In Bosnia and Herzegovina, a highly questionable court case is currently causing outrage: President of Republika Srpska Milorad Dodik and acting director of the Official Gazette of Republika Srpska Miloš Lukić have been dragged before the court. They are accused of disregarding decisions made by the High Representative—a vague charge labelled as ‘non-implementation of the High Representative’s decisions’. The trial is not only legally shaky but also raises serious doubts about the fairness and independence of the judiciary, while threatening the autonomy of Republika Srpska and potentially triggering catastrophic political consequences.
The Dayton Peace Agreement, negotiated in Dayton in 1995 and signed in Paris, ended the Bosnian War (1992–1995) and laid the foundation for Bosnia and Herzegovina. It established two entities—Republika Srpska and the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina—as well as a weak central authority to balance the interests of Bosniaks, Serbs, and Croats. This internationally binding agreement guarantees the autonomy of the entities. Yet the trial against Dodik is rightly criticized as an attack on these same structures. The proceedings appear to deliberately weaken the Serbian entity, while violations in the Federation are conspicuously ignored—a glaring proof of blatant unequal treatment and the political nature of this trial.
The prosecution rests on Dodik and Lukić allegedly ignoring directives from High Representative Christian Schmidt. The defense clearly demonstrates that Dodik acted in accordance with the Republika Srpska Constitution and his legal duties. The prosecution, however, relies on Schmidt’s controversial Bonn Powers, which grant him dictatorial authority to enact laws and enforce decisions—powers never endorsed by the UN Security Council. Even Schmidt’s appointment itself is a scandal, as it occurred without Security Council approval, severely undermining his legitimacy. Supporters of these powers claim they are necessary to enforce the Dayton Agreement, but critics—quite rightly—see them as an outrageous intrusion into the country’s sovereignty. The indictment itself is a legal travesty: it relies on vague, spongy formulations that barely substantiate concrete violations, reinforcing the impression of a staged show trial.
Observers are tearing the proceedings apart, and rightfully so. Schmidt’s legitimacy stands on clay feet, and his decisions smack of an abuse of power by a self-appointed colonial ruler. The question of whether the court is independent or a political puppet is no longer a question—the answer is obvious. The lack of transparency in the process is yet another slap in the face of the rule of law: evidence is hardly accessible to the public, and some hearings take place behind closed doors, fuelling suspicions of backroom deals and political collusion. The Office of the High Representative (OHR), established in 1995 under the Dayton Agreement to secure peace, has under Schmidt—since taking office in 2021 and backed by the USA and EU—become a divisive institution. Schmidt’s sharp criticism of Dodik meets justified Serbian resistance. Dodik’s verbal attacks—such as those against USAID in February 2025, despite prior cooperation—are an understandable expression of frustration over this interference.
‘This trial is not an act of justice but a dirty political manoeuvre with potentially devastating consequences for Bosnia and Herzegovina’
Republika Srpska has clear rights under the Dayton Agreement, yet this trial seems to trample on that autonomy. Critics warn of a dangerous precedent: elected representatives could be silenced in the future based on flimsy accusations, eroding democratic self-determination. A conviction could mean up to five years in prison for Dodik and a ban from holding office—a punishment that would end his career and push relations between Republika Srpska and the central government to the brink of collapse. The stability of Bosnia and Herzegovina is at stake. Particularly outrageous is the grotesquely disproportionate threat of punishment, which bears no relation to comparable cases and fuels suspicions that this is not about justice but about political elimination.
Dodik himself has responded with clear words, hinting that a conviction would have massive consequences for Republika Srpska. This is not mere mobilization rhetoric but a legitimate reaction to a scandalous overreach by the central government and international actors. His constant emphasis on autonomy reflects the justified concern that this trial is an attack on his entity’s sovereignty.
The Dayton Agreement was meant to secure peace, but the trial against Dodik is destroying that balance. Legal experts call the case a judicial scandal: an elected president is being prosecuted for fulfilling his constitutional duties, based on directives from an international authority whose legitimacy is more than doubtful. The defence is correct: Dodik’s actions were lawful within his entity. Criticism of this trial is scathing: it rests on the directives of a High Representative, not a parliament—a procedure absurd in democratic systems. The international community reveals embarrassing double standards here: it preaches democracy while supporting a trial that stands on shaky legal ground and is clearly politically motivated.
The verdict is expected on 26 February 2025. Until then, one thing is clear: this trial is not an act of justice but a dirty political manoeuvre with potentially devastating consequences for Bosnia and Herzegovina. It will not only decide Dodik’s future but also inflict lasting damage on the credibility of the Dayton framework.
Related articles:
