ON AMENDMENT TO CONSTITUTION OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
Citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina give due thanks to the U.S. administration for organizing and mediating in the process of signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement at the end of 1995, which ended the war and great suffering of all people and citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which enabled peace which lasts for 25 years.
However, even though efficient in ending the war, the Dayton Agreement turned out to be impractical in its consistent implementation and the economic development of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Many of its ideas, such as return of the refugees and displaced persons have not been implemented and formation of the entity named Republika Srpska, which was ruled responsible for genocide by the International Court of Justice in 2007, empowered the forces which tried to break up Bosnia and Herzegovina with war resources to continue doing so in peace through ongoing obstruction in its functioning.
In accordance with that, and based on the facts that
- Bosnia and Herzegovina cannot efficiently develop and join Euro-Atlantic associations with the political organization defined by the Dayton Constitution;
- Republika Srpska as part of Bosnia and Herzegovina, defined as entity by the Dayton Agreement, was formed based on genocide, atrocious crimes, rapes and ethnic cleansing;
- Dayton Agreement has never been and cannot be implemented fully, especially the issue of sustainable return established by Annex 7 of the Dayton Agreement
- A mechanism is integrated in the Dayton Agreement giving possibility to nationalist elements to obstruct all positive courses;
- Dayton Agreement does not secure equal rights of all citizens in the entire territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which is against the rules and freedoms contained in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
- Integrity, continuity and a thousand-year-long existence of Bosnia is disputed in different identification forms and degree of sovereignty;
- Disputing people’s right to use their own Bosnian language and culture is not punished
- Genocide against Bosniaks ruled by the court is being denied
- Nationalist and secessionist policies are active in attempt to make Bosnia and Herzegovina disappear, contrary to its constitutional sovereignty and integrity.
- Delegation of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina did not have a mandate to alter the structure of state organization of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
- Milošević’s signature on the Dayton Agreement is invalid
- Serious pressure was made on delegation of Bosnia nd Herzegovina in Dayton to accept the unjust peace. 
- First and most important principle adopted at the London Conference held on 26-28 August 1992 “that unrecognized or forcefully achieved advantages will not have consequences” was not applied in Dayton. If this principle was applied, cities with convincing Bosniak majority ( Srebrenica, Zvornik, Foča, Višegrad, Rogatica, Prijedor, Bratunac would not belong to Republika Srpska and twice as many Bosniaks would live in Brčko than Serbs)
- Dayton Peace Agreement is unsustainable because it was made based on principles contrary to IUS COGENS norm on prohibition of genocide.
- All the aforementioned blocks functioning of Bosnia and Herzegovina, causes setback in economic development and represents fruitful ground for development of corruption and nepotism.
All the aforementioned points to unsustainability of the Dayton Constitution and the need for adoption of a new constitution which will remove the aforementioned flaws and harmonize the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina with European standards.
Based on all aforementioned reasons, the new constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina should be based on the following basic principles:
- Name of the state: REPUBLIC OF BOSNIA as adherent of 930 year-long historical name of the state (948-1878) BOSNIA 
- Interest: Interest of the state of the Republic of Bosnia is above interests of individuals, lower levels of government, neighbor and other states of the world and above interests of interstate associations and blocs.
- Territory: Sovereignty and territorial integrity within AVNOJ borders.
- Continuity: Continuity of the Republic of Bosnia in different forms and degree of independence and sovereignty goes from medieval Bosnia, when Bosnia was an independent state, to pashalik (eyalets, beglerbegluks) under Ottoman rule, Bosnia and Herzegovina as corpus separatum under Austro-Hungarian rule, Article 135 of the Vidovdan Constitution protected by borders of Bosnia and Herzegovina determined at the Berlin Congress in the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, Federal unit in SFRJ when its statehood was renewed on 25th November at the First Session of ZAVNOBiH and the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina which based on results of the referendum for independence, which was required by the International Community and that was held on 29th February and 1st March in 1992, was recognized as an independent and sovereign state on 6th and 7th April in 1992 by the European Community and the USA and became a member of the United Nations on 22nd May 1992.
