H was formally no longera part of SFRY. It thus became and independent subject of interna-tional law. Political and administrative borders of the republic asone of six federal units of SFRY became international state bor-ders, and SFRY became a former state. With its dissolution, formerfederal units regained their sovereignty, which they had transferredto the federal state when they entered a Democratic Federal Yugo-slavia, at the Second Session of AVNOJ on 29 November 1943. On

111

27 April 1992, Serbia and Montenegro entered the third Yugosla-via and passed a new constitution. Thus the state of Bosnia andHerzegovina, without changing its former borders, borders withYugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) in the east, with Croatia inthe west and south-west, and in the north shares with Croatia theriver Sava, which became an international river.

As the aggression of Serbia and Montenegro and former JNAagainst B&H started, on 8 April 1992 the Presidency passed a De-cision on declaration on the state of immediate threat of war, thusexpanding the Presidency, pursuant to the B&H Constitution, toPresidents of the Assembly, the Government, and the Commanderof the Territorial Defence. The Presidency was thus authorised topass decrees and decide on appointments or removals, or be con-firmed by the Assembly as soon as it could be called (47).

At the same session, the Presidency changed the name of So-cialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina into the new name ofthe state: �Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina�. It then organiseda new Territorial Defence Staff, appointed new command and con-firmed the official interim emblem of the Territorial Defence mem-bers: the old Bosnian emblem in form of a blue shield cut by awhite diagonal line with three golden fleur-de-lis on each of thesides of the shield.

The Presidency then passed a Decree on succession and appli-cation of former SFRY laws and their application in B&H as lawsof the Republic. A selection was made from laws on economy, fi-nance, agriculture, forestry and water resources, traffic and com-munications, foreign economic relations and international relations,state administration, internal affairs, judiciary, health, labour rela-tions, pension and health insurance, social and child care, veteransand invalids protection, education, science, culture, sports, etc.Through a separate Decree, the Presidency selected laws not to beapplied, as well as application regulations (�Official Gazette ofRB&H�, No. 2, 11 April 1992). Throughout the aggression, thePresidency continued to pass Decrees, until the normal functioningof the Assembly was re-established, with the end of the state ofwar and the state of immediate threat of war.

112

Through a special Decree, the Presidency decided on the provi-sional emblem and flag of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.The emblem was the old Bosnian emblem in form of a blue shieldcut by a white diagonal line with three golden fleur-de-lis on eachof the sides of the shield. The flag was a white rectangle with theemblem in the middle, in a 1:2 ratio (�Official Gazette of RB&H�,No. 4, 20 May 1992). A special Decree defined the use of the em-blem and the flag (�Official Gazette of RB&H�, No. 15, 5 Septem-ber 1992).

In order to establish diplomatic and consular relations betweenB&H and other states, the Presidency ratified relevant internationalconventions.

After the aggressor had occupied 70% of the territory, killedover 40 thousand people, forcefully displaced approximately onemillion 400 thousand persons, detained over 60 thousand in con-centration camps, and continued to destroy systematically differ-ent civilian, economic, religious and other facilities, and startingfrom the right to defence as recognised under international law, aslate as on 20 June 1992, i.e. two months after the aggression hadstarted, the Presidency passed a decision declaring a state of war.This act of aggression had been confirmed by the UN Security Coun-cil, in Resolution 752 of 18 May 1992. The Presidency stated theaggressor: Republic of Serbia, Republic of Montenegro, YugoslavPeople�s Army and the SDS terrorists.

Bosnia and Herzegovina resisted the aggression decisively, andthroughout the most horrific combat activities and genocide againstits population, it continued to work towards preservation oflegitimity and legality of its institutions. And it succeeded. Legiti-mate bodies of Bosnia and Herzegovina: Assembly, Presidency,Government and courts, all continued their work with existing lawsand constitution, and the political system functioned in a state ofwar. These institutions, working in accordance with the constitu-tion and in conditions of war, continued to work until peace inBosnia and Herzegovina was established in Dayton on November21, 1995, and signed in Paris on December 14, 1995.

113

Pursuant to the peace agreement, the Republic of Bosnia andHerzegovina continued to exist as the state of Bosnia andHerzegovina. Thus B&H continued to exist as a sovereign and in-dependent state, maintaining its status under international law, andwith relations with other states and membership in internationalorganisations. Its Constitution, an integral part of the peace agree-ment (Annex IV) provides that Bosnia and Herzegovina is to re-main within its internationally recognised borders, that it may notbe divided into ethnic groups, and that each Bosnian is to feel athome anywhere in its territory .

114

115

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

29. The State of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Pursuant to the peaceagreement, the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina continued toexist as the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Thus B&H continuedto exist as a sovereign and independent state, maintaining its statusunder international law, and with relations with other states andmembership in international organisations. Its Constitution, an in-tegral part of the peace agreement (Annex IV) provides that Bosniaand Herzegovina is to remain within its internationally recognisedborders, that it may not be divided into ethnic groups, and that eachBosnian is to feel at home anywhere in its territory (48).

The fact that Annex IV contains the Constitution of Bosnia andHerzegovina as the most significant legal document illustrates itsimportance in preservation of the state of Bosnia and Herzegovinaand in stabilisation of post-war political situation, fit full respectand legal protection of human rights and freedoms of each indi-vidual citizen.

