Konstituvnost naroda je zaostala tekovina od SFRJ

[Mujko]

Kao prvo zelim da pozdravim sve prisutne na forumu i da im pozelim lijepu ugodnost i caskanje na ovom prelijepom forumu.Ova svakodnevnica nas jednostavno natjera na razmisljanje o opcim stvarima nase svakodnevnice.Politika je naravno uvijek u prvom planu.Ona je cak postala nas hobi.
Da predjem na stvar.Ja mislim da je uredjenje Bosne i hercegovine na bazi konstitutivnosti zaostala forma i predstavlja nesto sto podsjeca na proslost bivse SFRJ.Ne bi bilo zgoreg da je to dobar model jer ipak je u toj SFRJ bilo i lijepih stvari.Mislim da se uredjenje Bosanskih naroida mora svesti na dvije nacije, a to su Bosanac i Hercegovac kao dvije zvanicne nacije.
Smatram da se u BiH trebaju priznati etnosi ili etniciteti, pa stoga priznati tri enosa:Bosnjak, Srbin i Hrvat.Zvanicni jezik na cijelom prostoru BiH bi bio Bosanski jezik.
Religiaj se podrazumijeva kao osnovna stvar izjasnjavanja.Takvo predstavljanje stvari u Bosni i Hercegovini moze uljepsati zivot svakome.Granice Hercegovine su poznate i naravno da bi postojala zvanicna nacija Hercegovac na nivo drzavnosti Bosne i Hercegovine.

Ovo je tek da malo povedemo raspravu o tom pitanju.

Pozdrav

[Real Khan]

Kao prvo zelim da pozdravim sve prisutne na forumu i da im pozelim lijepu ugodnost i caskanje na ovom prelijepom forumu.Ova svakodnevnica nas jednostavno natjera na razmisljanje o opcim stvarima nase svakodnevnice.Politika je naravno uvijek u prvom planu.Ona je cak postala nas hobi.
Da predjem na stvar.Ja mislim da je uredjenje Bosne i hercegovine na bazi konstitutivnosti zaostala forma i predstavlja nesto sto podsjeca na proslost bivse SFRJ.Ne bi bilo zgoreg da je to dobar model jer ipak je u toj SFRJ bilo i lijepih stvari.Mislim da se uredjenje Bosanskih naroida mora svesti na dvije nacije, a to su Bosanac i Hercegovac kao dvije zvanicne nacije.
Smatram da se u BiH trebaju priznati etnosi ili etniciteti, pa stoga priznati tri enosa:Bosnjak, Srbin i Hrvat.Zvanicni jezik na cijelom prostoru BiH bi bio Bosanski jezik.
Religiaj se podrazumijeva kao osnovna stvar izjasnjavanja.Takvo predstavljanje stvari u Bosni i Hercegovini moze uljepsati zivot svakome.Granice Hercegovine su poznate i naravno da bi postojala zvanicna nacija Hercegovac na nivo drzavnosti Bosne i Hercegovine.

Ovo je tek da malo povedemo raspravu o tom pitanju.

Pozdrav

Joj, otkud ti pade "Ero sa onoga svijeta"... Bez uvrede, ali jedina dobra poenta tvog posta je da se treba brisati ovaj nepotreban i neodgovarajući prefiks "konstitutivnih" naroda. Ovo u stvari samo dodatno naglašava da su ta tri naroda u stvari ugrađeni u Ustav i priznati Ustavom kao narodi. Ništa više. Staromodna ruska politološka škola (koja se u mnogo čemu ne slaže sa zapadnom liberalno-demokratskom školom koja je jedina dominantna i relevantna) često miješa "kruške i jabuke" i "lupa lončiće". Naime, shodno shvatanjima te ruske "škole", ovaj termin "konstitutivnosti" se previše glorifikuje i čak ponekad neopravdano izjednačava sa pojmom suvereniteta, što je notorna glupost jer narodi ne mogu imati suverenitet. Zašto? Pa jednostavno zato jer su narodi definirani kao "etničko-kulturne zajednice koje imaju zajednički jezik, kolektivno sjećanje i gaje uvjerenje u svoje zajedničko porijeklo" (tzv. organicistička teorija). Pripadnikom naroda se ne može postati nekakvim "učlanjenjem" ili "inicijacijom", već isključivo svojim rođenjem. Shodno ovoj činjenici, narodi se ne mogu svrstavati u političke zajednice (premda se mogu baviti politikom). Političke zajednice su isključivo nacije i države (pa tako postoje "nacionalne države", "dvo-etničke države" i "multi-etničke države", itd). Države kao političke zajednice imaju suverenitet jer imaju jasno definisanu teritoriju, posjeduju legitimnu moć pretočenu u vlast koja se osigurava instrumentima države, i što je najvažnije - posjeduju internacionalno priznati vanjski suverenitet koji se uklapa u važeći svjetski poredak (članstvo u nadnacionalnim organizacijama ili tijelima kao što su Ujedinjene nacije, Svetska banka, IMF,... itd.) Da skratim, narodi u Bosni su Ustavom priznati (konstitutivnost) i nema tu nikakve dvojbe niti spora oko njihovog postojanja kao etničko-kulturnih zajednica sa svojim jezicima, kulturom, tradicijom, itd. ali NEMAJU nikakav SUVERENITET niti "tapiju nad teritorijom" naše države. Slažem se da se ovaj termin "konstitutivnost" briše iz Ustava jer je nepotreban i samo zbunjuje osobe koje se polu-razumiju u politologiju i ustavno pravo.

