Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T00:57:30.999Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Of veto players and entity-voting: institutional gridlock in the Bosnian reform process

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Birgit Bahtić-Kunrath
Birgit Bahtić-Kunrath*
Affiliation:
Department for Political Science and Sociology, University of Salzburg, Austria
*
*Email: birgit.kunrath@sbg.ac.at
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Entity-voting in the Bosnian Parliamentary Assembly is a veto mechanism in Bosnia's consociational institutional setting and an important reason for the country's orientation towards the political status quo. An empirical analysis of the number and nature of adopted and rejected draft laws during the legislative period 2006–2010, embedded in George Tsebelis's veto player approach, leads to the conclusion that the veto players in the parliament – either delegates from Republika Srpska or delegates from the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina – have pushed the consociational system of checks and balances to its extremes. Entity-voting enables the veto players to “hijack” the parliament for their exclusionary ethnic interests and discourages cooperation and compromise between the veto players. Significant legislation, which in the present article is defined as legislation relevant for the European Partnership, faces severe obstacles to getting passed. In the light of these findings, the article discusses three policy implications: institutional redesign, a change of the actors, and an active role of the European Union for providing the actors with a realistically achievable goal which they equally share. This should reset the current calculus of self-interest and encourage cooperation between the veto players.

Keywords

Bosnia and Herzegovinaveto playersentity-votingconsociationalismEuropean Partnership
Type
Articles
Information
Nationalities Papers , Volume 39 , Issue 6 , November 2011 , pp. 899 - 923
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 Association for the Study of Nationalities 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aitken, Rob. “Cementing Divisions? An Assessment of the Impact of International Interventions and Peace-Building Policies on Ethnic Identities and Divisions.” Policy Studies 28 (2007): 247–67. Print.Google Scholar
Belloni, Roberto. “Bosnia: Dayton is Dead! Long Live Dayton!” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 15 (2009): 355–75. Print.Google Scholar
Belloni, Roberto. “European Integration and the Western Balkans: Lessons, Prospects and Obstacles.” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 11 (2009): 313–31. Print.Google Scholar
Belloni, Roberto. “Peacebuilding and Consociational Electoral Engineering in Bosnia and Herzegovina.” International Peacekeeping 11 (2004): 334–53. Print.Google Scholar
Belloni, Roberto. State Building and International Intervention in Bosnia. London: Routledge, 2007. Print.Google Scholar
Bieber, Florian. “Constitutional Reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Preparing for EU Accession.” European Policy Centre. Policy Brief, April 2010. Web. 6 June 2011. <http://www.epc.eu/pub_details.php?cat_id=3&pub_id=1087&year=2010>..>Google Scholar
Bieber, Florian. “Local Institutional Engineering: A Tale of Two Cities, Mostar and Brcko.” Peace Without Politics? Ten Years of International State-Building in Bosnia. Ed. David Chandler. London: Routledge, 2006: 114–27. Print.Google Scholar
Bieber, Florian, and Keil, Sören. “Power-Sharing Revisited: Lessons Learned in the Balkans?” Review of Central and East European Law 34 (2009): 337–60. Print.Google Scholar
Bose, Sumantra. “The Bosnian State a Decade after Dayton.” Peace Without Politics? Ten Years of International State-Building in Bosnia. Ed. David Chandler. London: Routledge, 2006: 16–29. Print.Google Scholar
Bosnia and Herzegovina. Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Version 2006. Web. 1 Feb. 2010.Google Scholar
Bosnia and Herzegovina. The General Framework Agreement. Web. 1 Feb. 2010.Google Scholar
Bosnia and Herzegovina. Rules of Procedure Council of Ministers of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Version 2007. Web. 1 Feb. 2010.Google Scholar
Bosnia and Herzegovina. Rules of Procedure House of Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Version 2007. Web. 1 Feb. 2010.Google Scholar
Bosnia and Herzegovina. Rules of Procedure House of Representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Version 2007. Web. 1 Feb. 2010.Google Scholar
Bosnia and Herzegovina. Statute of Brčko District in BiH. Version 2008. Web. 13 Feb. 2010.Google Scholar
Central European Free Trade Agreement. Web. 30 Oct. 2010. <http://www.cefta2006.com/>..>Google Scholar
Centralna Izborna Komisija. Potvrđeni Rezultati općih izbora 2010 godine. Web. 15 Oct. 2010. <http://www.izbori.ba/Finalni2010/Finalni/PredsjednistvoBiH/Default.aspx>..>Google Scholar
Centri Civilnih Inicijativa. Izvjestaj o monitoringu rada Skupstine Parlamentarne skupstine BiH. Web. 30. Oct. 2010. <http://www.cci.ba/monitoring/l/7/l.html>..>Google Scholar
Chandler, David. Bosnia: Faking Democracy after Dayton. London: Pluto, 2000. Print.Google Scholar
Commission of the European Communities. Bosnia and Herzegovina 2006 Progress Report {COM (2006) 649 final}, Web. 30 Sept. 2010.Google Scholar
Commission of the European Communities. Bosnia and Herzegovina 2007 Progress Report {COM(2007) 663 final}. Web. 30 Sept. 2010.Google Scholar
Commission of the European Communities. Bosnia and Herzegovina 2008 Progress Report {COM(2008) 674}. Web. 30 Sept. 2010.Google Scholar
Commission of the European Communities. Bosnia and Herzegovina 2009 Progress Report {COM(2009) 533}. Web. 30 Sept. 2010.Google Scholar