Structure of the Constitution is: the Preamble, general provi-sions on Bosnia and Herzegovina, provisions on human rights, pro-visions determining competences and relations of institutions ofBosnia and Herzegovina and those of its entities, provisions defin-ing bodies of authority of Bosnia and Herzegovina, their composi-tion and competences, and provisions dealing with procedure ofamendments to the Constitution, interim provisions and Annexes Iand II as integral parts of the Constitution of Bosnia andHerzegovina.

Particular importance is attached to the provision in the Consti-tution of Bosnia and Herzegovina prescribing an obligation of bothentities to reconcile their respective constitutions with the Consti-tution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as to establish constitu-tional control to be carried out by the Constitutional Court of Bosniaand Herzegovina, especially regarding uniformity of constitutionsand laws of the entities with the Constitution of Bosnia and

116

Herzegovina. These provisions give rise to optimism regarding pres-ervation of an integral, sovereign and independent state of Bosniaand Herzegovina as a subject in international law and a memberstate of many organisations, such as the UN, OSCE, etc.

Bosnia and Herzegovina is at the door of European politicalintegration and NATO Partnership for Peace, and it remains opentowards co-operation with all the states that wish to do so as wellas other international organisations, in further efforts in establish-ing peace.

117

SUMMARY

Ever since the �Land of Bosnia� was first mentioned in �Deadministrando imperio� by the Byzantine emperor ConstantinePorphirogenet in mid-X century, until today, Bosnia has passedthrough different forms of state and political forms of organisationof power and corresponding legal systems.

Bosnia has had centuries of tradition of blending differentcivilisations and cultures, synthesised in specific spirituality notto be found in its neighbours, Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro Thatis why they do not understand Bosnia and continue to exercise vio-lence against it. It is its specific spirituality that makes the Bosniansociety specific and indivisible political community and state. Thatis what has helped it survive.

In late VI and early VII centuries, Avars and Slavs found whatwas left of Illyrians and Romans in what is today Bosnian territory.Two hundred years of Avar political organisation left the namesban and zupan. This leads to an assumption that there had beenforms of public rule even prior to Porphirogenet�s mention of Bosnia,as there are insufficient sources for times earlier that the first men-tion of Bosnia as a banate in early XII century.

There were two forms of state organisation in medieval Bosnia:banate (until 1377) and kingdom (until 1463). Bosnia was an inde-pendent state in both forms. Bosnia reached its peak with BanStjepan II and King Tvrtko I. Medieval Bosnia was dominated bycustomary law. Written sources include international contracts, land-owners� charters and inscriptions on tombstones. There were nowritten laws.

With its fall under the Ottoman Empire in 1463, Bosnia wasterritorially organised into sanjaks within the Rumeliyabeglerbekluks. Even then, most of the Bosnian territory was withinthe Bosnian sanjak, and peripheral parts were organised within thesanjaks of Herzegovina, Zvornik and Klis.

118

Following 117 years of such arrangements, in 1580 Bosna wasestablished as a separate province (ayalet), in a territory coveringparts of neighbouring states as well. After the Karlovac peace treatyin 1699, the Bosnian ayalet was reduced to the territory of the XVcentury Bosnian kingdom. Establishment of the Bosnian ayalet inthe historical territory of Bosnia contributed to the preservation ofthe peoples� awareness of the political and cultural continuity ofBosnia with the medieval Bosnian state, preservation of its integ-rity and a later renewal of Bosnian statehood (1943).

In the first half of XIX century, political and historical circum-stances resulted in the establishment of the mutesafirluk ofHerzegovina (18330 and in 1866 the territory was unified into asingle Bosnian vilayet. Throughout the 415 years of the Ottomanrule in Bosnia, the country was administered by sanjakbeys subor-dinated to the beglerbey of Rumeliya, and when it became a sepa-rate Ottoman province (ayalet) it was administered by the Sultan�semissaries, the vezirs.

Specific legal and political status of Bosnia under the Ottomanswas the consequence of its frontier character, conversion to Islamof a large part of its population who called themselves Bosnians ofdifferent religions, and the existence of kapetaniyas.

The Ottoman legal system in force in Bosnia at the time con-sisted of sharia law (Qur�an and hadis) and state (sultan�s) law, i.e.,canonic law defining relations not covered or covered incompletelyby the sharia law. Towards the end of the Ottoman rule, in additionto the sharia ones, civil legal institutions and laws were established.

In the 1878-1918 period, Bosnia and Herzegovina had a suigeneris legal existence. There was a forma Ottoman sovereigntyover it, and actual administration was executed by the Austro-Hun-garian Empire, with the consent of Europe and Turkey.

Annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1908 was an illegaltake-over of sovereignty from the Ottomans by the Austro-Hun-garians, in breach of the Berlin treaty. In order to legitimise theannexation, the Austro-Hungarian Empire bought the rights overBosnia and Herzegovina from Turkey for two million pounds ster-ling, thus turning it into a colony. Throughout that time, Bosnia

119

and Herzegovina remained outside the Austro-Hungarian constitu-tional structure.

The 1910 Constitution and the Assembly imposed by the em-peror never changed the dependent status of Bosnia. Due to thefact that Bosnia was ruled by the crown, i.e. never divided betweenAustria and Hungary, Bosnia and Herzegovina maintained its in-tegrity within its historical borders.

During the Austro-Hungarian rule, the Roman law based legalsystem of the Empire was in force. A set of regulations was passedfor and applied in Bosnia only. Despite the 1910 Constitution andits own Assembly, Bosnia never had an autonomous right to passits own laws. At the time, Bosnian Moslems applied sharia law inmatters of inheritance and family relations.