Eh, sad, ona "teorija" o uvođenju "dvije nacije - Bosanac i Hercegovac" jednostavno ne pije vode, da ne kažem kako je apsolutno infantilna iz prostog razloga što baš miješaš neke pojmove kao da si na pijaci. Ovo su regionalni identiteti koji nemaju nikakav pravno-politički (pa čak ni kulturno-etnički) karakter, pa samim tim nemaju nikakav osnov za razvijanje dublje "teorije o njihovom transformiranju u nacije". Jednostavno pitanje, šta je onda sa identitetom Krajišnika i Posavaca? Da li bi i oni onda mogli "osnovati" svoju naciju kao nekakvo ribolovačko društvo? Da se razumijemo, nacije se ne osnivaju tako... One se stotinama godina stvaraju i uobličavaju kao političke zajednice. Ti procesi su išli različitim načinima i na različitim osnovama. Negdje su se nacije rađale oko "krune" ili monarha, negdje (kao u Francuskoj) nakon građanske ili buržoaske revolucije koja je srušila monarhiju i krunu, negdje doseljavanjem i kolonizacijom novoga svijeta (Australija i N. Zeland), a negdje udruživanjem manjih državica (Švicarska) ili kolonija (USA), ili jednostavno procesom oslobađanja od kolonijalne vlasti (nacije širom Afrike i Azije)...

I na kraju, baš si me nasmijao sa "granicama" Hercegovine... Da se razumijemo, i moje porijeklo je iz Hercegovine, ali ti moram priznati da su ovo nebuloze sa "nacijom" Hercegovaca jer nema nikakvo uporište osim pukog regionalizma. Još da dodam kako moji početni korijeni sežu čak do azijskih stepa i slavnog velikog vođe "Zlatnih hordi" Džingis Khana. Njegov pradjed se zvao po mom prezimenu. Živa istina...

[Mujko]

Ne mozes uporedjivati termin posavca i krajisnika sa Hercegovcem koji ima utanacenu kulturu i specificnost u bosansko-hercegovacko drustvo i historiju.Pojam nacija ne naglasava pojam naroda ili etnosa nego dio populacije u utanacenoj granici.Evo malo i da udjemo u neku polemiku. Ako zivim u BiH, onda smo Hercegovac ili Bosanac.To je normala.To je nesto sto ima veci znacaj od etnosa u Bosni i Hercegovini.Na primjer. u Francuskoj postoji jedan region sa Njemcakom vecinom, ali oni su svi zvanicno Francuzi, ali po etnosu Njemci.Etnos nema ogranicenja u zvanicno priznatoj drzavi jer ona obuhvata onaj dio zivlja koji se nalazi van granica postojece drzave, i oni su nekoj vrsti kulturne povezanosti.

Eto ja mislim da je ovo dosta.I da sam rekao bar nesto pametno (nadam se).

[Mujko]

Evo da dodam.Narod je Hercegovac i Bosanac a narodnost Bosnjak, Srbin, Hrvat i ostali.Nacija u prijevodu oznacava drzavu.

[simi5]

Samo se vi opet igrajte vatrom. Iz SFRJ je proistekla državnost BiH na temelju ravnopravnosti konstitutivnih naroda. Urušivši temelje svoje države referendumom 1991. izazvali ste rat koji se završio nacionalnim udaljavanjem idubokim nepoverenjem. Da li ste svesni šta radite?