Commission of the European Communities. Enlargement Strategies and Main Challenges 2009–2010 {COM(2009) 533}. Web. 29 Jan. 2011.Google Scholar
Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Session 50, November 2008. Web. 10 Nov. 2010. <http://www.ccbh.ba/eng/press/index.php?pid=3073&sta=3&query=vital+interest>..>Google Scholar
Council of Europe. The Parliamentary Assembly. Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Bosnia and Herzegovina. Para. 108, Doc. 11700, September 2008. Web. 13 Feb. 2010.Google Scholar
Delegation of the European Union to Bosnia and Herzegovina. Key Documents. Web. 30. Oct. 2010. <http://www.delbih.ec.europa.eu/?akcija=clanak&CID=39&jezik=2&LID=57>..>Google Scholar
Direkcija za evropske integracije. Key Documents. Web. 15 Oct. 2010. <http://www.dei.gov.ba/Default.aspx?template_id=37&pageIndex=1>..>Google Scholar
Džihić, Vedran. Ethnopolitik in Bosnian-Herzegowina: Staat und Gesellschaft in der Krise. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2009. Print.Google Scholar
European Court of Human Rights. Sejdić and Find vs. Bosnia and Herzegovina. ECHR Judgment 22, December 2009, No. 27.996/06 and 34.836/06. Web. 15 March 2010.Google Scholar
European Partnership with Bosnia and Herzegovina. Web. 29 Jan. 2011. <http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/enlargement/western_balkans/r18012_en.htm>..>Google Scholar
Gromes, Thorsten. “The Prospect of European Integration and Conflict Transformation in Bosnia and Herzegovina.” European Integration 31 (2009): 431–47. Print.Google Scholar
Ibrahimagić, Omer. Dayton=Bosnia in Europe. Legal Essence of Dayton Agreement. Sarajevo: Vijece Kongresa Bosnjackih Intelektualaca, 2001. Print.Google Scholar
International Crisis Group. Bosnia's Dual Crisis. Europe Briefing N° 57, Sarajevo/Brussels, 12 November 2009. Web. 15 Oct. 2010.Google Scholar
International Crisis Group. Bosnia's Incomplete Transition: Between Dayton and Europe. Europe Report N° 198, Sarajevo/Brussels, 9 March 2009. Web. 15 Oct. 2010.Google Scholar
Jeffrey, Alex. “The Politics of ‘Democratization’ : Lessons from Bosnia and Iraq.” Review of International Political Economy 14 (2007): 444–66. Print.Google Scholar
Kasapović, Mirjana. “Bosnia and Herzegovina: Consociational or Liberal Democracy?” Politicita misao XLII.5 (2005): 3–30. Print.Google Scholar
Lijphart, Arend. Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. New Haven: Yale UP, 1977. Print.Google Scholar
March, James G. and Johan P. Olsen. “Elaborating the ‘New Institutionalism'.” The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions. Eds. R.A.W. Rhodes, Sarah H. Binder, and Bert A. Rockman. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2006: 1–20. Print.Google Scholar
Ó Tuathail, Gearóid and Dahlman, Carl. “The ‘West Bank of the Drina’: Land Allocation and Ethnic Engineering in Republika Srpska.” Transactions, Institute of British Geographers 31 (2006): 304–22. Print.Google Scholar
Office of the High Representative. “Explanatory Note on the High Representative's Decision from October 19th.” 2007. Web. 12. Feb. 2010. <http://www.ohr.int/print/?content_id=40710>..>Google Scholar
Office of the High Representative. “Supervisory Order on Temporarily Suspending Payments of Salaries and Remunerations to the Councilors of the Assembly of Brčko District.” 6 Feb. 2009. Web. 9 Feb. 2010. <http://www.ohr.int/ohr-offices/brcko/bc-so/default.asp?content_id=43015>..>Google Scholar
Office of the High Representative/European Union Special Representative. Minutes of the House of Peoples. Sarajevo: Office of the High Representative/European Union Special Representative, 2006–2010. Print.Google Scholar
Office of the High Representative/European Union Special Representative. Minutes of the House of Representatives. Sarajevo: Office of the High Representative/European Union Special Representative, 2006–2010. Print.Google Scholar
Official Journal of the European Union. “Council Decision of 30 January 2006 on the principles, priorities and conditions contained in the European Partnership with Bosnia and Herzegovina and repealing Decision 2004/515/EC (2006/55/EC).” Web. 30 Sept. 2010.Google Scholar
Official Journal of the European Union. “Council Decision of 18 February 2008 on the principles, priorities and conditions contained in the European Partnership with Bosnia and Herzegovina and repealing Decision 2006/55/EC (2008/211/EC).” Web. 30 Sept. 2010.Google Scholar
Parlamentarna Skupština Bosne i Hercegovine. “Neki statistički podaci o Predstavničkom domu: Stranačka Struktura PSBiH.” December 2008. Web. 30 Oct. 2010.Google Scholar
Simonsen, Sven Gunnar. “Addressing Ethnic Divisions in Post-Conflict Institution-Building: Lessons from Recent Cases.” Security Dialogue 36 (2005): 297–318. Print.Google Scholar
Stokke, Hugo. “Human Rights as a Mechanism for Integration in Bosnia-Herzegovina.” International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 13 (2006): 263–84. Print.Google Scholar
Trnka, Kasim. Evaluation der Entscheidungsprozesse in der Parlamentarischen Versammlung Bosnien und Herzegowinas 1996–2007 [Evaluation of Decision-Making Processes in the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina 1996–2007]. Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Bosna-Herzegovina, 2008. Web. 15 March 2010.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, George: “Decision Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism and Multipartyism.” British Journal of Political Science 25 (1995): 289–325. Print.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, George: “Veto Players and Law Production in Parliamentary Democracies: An Empirical Analysis.” American Political Science Review 93 (1999): 591–608. Print.Google Scholar
Tsebelis, George: Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2002. Print.Google Scholar