Together with other South Slavic states under the Austro-Hun-garian rule, Bosnia and Herzegovina took part in the creation of theSHS state, which was actually in existence less than two months (6October to the end of November 1918), and which, together withthe Kingdom of Serbia established a new community, the Kingdomof SHS, on 1 December 1918. Thanks to Article 35 of the VidovdanConstitution, Bosnia preserved its territorial integrity within itshistorical borders under the Austro-Hungarian rule. It enjoyed ele-ments of autonomy with a seat in Sarajevo until the final establish-ment of centralist government of the new state. From the 1918 uni-fication until 1929, it can be said that Bosnia with its six regionaladministrations functioned in a legitimate constitutional system.

In 1929, for the first time since 1463, the dictatorship of KingAlexander broke the territorial integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovinaby dividing it into four regions, each including territories of itsneighbours. This broke the Bosnian political space in its historicalborders, with the intention of ensuring that Bosniaks would not bea majority in any of the regions. In its thousand years, this was themost severe blow against Bosnia as a single political and territorialunit. The next blow was the Cvetkovic-Macek agreement of 26August 1939, which was a division of Bosnia and Herzegovinabetween Serbia and Croatia at the expense of Bosniaks. This agree-

120

ment never passed the parliamentary procedure due to the out-break of World War II, and it is officially considered non-existent.

As a forceful unitary state between 1929 and 1945, the King-dom of Yugoslavia was an illegal creation of the 1931 Constitutionwith an improvised legal system created by the use of force andpolitical blackmail of the court. It was therefore possible for thepolitical regime to be completely irresponsible in relation to Bosniaand Herzegovina and Bosniaks.

Due to political changes in 1941 and active participation of allthe three Bosnian peoples in the 1941-1945 Peoples� LiberationMovement, and their decision to establish a new Yugoslavia on afederal principle, after 480 years, Bosnia and Herzegovina renewedits statehood and the First Session of ZAVNOBIH in Varcar Vakuf(Mrkonjic Grad) on 25 November 1943. Four days later, at the Sec-ond Session of AVNOJ on 29 November, representatives of all threeBosnian peoples conveyed the ZAVNOBIH decision that Bosniaand Herzegovina was to be a constituent part of the new Demo-cratic Federal Yugoslavia as one of six equal federal units.

At the time no decisions were made on the political arrange-ments in the new state. After the elections (11 November), and thesession of the Constitutional Assembly on 29 November 1945, itwas decided that Yugoslavia was to be defined as a �federal peoples�republic�. Thus, Bosnia and Herzegovina as a federal unit had arepublic administration. As a state, together with other federal unitsand with full political legitimity, Bosnia and Herzegovina partici-pated in the administration of the new federal state as the subject ofstate sovereignty and international law.

A more intensive introduction of elements of social ideologyinto its internal arrangements, and especially the introduction ofworkers� self-management, resulted in a transformation of Bosniaand Herzegovina from a peoples� republic into a socialist republicarrangement, dominated by a one-party system, same as in the pre-vious �peoples� republic� system.

Socialist legal system consisted of state and self-managementlaw. This system was build in the joint federal parliament and gov-

121

ernment, and it subordinated state bodies of B&H to the federalones in issues within the federal state competence. There was, how-ever, considerable �republic� and �self-management� legislation,especially in the fields of economy and services, allowing for theexpression of specific features of Bosnian and Herzegovina andfor self-management of local communities, companies and institu-tions.

An attempt to create such state community whereby Bosnia andHerzegovina, along with other federal units, could have more au-tonomy and could reach all the federal level decisions by consen-sus, as provided by the 1974 Constitution, failed as a lasting solu-tion, which is why Yugoslavia dissolved in 1991/1992. Thus, afterlosing its independence in 1463, 529 years later, on 6 April 1992,Bosnia and Herzegovina was again internationally recognised aspolitically independent and sovereign state, and it assumed its fullstatus of subject of international law.

Subsequent political, social and economic changes eliminatedthe socialist features from its organisation, thus eliminating the �so-cialist� pre-determiner from its name. The official name was �Re-public of Bosnia and Herzegovina�. The Dayton Agreement, singedin Paris on 14 December 1995, removed the attribute �republic�,and the official name of the state is just �Bosnia and Herzegovina�,consisting of two entities with a wide political autonomy.

The Peace Agreement guarantees territorial integrity of Bosniaand Herzegovina within its internationally recognised borders, statesovereignty exercised by state bodies, and the status of a subjectunder international law, as well as membership in internationalorganisations. The current legal system was created by the B&HConstitution (Annex IV of the Peace Agreement) supplemented by15 international conventions and treaties, with the status of a con-stitutional nor in the B&H legal system. The B&H legal systemincludes the legal systems of its entities, cantons and municipali-ties.

Since Bosnia and Herzegovina has a long historical and politi-cal tradition of regional organisation, the best option is to organiseit as a federation of cantons in its entire internationally recognised

122

territory, with no national denominators. That is why he currentdivision into entities should be seen as interim. The term Bosnia asa society and a state means an ethnically mixed population in itsentire territory, with full respect of national, civil and human rightsand freedoms. Without this, it would not be Bosnia as history knew it.

The colonial name of �Bosnia and Herzegovina�, created dur-ing the Austro-Hungarian rule should be changed, and our countryshould be given back its historical name - BOSNIA.