- Definition of the Republic of Bosnia: Bosnia is a state of equal citizens and people. Therefore, citizen comes first and equality of its peoples should stem from legal and practical equality of every citizen of Bosnia.
- National identity:Affirm the national identity BOSNIAN, which includes all citizens of Bosnia or those who see Bosnia as the mother state after the models of the USA, France and other European states which define nation as a community of citizens of one state with maintaining and undisputing ethnic affiliation to Bosniak, Serb, Croat and other peoples living in Bosnia.
- Structure of state legislative, executive and judicial power:
- President of the Republic of Bosnia is elected in the entire territory of the state as one electoral unit. Introduce electronic vote after the USA model if possible.
- Government of the Republic of Bosnia with all its ministries necessary for functioning of the state.
- Parliamentary Assembly of the Republic of Bosnia which would consist of two houses.
- House of Representatives, which is elected on a one man one vote principle proportionally to number of residents from four areas that are also electoral units (total of 99 members of house of representatives – parliament)
- House of areas which would have ten members per each area. Mechanisms of their election should be determined.
- Supreme Court of the Republic of Bosnia as the highest court of general jurisdiction.
- Constitutional Court of the Republic of Bosnia which would solve harmonization of lower legal acts with the Constitution of the Republic of Bosnia with eight judges and ninth, President of the Court.
More precise assembly and jurisdictions of the aforementioned institution will be provided in a separate annex.
- Territorial organization:
State of Bosnia and Herzegovina is regulated based on principles and methods of geographic regionalization, which are based on all geographic regionalizations to date, taking into account physiognomic, nodal, functional and nodal-functional elements of the entire state territory. Defining regions of Bosnia and Herzegovina will be based on principles of the European Union which come from nomenclature and statistics taking into account physiognomic, demogeographic and statistical model. Regional division will be basis for state classification of territory units for statistics of the State Institute of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and in accordance with the European “Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics“ (Nomenclature des unités territoriales statistiques) abbr. NUTS).
Image 1 shows proposed starting solution of territorial organization of Bosnia with four regions: Sarajevo, Tuzla, Mostar and Banja Luka macro region (Spahić, M., 2014 “Geographic Regionalization of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the light of Euro-Atlantic Integration“).
It is important to emphasize that territorial organization of Bosnia into four regions is optimal and generally accepted in practice by many institutions.
Based on all the aforementioned, commitment for territorial reorganization of Bosnia into four regions would result in far greater economic-administrative efficiency, and implementation of the offered solution would be the fastest and simplest one than all other options which imply greater number of territorial units. Regional-geographic maps of Bosnia will finally be defined after comprehensive geographic research.
* * *
Even a visual take on the current entity map of BiH is enough (Image 7) to realize the absurdity of this kind of territorial division which is one of the great causes of stagnation in development of the state.
 Dayton Agreement does not secure equal rights of all citizens in the entire territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina contrary to the rights and freedoms stated in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and in its protocols which include Article 2 paragraph 2 as the integral part of the Dayton Constitution and have direct application in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Provisions of the European Convention are against other constitutional provisions contained in Article IV and Article V of the Dayton Constitution and they refer to the election of members of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina and election of members of the House of Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
According to the Dayton Constitution, those who do not belong to three peoples: Bosniaks, Serbs or Croats cannot be elected to these bodies, and sometimes even that is not enough because there are requirements that a candidate can run for a certain position, for example member of the Presidency can run for this function if they are Bosniak or Croat only if they live in territory of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and a Serb only if they live in territory of Republika Srpska. Same thing applies with election of delegates to the House of Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina where five Bosniaks and five Croats are elected from the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and five Serbs from Republika Srpska.
 Denial of genocide against Bosniaks is unacceptable, which was ruled by the highest judicial body on the planet, the International Court of Justice in Hague, that ruled the army and police of Republika Srpska as executors of genocide in and nearby Srebrenica with its ruling issued on 26th February 2007, making it directly responsible.