[Stari]

Ja cu sad vjerovatno ispasti budala ... al neja veze - ni prvi ni zadnji put - ...ali stanite malo. Pa kako je to sredjeno u slucaju recimo Velike Britaniji ...Drzava koja se tako zove postoji...postoji li narod Britanci ? Ili su Britanci ako postoje Nacionalnost ....sta su onda Englezi, Skoti i Sjeverni Irci ? Kad ih pitas , to znam iz iskustva, oni za sebe tvrde da su i jedno i drugo ... u smislu jedno ne iskljucuje drugo....Englez kaze da je Englez ali istovremeno i Britanac jer sa britanskog je ostrva...Kad se igra "Nations cup" (Kup nacija - prvenstvo evrope) onda igraju za svoje nacije Englesku, Skotsku i Sjevernu irsku.

Jer ako se vec igramo igre stranih rijeci , premda svjestan cinjenice da ovdje ima raje koja zna engleski bolje od mene, mensecini da je negdje u balkanskom tumacenju analogije izmedju rijeci: Nation = Nacija = Narod ...doslo donekle do krivog srastanja...Narod je na anglijskom: Folk (ispravite me ako grijesim) ... na Njemackom recimo takodjer (Das) Volk.
Nacija je = Nation ... Ne znam da li recimo Skoti imaju pravo na samoopredjeljenje do odcijepljenja od Britanije po vazecem ustavu Britanije i konstituciji ... ali zaboga, ustav i konstitucija nisu nikakve prirodno-matematicka konstante ...hocu reci i konstitucija je slovo na papiru , stvoreno ljudskom rukom i ljudskom rukom moze biti i izmjenjeno.

[Prozor]

Rat su ti izazvali oni sto su prvi narusili Ustav SFRJ ukinuvsi autonomiju Kosova i Vojvodine, zbog toga sada imas Republiku Kosovo.

@Mujko

Smatram da BiH ima precih problema.

[osa]

Rat su ti izazvali oni sto su prvi narusili Ustav SFRJ ukinuvsi autonomiju Kosova i Vojvodine, zbog toga sada imas Republiku Kosovo.

@Mujko

Smatram da BiH ima precih problema.

ma ne tuđman i slobo su sve dogovorili, ovo je bio samo folklor.

[Prozor]

odgovorio bih ti ali nije tema

[osa]

odgovorio bih ti ali nije tema

ma nema potrebe, samo da se javim, ovo je naravno z.........a.

[Real Khan]

Samo se vi opet igrajte vatrom. Iz SFRJ je proistekla državnost BiH na temelju ravnopravnosti konstitutivnih naroda. Urušivši temelje svoje države referendumom 1991. izazvali ste rat koji se završio nacionalnim udaljavanjem idubokim nepoverenjem. Da li ste svesni šta radite?

Evo, ignorisat ću @Mujketa, jer se vidi da je njemu politika baš hobi...

@simi5, koliko te ja poznajem u ovom virtuelnom svijetu, znam da se politikom baviš na malo "profesionalniji način" pa se pitam kako ti se "potkrala" ova greška... Državnost Bosne i Hercegovine nije proistekla iz SFRJ na temelju ravnopravnosti konstitutivnih naroda, kako ti tvrdiš, nego je njena državnost obnovljena i ponovo potvrđena na zasjedanju ZAVNOBIH-a i AVNOJ-a. Međutim, dovoljno si upoznat-a sa činjenicom da je najbolje to objasnila Badinterova komisija koja je imala mandat da zvanično "raspiša" Jugoslaviju. Dole ti je čitav tekst nalaza Badinterove komisije. Praviš se da ne znaš kako je Jugoslavija u stvari bila neuspješan eksperiment koji je osmislio tadašnji predsjednik USA Woodrow Wilson, za razliku od njenih republika koje su imale svoje državno-pravne kontinuitete i suverenosti i prije uspostave vještačke države - YU.

Evo ti Badinterove komisije šta kaže: PAŽLJIVO ČITAJ DO KRAJA...