123

N O T E S:

1. Constantine Prophirogenet, O upravljanju carstvom, August Cesarec andAGM, Zagreb 1994, p. 92

2. Nada Klaic, Srednjevjekovna Bosna, Eminex, Zagreb 1994, pp. 5, 19, 20,21

3. Ante Babic, Iz istorije srednjevjekovne Bosne, Sarajevo 1972, p. 794. Mijuskovic, Vizantijski izvori IV, 1971, pp. 1-1065. Dinic, Historija naroda Jugoslavije I, pp.562, 5636. Smiciklas, Codex diplomaticus regni II, p. 24 and N.K. Srednjevjekovna

Bosna, p. 797. Srednjevjekovna Bosna, p. 1178. Ibid, pp. 124-1439. Iz problematike, Prilozi No. 14-15, Sarajevo 1978, p. 6410. Srednjevjekovna Bosna, p. 16011. Ibid, pp. 174-18012. Istrazivanja, p. 404-405, Srednjevjekovna Bosna, p. 18113. Istrazivanja, Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja BiH, st. XVIII, 1906, pp. 404-

40514. Srednjevjekovna Bosna, p.18215. Ibid, pp. 182, 18316. Ibid, p. 21517. Ibid, pp. 213, 21618. Ibid, pp. 248, 24919. Ibid, pp. 262-26420. Klaic, Poviest Bosne, pp. 193-19421. Pavao Andjelic, Ph.D., Barones regni i drzavno vijece srednjevjekovne

Bosne, Prilozi br. 11-12, Sarajevo 1975-197622. Sabanovic, Bosanski pasaluk, p. 3523. Ibid, p. 4924. Taken from ibid, pp. 77-78, 92-94, 229-23125. �Bosna i Herzegovina od najstarijih vremena do kraja drugog svjetskog

rata�, Sarajevo 199426. See Sabanovic, Bosanski pasaluk, pp. 77-81, 92-94, 229-231, 101, 109-

114, 95-98, 233-234, 88-91

124

27. See Avdo Suceska, Drzavnopravni razvitak Bosna i Herzegovine, Sarajevo1995; Halil Inaldzik, Osmansko carstvo, pp. 99-197

28. Imamovic, p. 15, note 17: This provision was considered secret, and thefirst to publish it was former French Minister of Foreign Affairs GabrielHanotaux in October 1908, Belgrade, �Delo� magazine 49/1908

29. Zivojin Peric, O pravnom polozaju Bosanaca i Hercegovaca u stranimdrzavama, Belgrade 1906, p. 31; M. Imamovic, Pravni polozaj i unutra-snjopoliticki razvitak BiH od 1878 do 1914, pp, 5, 15, 17, 18, 19, 23, 24

30. Peter Sugar, Industrialisation of Bosnia and Herzegovina 1878-1918,Seattle 1963

31. Dzevad Juzbasic, O nastavku paralelnog austrijskog i ugarskog zakona oupravljanju Bosnom i Hercegovinom iz 1880, Radovi ANUBiH,XXXI/1967

32. Thus, for example, at the 5th session of the Bosnian Parliament on August23, 1910, Dr. Jozo Sunaric filed a protest before the Land Governmentregarding the fact that Viennese professor Friedrich Tezner wrote in �DerKaiser� in 1909 that BiH was a colony. Stenograms, I/1910

33. Imamovic, Pravni sistem i zakonodavstvo Bosne i Hercegovine 1878-1914, Anali Pravnog fakulteta u Beogradu, No. 1-3/1972; Laszlo Szalay,Bosznia et Hercegovina, Magyar Gofi Lexikon, II ,Budapest 1899, p. 255;Vojislav Bogicevic, Aneksija Bosne i Hercegovine i jugoslovenskopitanje, Historijski pregled, No. 4/1959, p. 337; Content of the annexationdiscussions was also published by H. Kapidzic in Glasnk arhiva i Drustvaarhivista BiH, IV-V/1964, pp. 133-188; Imamovic, Pravni polozaj i..., pp.27-36; See Imamovic, Pravni sistem i zakonodavstvo Bosne iHerzegovine, pp. 245-246

34. Ferdo Culinovic, Ph.D. Dokumenti, pp. 118, 11935. Ferdo Sisic, Dokumenti, p. 28036. Vojnoistorijski institut, Belgrade, Fond NDH, No. 85-38/14-1; Zbornik

NOR-a, Vol. IV, book 2, p. 213; Josip Broz Tito, Borba narodaJugoslavije, Zbornik NOR-a, Vol. II, book 12, p. 330; Arhiv Savezakomunista BiH, Vol. III, Istorijsko odjeljenje CK SK BiH, Sarajevo 1952,p. 12; 1941 u istoriji naroda Bosne i Hercegovine, Veselin Maslesa,Sarajevo 1973, p. 166; Peti kongres KPJ, Kultura, Belgrade, 1984

37. Pero Moraca, NOP u Bosni i Hercegovini u vrijeme osnivanjaZAVNOBIH-a, Prilozi, No. 4, p. 247

38. Avdo Humo, Narodnooslobodilacka borba u Bosni i Hercegovini i AVNOJ- 1942-1943, Rad, Belgrade 1974; ZAVNOBIH, Vol. I, pp. 58-69; HasanBrkic, U matici zivota, Svjetlost, Sarajevo, pp. 37-81; RodoljubColakovic, Izabrani govori i clanci, Vol. I, Svjetlost, Sarajevo 1960, pp.47-192, 197-211