 Nationalist policy led by the current government in Republika Srpska is peacefully trying to break up Bosnia and Herzegovina and finish the job they failed to do through armed resources by generating awareness of youth on inability of survival of Bosnia and Herzegovna and deluding them with unrealistic ideas and expectations that Republika Srpska and Serbia will one day be one.
 Delegation of Bosnia and Herzegovina did not have a mandate to alter the structure of state organization of Bosnia and Herzegovina which is defined as single and indivisible according to amendment LXII from 1990 to the Constitution of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina from 1974, which is an important rule. In order to change its internal structure, which is also an important rule, it was necessary to have a two-third will of citizens expressed through the referendum.
Article 46 as basis of invalidity of agreement of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
 Milošević’s signature on the Dayton Agreement is invalid because the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was not recognized during the negotiations in Dayton, where Milošević lacked an active identification in negotiation and signing of the Dayton Agreement. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was not recognized until 1996 and it became a member of the United Nations in 2000.
 There was a serious pressure on delegation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in Dayton to accept the unjust peace. Conditions from the Dayton Agreement were accepted by the delegation of Bosnia and Herzegovina under threat that the international community will back out and leave the government forces to the mercy of Milošević’s aggressive policy, which is also basis for annulment of every international agreement in accordance with th Article 51 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and thereby the Dayton Agreement as one of the international agreements.
 There is a violation of the imperative norm of the IUS COGENS International Law contained in section 2 Agreement null and void in the Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties from 1969, according to which the International Court of Justice in Hague trials and annuls international agreements if there is a legal basis to do so.
Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties explicitly states that
“Any agreement which at the moment of signing is against the imperative norm of general international law is null and void. For the purposes of this Convention, the imperative norm of general international law is the norm accepted and recognized by the entire international community of states as a norm which does not allow any deviation and which can only be altered by the new norm of general international law of the same nature.”
Prohibition of genocide is first stated in contents of the term IUS COGENS norm.
That is the legal basis of unsustainability of the Dayton Peace Agreement as an international agreement after the International Court of Justice determined responsibility of Republika Srpska for the executed genocide in its ruling.
Republika Srpska was awarded for genocide by the Dayton Agreement because it received a status of an entity within Bosnia and Herzegovina from a parastate.
And if the international community justified this fact by saying that it was an unknown fact in Dayton or that there was not sufficient information or that there was no ruling for genocide, no one can hide behind that today. Today it is known that genocide was committed by army and police of Republika Srpska starting from 13th July 1995 in and nearby Srebrenica and the ruling was issued by the International Court of Justice in Hague on executed genocide and responsibility of Republika Srpska on 26th February 2007.
 Name Bosnia dates from mid 10th century and is stated in document Administrando Imperio (On the Governance of the Empire of Byzantine emperor Constantine VII “Porphyrogenitus”of 948) up until Austro-Hungarian Monarchy as a colonial power changed the name to Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1878.
 Citizen’s right in Dayton Bosnia and Herzegovina stemed from the right of the people, and the interests of peoples were put above the interest of the state which naturally generated all interethhnic conflicts, permanent violation of rights and freedoms of citizens and blocked the development of the state. It is an impossible assumption that peoples are not equal if all citizens are equal.
Solution shown in Image 2 corresponds with organization of Ministry of Human Rights and Refugees of BiH and works within four regional centers which greatly concur with proposed solution.
SIPA is organized in four regions (Image 3) which deviates from proposed solution in Image 1, due to partial adjustment to entity borders
Bishops’ Conference of BiH proposed territorial organization of BiH also into four regions in 2017 (Image 4), which to greater extent differs from the offered solution, due to attempt to balance ethnic representation.
According to research of the Federal Geodetic Administration of SFRJ from 1953, four nodal-functional macro regions of Bosnia and Herzegovina were defined under other names (Image 5), which differs from the offered solution in Image 1 in only five municipalities.
Indirect Taxation Authority is organized in four regions (Image 6), which almost concurs with the solution offered in Image 1.