GEOPOL ANALYSIS ON BiH STATE PROPERTY INCOMPATIBLE WITH CONSTITUTIONS AND INTERNATIONAL LAW

BANJA LUKA, JUNE 8 /SRNA/ – Claims made by the Center for Geopolitical Research /Geopol/ regarding a proposed legal framework on state property in BiH are contrary to the constitutions in force in BiH and to international conventions, the Republika Srpska Administration for Geodetic and Property-Legal Affairs /RUGIPP/ said.

In a statement, RUGIPP said that everything contained in the Geopol text titled "The Issue of State Property in BiH - A Geopolitical and Legal Analysis of Disagreements and a Proposal for a Sustainable Solution with Draft Legislative Amendments" is fully inconsistent with the Dayton Peace Accords and the Constitution of BiH, as well as with the constitutions of Republika Srpska and the Federation of BiH /FBiH/, including the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

According to Geopol's proposal, state property would be owned by BiH and classified into three categories based on its nature and purpose: strategic state property, functional public property and local development property, RUGIPP explained.

The proposal also envisages harmonization of entity legislation with the proposed legal framework within six months.

RUGIPP pointed out that under the Dayton Peace Accords, the territorial division was agreed in accordance with the "Geneva Principles" through Annex 2, the Agreement on the Boundary Between Republika Srpska and the Federation of BiH, whose Article 1 stipulates that the boundary between the two entities shall be as defined on the map attached to the agreement.

The administration further stressed that the Constitution of BiH does not prescribe that property belongs to BiH, nor does it provide BiH with constitutional jurisdiction over that issue.

"We emphasize that Article 12 of the Constitution of BiH requires the entities to amend their constitutions to ensure compliance with the Constitution of BiH. Republika Srpska did so, and its Constitution was harmonized with the Constitution of BiH in 2003," RUGIPP stated.

It reminded that Amendment 32 to Article 68 of the Constitution of Republika Srpska provides that the Republic regulates and ensures, among other things, property and contractual relations and the protection of all forms of ownership, while Article 70 stipulates that the National Assembly of Republika Srpska adopts laws and other regulations.

Based on these constitutional provisions, Republika Srpska has regulated ownership relations concerning all real estate on its territory since 1995, including formerly socially owned property, through the adoption of the Law on Property Rights and other legislation governing real estate.

FBiH regulated ownership relations in a similar, almost identical, manner through its own Law on Property Rights and related legislation.

The Law on Property Rights underwent constitutional review before both the Constitutional Court of Republika Srpska and the Constitutional Court of BiH, with its provisions, particularly transitional and final provisions, being found constitutional.

Should there be an attempt to regulate ownership relations concerning formerly socially owned property in a different manner, it would require amendments to the Constitution of BiH, the Dayton Peace Accords, the constitutions of Republika Srpska and FBiH, as well as the legal framework in Brčko District and all relevant legislation adopted under the existing constitutional arrangements, RUGIPP said.

Any such changes would jeopardize acquired rights of legal and natural persons who, under current constitutional and legal provisions, may own property in those territories.

In light of the above, it is legally absurd and entirely impossible to regulate changes in ownership relations concerning abolished social property across the territories of both entities through the proposed state property law.

Repealing all regulations, acts, and legal transactions concerning "state property" would invalidate an undefined number of legal provisions and raise uncertainty as to whether only individual provisions or entire laws would be repealed, while also introducing retroactive application of legislation.
The statement was signed by RUGIPP Director Dragan Stanković.