125

39. Prvo i Drugo zasjedanje AVNOJ-a, pp. 208. 231-24240. ZAVNOBIH, Vol. I, pp. 170-171, 233-234, 23741. Ibid, Vol. II, pp. 321, 483-48742. Sluzbeni list NR BiH, No. 8/46, 46/4643. Compare: Drago Borovcanin, Ph.D, Izgradnja bosanskohercegovacke

drzavnosti u uslovima NOR-a, Svjetlost, Sarajevo 1979, pp. 80-26844. Compare: Lukic-Grebo, Osnovi pravnog sistema SFRJ, pp. 257-26245. Amendments to the SR B&H Constitution, July 31, 199046. Sluzbeni list SR BiH, December 23, 199147. Sluzbeni list R B&H, No. 1, 9 April, 199248. Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Annex IV, General Framework

Peace Agreement for Bosnia and Herzegovina, December 14, 1995

126

127

Sadr`aj - Contents

PREDGOVOR .................................................................................................. 5U V O D ........................................................................................................ 7BANOVINA BOSNA .......................................................................................... 9KRALJEVSTVO BOSNA ................................................................................... 13OSMANSKI AJALET BOSNA ............................................................................. 15AUSTROUGARSKI CORPUS SEPARATUM............................................................ 21BOSNA U DR@AVI SHS .................................................................................. 27BOSNA U KRALJEVINI SHS ............................................................................. 29BOSNA U KRALJEVINI JUGOSLAVIJI ................................................................. 31FEDERALNA BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA ............................................................... 33NARODNA REPUBLIKA BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA ................................................. 35SOCIJALISTI^KA REPUBLIKA BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA ......................................... 37REPUBLIKA BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA ................................................................ 43DR@AVA BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA ..................................................................... 53R E Z I M E .................................................................................................. 55N A P O M E N E .......................................................................................... 61

PREFACE ..................................................................................................... 67INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 69BANATE OF BOSNIA ...................................................................................... 71THE KINGDOM OF BOSNIA ............................................................................ 75THE OTTOMAN AYALET OF BOSNIA .................................................................. 77THE AUSTRO-HUNGARIAN CORPUS SEPARATUM ................................................ 83BOSNIA WITHIN THE STATE OF SERBS, CROATS AND SLOVENES.......................... 89BOSNIA IN THE KINGDOM OF SERBS, CROATS AND SLOVENES ........................... 91BOSNIA IN THE KINGDOM OF YUGOSLAVIA ...................................................... 93FEDERAL BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA .............................................................. 95PEOPLES' REPUBLIC OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA ......................................... 97SOCIALIST FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA ........................... 99

128

REPUBLIC OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA ..................................................... 105BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA......................................................................... 115S U M M A R Y .......................................................................................... 117N O T E S .................................................................................................. 123

129

DO SADA OBJAVLJENO

BIBLIOTEKA �TRIBINA�

1. POGLED NA DRU[TVENO I POLITI^KO ORGANIZIRANJE BO[NJAKA -MUSLIMANA , prof.dr. Kemal Hrelja, Alija Isakovi}, Fikret Muslimovi}

2. ORGANIZIRANOST, STRUKTURA MO]I I DR@AVOTVORNOST BOSANSKIHMUSLIMANA, prof.dr. Kemal Hrelja, dr. Tarik Dizdarevi}, prof.dr. Mujo Slatina

3. MASS-MEDIJI DANAS I SUTRA, prof.dr. Emina Ke~o, Had�em Hajdarevi},Mufid Memija, Kemal Mufti}, Asim Gruhonji}

4. MIROVNI PREGOVORI I INTERESI BOSANSKIH MUSLIMNA,Prof.dr. Omer Ibrahimagi}

5. AGRESIJA NA R BiH I ODBRANA DR@AVE, Ned�ad Ugljanin, Jusuf Ja{arevi},Vehbija Kari}, Rifat Bilajac, Asim Gruhonji}

6. ISLAMSKA CIVILIZACIJA I BOSANSKI MUSLIMANI, prof.dr. Jusuf @iga

7. HISTORIJSKA BIT NACIJE,prof.dr. Mustafa Imamovi}, prof.dr. Jusuf @iga

8. ODBRANA ZEMLJE I BORA^KA ZA[TITA,Hamdija Had�ihasanovi}, brig. general Munib Bisi}

9. ANTIISLAMSKI SINDROM KAO FAKTOR DESTRUKCIJE BOSNE IHERCEGOVINE, dr. Halid ^au{evi}

10. INFORMIRANJE U NOVIM UVJETIMA, Asim Gruhonji}, Arif Zuli}

11. KAKO SARAJEVO PRE@IVLJAVA DA BI @IVJELO,[efkija Okeri}, dr. Tarik Kupusovi}

12. BOSANSKI MUSLIMANI I FEDERACIJA BiH, prof.dr. Ibrahim Bu{atlija,Edib Bukvi}, prof.dr. Kasim Begi}, doc.dr. [a}ir Filandra

13. PRILOG SOCIJALNO PSIHOLO[KOM RAZUMIJEVANJU AGRESIJE NA R BiH,dr. Mujo Slatina

14. NACIONALNO I NACIONALISTI^KO, dr. Tarik Dizdarevi}

15. SRPSKO GRA\ANSKO VIJE]E I BUDU]NOST R BiH,dr. Mirko Pejanovi}, dr. Halid ^au{evi}, prof.dr. Omer Ibrahimagi}

16. AGRESIJA I GENOCID - FALSIFIKAT I REVIZIJA,prof.dr. ]azim Sadikovi}

17. NOVI SVJETSKI POREDAK I BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA - NEW WORLD ORDERAND BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA, dr. Irfan Ljubijanki}