The Opinions of the Badinter Arbitration Committee: A Second Breath for the Self-Determination of Peoples
Appendix: Opinions of the Arbitration Committee
Opinion No. 1
The President of the Arbitration Committee received the following letter from Lord Carring-ton, President of the Conference on Yugoslavia, on 20 November 1991:
We find ourselves with a major legal question.
Serbia considers that those Republics which have declared or would declare themselves inde-pendent or sovereign have seceded or would secede from the SFRY which would otherwise continue to exist.
Other Republics on the contrary consider that there is no question of secession, but the ques-tion is one of a disintegration or breaking-up of the SDRY as the result of the concurring will of a number of Republics. They consider that the six Republics are to be considered equal successors to the SFRY, without any of them or group of them being able to claim to be the continuation thereof.
I should like the Arbitration Committee to consider the matter in order to formulate any opin-ion or recommendation which it might deem useful.
The Arbitration Committee has been apprised of the memoranda and documents communi-cated respectively by the Republics of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Monte-negro, Slovenia, Serbia, and by the President of the collegiate Presidency of the SFRY.
1) The Committee considers:
a) that the answer to the question should be based on the principles of public international law which serve to define the conditions on which an entity constitutes a state; that in this respect, the existence or disappearance of the state is a question of fact; that the effects of recognition by other states are purely declaratory;
b) that the state is commonly defined as a community which consists of a territory and a population subject to an organized political authority; that such a state is characterized by sovereignty;
c) that, for the purpose of applying these criteria, the form of internal political organization and the constitutional provisions are mere facts, although it is necessary to take them into consideration in order to determine the Government's way over the population and the terri-tory;
d) that in the case of a federal-type state, which embraces communities that possess a degree of autonomy and, moreover, participate in the exercise of political power within the frame-work of institutions common to the Federation, the existence of the state implies that the fed-eral organs represent the components of the Federation and wield effective power;
e) that, in compliance with the accepted definition in international law, the expression `state succession' means the replacement of one state by another in the responsibility for the interna-tional relations of territory. This occurs whenever there is a change in the territory of the state. The phenomenon of state succession is governed by the principles of international law, from which the Vienna Conventions of 23 August 1978 and 8 April 1983 have drawn inspiration. In compliance with these principles, the outcome of succession should be equitable, the states concerned being free of terms of settlement and conditions by agreement. Moreover, the per-emptory norms of general international law and, in particular, respect for the fundamental rights of the individual and the rights of peoples and minorities, are binding on all the parties to the succession.
2) The Arbitration Committee notes that:
a) - although the SFRY has until now retained its international personality, notably inside in-ternational organizations, the Republics have expressed their desire for independence;
- in Slovenia, by a referendum in December 1990, followed by a declaration of independence on 25 June 1991, which was suspended for three months and confirmed on 8 October 1991;
- in Croatia, by a referendum held in May 1991, followed by a declaration of independence on 25 June 1991, which was suspended for three months and confirmed on 8 October 1991;
- in Macedonia, by a referendum held in September 1991 in favour of a sovereign and inde-pendent Macedonia within an association of Yugoslav states;
- in Bosnia and Herzegovina, by a sovereignty resolution adopted by Parliament on 14 Octo-ber 1991, whose validity has been contested by the Serbian community of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
b) - The composition and workings of the essential organs of the Federation, be they the Fed-eral Presidency, the Federal Council, the Council of the Republics and the Provinces, the Fed-eral Executive Council, the Constitutional Court or the Federal Army, no longer meet the cri-teria of participation and representatives inherent in a federal state;
c) - The recourse to force has led to armed conflict between the different elements of the Fed-eration which has caused the death of thousands of people and wrought considerable destruc-tion within a few months. The authorities of the Federation and the Republics have shown themselves to be powerless to enforce respect for the succeeding ceasefire agreements con-cluded under the auspices of the European Communities or the United Nations Organization.
3) - Consequently, the Arbitration Committee is of the opinion:
- that the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is in the process of dissolution;
- that it is incumbent upon the Republics to settle such problems of state succession as may arise from this process in keeping with the principles and rules of international law, with par-ticular regard for human rights and the rights of peoples and minorities;
- that it is up to those Republics that so wish, to work together to form a new association en-dowed with the democratic institutions of their choice.
Opinion No. 2
On 20 November 1991 the Chairman of the Arbitration Committee received a letter from Lord Carrington, Chairman of the Conference on Yugoslavia, requesting the Committee's opinion on the following question put by the Republic of Serbia:
Does the Serbian population in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, as one of the constituent peoples of Yugoslavia, have the right to self-determination?
The Committee took note of the aide-mémoires, observations and other materials submitted by the Republics of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Slovenia and Serbia, by the Presidency of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) and by the `Assembly of the Serbian People of Bosnia-Herzegovina'.
1. The Committee considers that, whatever the circumstances, the right to self-determination must not involve changes to existing frontiers at the time of independence (uti possidetis ju-ris) except where the states concerned agree otherwise.
2. Where there are one or more groups within a state constituting one or more ethnic, religious or language communities, they have the right to recognition of their identity under interna-tional law.