18. FEDERACIJA PROJEKCIJA BUDU]NOSTI BiH - BUDU]NOST BOSNE IHERCEGOVINE KAO STJECI[TA CIVILIZACIJA, prof.dr. Ivo Kom{i},prof.dr. Zdravko San~evi}

130

19. SUKCESIJA ex- SFRJ, dr. D�evad Dervi{kadi}

20. POVIJESNA PLJA^KA ZEMALJSKOG OD STRANE NEBESKOG NARODA,dipl. ing. Ned�ad Aganovi}

21. CENTRALNA BANKA I MONETARNI SISTEM R BiH,doc. dr. Enver Backovi}

22. BO[NJA^KI MEMENTO, prof.dr. Hajrudin Numi}

23. STRANA ULAGANJA U REPUBLICI BOSNI I HERCEGOVINI,Tufik Burnazovi}

24. AGRESIJA I PROPAGANDA, prof.dr. Muhamed Nuhi}

25. PRAVNI OSNOVI NESTANKA SFRJ, dr. Halid ^au{evi}

26. ROY GUTMAN �SVJEDOK GENOCIDA� PROMOCIJA - ROY GUTMAN �AWITNESS TO GENOCIDE� PROMOTION

27. BITKA ZA NAFTU ISLAMSKIH ZEMALJA, prof.dr. Muris Osmanagi}

28. O BOSANSKOM JEZIKU, prof.dr. Senahid Halilovi}

29. ZLO^INCI PRED HA[KIM SUDOM, Sead Hod�i}

30. KORELACIJA VJERE I NACIJE, prof.dr. Ibrahim Baki}

31. AGRESIJA NA REPUBLIKU BOSNU I HERCEGOVINU I BOSANSKA KRAJINA,Muhamed Be{i}

32. RAZVOJNE I @IVOTNE DILEME SARAJEVA, prof.dr. Midhat Aganovi}

33. PRAVO NA SAMOOPREDJELJENJE, Mustafa Resulovi}

34. BOSNA I �GLOBALNI BALKAN� , Muhamed Be{i}

35. JUBILEJ I KRIZA UJEDINJENIH NACIJA, Mustafa Resulovi}

36. DAN DR@AVNOSTI REPUBLIKE BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE,prof.dr. Ejup Gani}, dr. Omer Ibrahimagi}, akademik Edhem ^amo

37. SJE]ANJE NA DR. IRFANA LJUBIJANKI]A, prof.dr. Ismet Dautba{i},Muhamed Be{i}

38. FEDERACIJA BiH USLOV REINTEGRACIJE BiH, Edhem Bi~ak~i}

39. AMERIKA I MIROVNO RJE[ENJE ZA BOSNU I HERCEGOVINU,prof.dr. Mirko Pejanovi}

40. MUSLIMANI IZME\U TRADICIJE I SUVREMENOSTI, mr. Adnan Silajd�i}

41. BOSNA U MIROVNOM PROCESU, prof.dr. Omer Ibrahimagi}

42. VOJNI ASPEKTI MIROVNOG SPORAZUMA ZA BOSNU I HERCEGOVINU,Armijski general Rasim Deli}

43. MOGU]A PROJEKCIJA BiH PREMA STAVOVIMA ZAPADA, Miro Lazovi}

44. ZNANJE I RAZVOJ BiH, prof.dr. Ismet Dizdarevi}

45. BO[NJACI U INOZEMSTVU, prof.dr. Enes Pelidija

131

46. ISLAM U SUVREMENOJ BOSNI - ISLAM IN CONTEMPORARY BOSNIA -prof.dr. Enes Kari}

47. FEDERACIJA BiH - NA PUTU REALIZACIJE, Kre{imir Zubak

48. IZBORNA PRAVILA ZA IZBORE U 1996. GODINI U BOSNI I HERCEGOVINI,prof.dr. Omer Ibrahimagi}

49. VJERSKI @IVOT I PRAVA U SAD, dr. Ned�ib [a}irbegegovi}

50. POLITI^KA DIMENZIJA ISLAMA, D�emaludin Lati}

51. SLOBODA I LJUDSKA ODGOVORNOST, prof.dr. Rasim Muminovi}

52. ISLAMSKO PRAVO I [ERIJATSKI SUDOVI, mr. Ibrahim D�anovi}

53. IZME\U MITA, PAM]ENJA I ZABORAVA, Hamza Bak{i}

54. BO[NJACI JU^E, DANAS I SUTRA, prof.dr. Ejup Gani}

55. PRIVREDNE PERSPEKTIVE BIH U MIRU, prof.dr. Kemal Hrelja

56. EGZISTENCIJA BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE KAO DR@AVE,doc.dr. Uzeir Bav~i}

57. SAVREMENA BO[NJA^KA POLITIKA, doc.dr. [a}ir Filandra

58. [UMARSTVO KAO FAKTOR RAZVOJA BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE,prof.dr. [ukrija [akovi}

59. KULTURA I MIROVNI SPORAZUM O BiH, prof.dr. Jusuf @iga

60. SAND@AK U SADO[NJOSTI I BUDU]NOSTI, prof.dr. Enes Pelidija

61. BO[NJACI I OP]A KULTURA, Alija Isakovi}

62. PROGRAMSKI CILJEVI BO[NJAKA U KULTURI, prof.dr. Munib Maglajli}

63. BOSNA , BO[NJACI I ISLAMSKI SVIJET, dr. Ismet Grbo

64. ME\UNARODNI SUDOVI I BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA, Alija Nuhbegovi}

65. TRADICIONALNI I FEMINISTI^KI ODGOJ BOSANSKO-HERCEGOVA^KIHMUSLIMANA - BO[NJAKA, Nusret Voloder

66. PRAVNI ASPEKTI INTEGRACIJE BiH, Sead Hod�i}

67. IZBORI 96 I REINTEGRACIJA BIH, Suad Arnautovi}

68. USTAVNO SUDSTVO I DEJTON, prof.dr. Ismet Dautba{i}

69. BO[NJA[TVO I BOSANSTVO, prof.dr. Hajrudin Numi}

70. BOSNA I AMERI^KI NACIONALNI INTERESI, Nerzuk ]urak

71. SVAKA POLITIKA JE LOKALNA, Suad Arnautovi}

72. MANIHEJSTVO, BOGUMILSTVO I ISLAM, Be}ir D�aka

73. ^EKA LI NAS VIJETANAMSKI SINDROM?, prof.dr. Jusuf @iga

74. INTELEKTUALCI I VRIJEME, prof.dr. Amir Pleho

75. KAKO @IVJETI ZAJEDNO?, fra Luka Marke{i}

76. PSIHOLO[KE POSLJEDICE AGRESIJE NA BiH, prof.dr. Ismet Dizdarevi}

132

77. BANJALU^KI BOJ 1737. GODINE U POVIJESTI BOSNE I BO[NJAKA,prof.dr. Enes Pelidija

78. DEMOKRACIJA I NACIONALNI INTERESI U BIH, Esad Zgodi}

79. BO[NJACI KOSOVA - POLO@AJ I IDENTITET, Skender R. Red�epagi}

80. ISLAM PRIJE DOLASKA OSMANLIJA U NA[IM KRAJEVIMA,[efko Omerba{i}

81. [EHIDI - SVJEDOCI VJERE, Muharem Omerdi}

82. POSTDAYTONSKA BiH I PROBLEM ZAPO[LJAVANJA, Mesud Sabitovi}

83. BEZBJEDNOST U DEMOKRATSKOJ BiH, Mehmed @ili}

84. ME\UNARODNA ZAJEDNICA I NESTALA LICA, Amor Ma{ovi}

85. PENZIJE U BOSNI I HERCEGOVINI IZME\U REALNOSTI I NOVIH IZAZOVA,Mustafa Memi}

86. MINE U BOSNI I HERCEGOVINI, Enes ^engi}MOGU]NOST HIRUR[KIH TRETMANA POVREDA DONJIH EKSTREMITETAPROUZROKOVANIH EKSPLOZIVNIM SREDSTVIMA,Faris Gavrankapetanovi}.

87. RASKR[]A PRIVREDNOG RAZVOJA BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE,Firdus Hamzagi}

88. ULOGA ILMIJE U ODBRANI BI]A BOSNE, Hafiz Halil ef. Mehti}

BIBLIOTEKA �ARABESKA�

1. ISLAM U BOSNI, dr. Mustafa Ceri}, Reisu-l-ulema

2. KRVAVA BOSANSKA ZBILJA, prof.dr. Jusuf @iga

3. ^OVJEK USPRAVNOG HODA

4. BO[NJACI U OSMANSKOJ DR@AVI , Ak. Avdo Su}eska

5. SAND@AK NA PUTU AUTONOMIJE

6. STANJE KULTURNOG BLAGA BiH

7. KRVAVA BOSANSKA ZBILJA - dopunjeno drugo izdanje,prof.dr. Jusuf @iga

8. DR@AVNOPRAVNI KONTINUITET BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE DOPRISAJEDINJENJA KRALJEVINI SHS, Zlatko Badrov

9. KNJI@EVNIK I MISLILAC ALIJA ISAKOVI]

133

BIBLIOTEKA �POSEBNA IZDANJA�

1. RATNI KONGRES BOSANSKOMUSLIMANSKIH INTELEKTUALACA,22 DECEMBAR 1992.

2. SVJEDOK GENOCIDA, Roy Gutman

3. PREGLED RADA 1992.-1994.

4. UZROCI, CILJEVI I RAZMJERE AGRESIJE NA BOSNU I HERCEGOVINU, 1991-1995. - CAUSES, OBJECTIVES AND EXTENT OF THE AGGRESSION AGAINSTBOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA 1991-1995.,prof.dr. Smail ^eki}

5. SAND@A^KO PITANJE - SANJAK QUESTION, prof.dr. [efkija ^eki}

6. CIJENA BOSNE, ~lanci, izjave i javni nastupi, 1992-1995.prof.dr. Ivo Banac

7. �ETNI^KO ^I[]ENJE �GENOCID ZA �VELIKU SRBIJU�priredio Tilman Zulch

8. HA[KI TRIBUNAL - THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL, prof.dr. Smail ^eki}

9. ORBITON I ORBITONSKI MODELI ELEMENTARNIH ^ESTICA, (STUDIJA),prof.dr. Hajrudin Numi}

10. PRAVO NA SAMOOPREDJELJENJE, POSEBNA STUDIJA Palestina,Ernast Petri}

11. PRIVLA^ENJE I TR@I[TE KAPITALA, - Tufik Burnazovi}

12. PAPA NA PUTU MIRA U BiH, mr. D�emaludin Lati}

13. DR@AVNOST I NEZAVISNOST BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE,prof.dr. Omer Ibrahimagi}

14. DR@AVLJANSTVO BiH - Hilmo Pa{i}

15. SLIKE SARAJEVA U ROMANU LEGENDA O ALI PA[I

16. PREGLED RADA 95-96

17. ME\UNARODNA HUMANITARNA AKTIVNOST I CIVILNO DRU[TVO - INTERNA-TIONAL HUMANITARIAN ACTIVITES AND CIVIL SOCIETY,dr. @arko Papi}

18. AGRESIJA NA BOSNU I HERCEGOVINU I NJEN OPSTANAK,Muhamed Vejzagi}

19. BO[NJACI U REPUBLICI HRVATSKOJ - BOSNIAKS IN THE REPUBLIC OFCROATIA, [emso Tankovi}

20. SADA[NJOST I POLITI^KA BUDU]NOST BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE - PRESENTAND POLITICAL FUTURE OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA,prof.dr. Mirko Pejanovi}

134

21. BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA I SVIJET, JU^ER, DANAS I SUTRA - BOSNIAHERZEGOVINA AND THE WORLD - YESTERDAY, TODAY AND TOMORROW,Husein @ivalj

22. USTAV I POLITIKA. Kritika etni~kih ustava i postrepubli~kog ustavotvorstva u Bosnii Hercegovini, Edin [ar~evi}

23. PJESNIKOV STRAH OD STVARNOSTI, TIlman Zulch

24. ZAPADNOEVROPSKI HERETICI I BOSANSKI BOGOMILI, Salih Jalimam

25. SVJETSKA BANKA I BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA - Im{ir Im{irevi}

26. PRIVATIZACIJA BH BUDU]NOST - Edhem Bi~ak~i}

27. BOSNA RASKRSNICA EVROPE - prof.dr. [efkija ^eki}

28. ODNOSI REPUBLIKE HRVATSKE, FEDERACIJE BIH, I BOSNE IHERCEGOVINE, U DUHU WASHINGTONSKIH I DAYTONSKIH SPORAZUMA,Darinko Bago

29. BOSNA I BO[NJACI U POLITICI I PRAKSI DR. FRANJE TU\MANA �BOSNEMORA NESTATI�

30. PARLAMENTARIZAM U BiH, Sead Hod�i}

31. RAT I MIR U BOSNI I HERCEGOVINI / WAR AND PEACE IN BOSNIA ANDHERZEGOVINA, Alija Izetbegovi}

32. BOSANCI EVROPEJCI - BOSNIANS EUROPEANS, Charles Crawford

33. SUPREMACIJA BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE NAD ENTITETIMA -SUPREMACY OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA OVER ITS ENTITIES,Prof.dr. Omer Ibrahimagi}

34. ORGANIZACIJA ISLAMSKE KONFERENCIJE I AGRESIJA NAR BIH 1992. - 1995., Alija Muminovi}

35. HRVATI I BOSNA I HERCEGOVINA, Drago Pilsel

36. LJUDSKA PRAVA U ISLAMU, HUMAN RIGHTS IN ISLAM,DIE MENSCHENRECHTE IM ISLAM, Sead Hod`i}

37. JEDNAKOST ME\U LJUDIMA TEMELJNA PRETPOSTAVKA ZA OSTVARIVANJESVIH DRUGIH LJUDSKIH PRAVA, Muharem Omerdi}

135

CIP - Katalogizacija u publikacijiNarodna i univerzitetska biblioteka Bosne i Hercegovine,Sarajevo

UDK 342(497.6)(091)

IBRAHIMAGI], Omer Dr`avno-pravni razvitak Bosne i Hercegovine =

Constitutional development of Bosnia andHerzegovina / Omer Ibrahimagi} ; [prijevod naengleski Amira Sadikovi}]. - Sarajevo : Vije}eKongresa bo{nja~kih intelektualaca, 1998. - 126str. ; 21cm. - (Biblioteka Posebna izdanja /Vije}e Kongresa bo{nja~kih intelektualaca, br.38)

Tekst na bos. i engl. jeziku

ISBN 9958-47-030-6

COBISS-ID 486150

Na osnovu ~lana 19. ta~ka 13. stav 2. Zakona o porezu na prometproizvoda i usluga ("Slu`bene novine Federacije BiH", broj 6/95 I 25/97),

na zahtjev VVVVVije}a Kongrea bo{nja~kih intelektualaca ije}a Kongrea bo{nja~kih intelektualaca ije}a Kongrea bo{nja~kih intelektualaca ije}a Kongrea bo{nja~kih intelektualaca ije}a Kongrea bo{nja~kih intelektualaca iz Sarajeva,broj: 01-194/98 od 29.07.1998. godine, Federalno ministarstvoobrazovanja, nauke, kulture i sporta daje MI[LJENJE da je knjiga"Dr`avnopravni razvitak Bosne i Hercegovine" autora prof.dr"Dr`avnopravni razvitak Bosne i Hercegovine" autora prof.dr"Dr`avnopravni razvitak Bosne i Hercegovine" autora prof.dr"Dr`avnopravni razvitak Bosne i Hercegovine" autora prof.dr"Dr`avnopravni razvitak Bosne i Hercegovine" autora prof.dr. Omera. Omera. Omera. Omera. Omera

Ibrahimagi}a, Ibrahimagi}a, Ibrahimagi}a, Ibrahimagi}a, Ibrahimagi}a, proizvod iz ~lana 19. ta~ka 13. Zakona o porezu na prometproizvoda i usluga na ~iji se promet ne pla}a porez na promet proizvoda.