As the Committee emphasized in its Opinion No. 1 of 29 November 1991, published on 7 De-cember, the - now peremptory - norms of international law require states to ensure respect for the rights of minorities. This requirement applies to all the Republics vis-à-vis the minorities on their territory.
The Serbian population in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia must therefore be afforded every right accorded to minorities under international convention as well as national and interna-tional guarantees consistent with the principles of international law and the provisions of Chapter II of the draft Convention of 4 November 1991, which has been accepted by these Republics.
3. Article 1 of the two 1986 International Covenants on human rights establishes that the prin-ciple of the right to self-determination serves to safeguard human rights. By virtue of that right every individual may choose to belong to whatever ethnic, religious or language com-munity he or she wishes.
In the Committee's view one possible consequence of this principle might be for the members of the Serbian population in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia to be recognized under agree-ments between the Republics as having the nationality of their choice, with all the rights and obligations which that entails with respect to the states concerned.
4. The Arbitration Committee is therefore of the opinion:
(i) that the Serbian population in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia is entitled to all the rights concerned to minorities and ethnic groups under international law and under the provisions of the draft Convention of the Conference on Yugoslavia of 4 November 1991, to which the Re-publics of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia have undertaken to give effect; and
(ii) that the Republics must afford the members of those minorities and ethnic groups all the human rights and fundamental freedoms recognized in international law, including, where ap-propriate, the right to choose their nationality.
Opinion No. 3
On 20 November 1991 the Chairman of the Arbitration Committee received a letter from Lord Carrington, Chairman of the Conference on Yugoslavia, requesting the Committee's opinion on the following question put by the Republic of Serbia:
Can the internal boundaries between Croatia and Serbia and between Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia be regarded as frontiers in terms of public international law?
The Committee took note of the aide-mémoires, observations and other materials submitted by the Republics of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Slovenia and Serbia, by the Presidency of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) and by the `Assembly of the Serbian People of Bosnia-Herzegovina'.
1. In its Opinion No. 1 of 29 November, published on 7 December, the Committee found that `the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is in the process of breaking up'. Bearing in mind that the Republics of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, inter alia, have sought interna-tional recognition as independent states, the Committee is mindful of the fact that its answer to the question before it will necessarily be given in the context of a fluid and changing situa-tion and must therefore be founded on the principles and rules of public international law.
2. The Committee therefore takes the view that once the process in the SFRY leads to the creation of one or more independent states, the issue of frontiers, in particular those of the Republics referred to in the question before it, must be resolved in accordance with the fol-lowing principles:
First - All external frontiers must be respected in line with the principles stated in the United Nations Charter, in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV)) and in the Helsinki Final Act, a principle which also underlies Article 11 of the Vienna Convention of 23 August 1978 on the Succession of States in Respect of Treaties.
Second - The boundaries between Croatia and Serbia, between Bosnia-Herzegovina and Ser-bia, and possibly other adjacent independent states may not be altered except by agreement freely arrived at.
Third - Except where otherwise agreed, the former boundaries become frontiers protected by international law. This conclusion follows from the principle of respect for the territorial status quo and, in particular, from the principle of uti possidetis. Uti possidetis, though ini-tially applied in settling decolonisation issues in America and Africa, is today recognized as a general principle, as stated by the International Court of Justice in its Judgment of 22 Decem-ber 1986 in the case between Burkina Fase and Hali (Frontier Dispute, (1986) Law Reports 554 at 565):
Nevertheless the principle is not a special rule which pertains solely to one specific system of international law. It is a general principle, which is logically connected with the phenomenon of the obtaining of independence, wherever it occurs. Its obvious purpose is to prevent the in-dependence and stability of new states being endangered by fratricidal struggles...
The principle applies all the more readily to the Republic since the second and fourth para-graphs of Article 5 of the Constitution of the SFRY stipulated that the Republics' territories and boundaries could not be altered without their consent.
Fourth - According to a well-established principle of international law the alteration of exist-ing frontiers or boundaries by force is not capable of producing any legal effect. This princi-ple is to be found, for instance, in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concern-ing Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV)) and in the Helsinki Final Act; it was cited by the Hague Conference on 7 September 1991 and is enshrined in the draft Con-vention of 4 November 1991 drawn up by the Conference on Yugoslavia.

[Real Khan]

S OBZIROM NA ČINJENICU DA JE OVO PITANJE JAKO VAŽNO, ŽELIM DA VAM UKAŽEM POSEBNO NA OVAJ PARAGRAF MIŠLJENJA BADINTEROVE KOMISIJE:


On 20 November 1991 the Chairman of the Arbitration Committee received a letter from Lord Carrington, Chairman of the Conference on Yugoslavia, requesting the Committee's opinion on the following question put by the Republic of Serbia:
Does the Serbian population in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, as one of the constituent peoples of Yugoslavia, have the right to self-determination?
The Committee took note of the aide-mémoires, observations and other materials submitted by the Republics of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Slovenia and Serbia, by the Presidency of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) and by the `Assembly of the Serbian People of Bosnia-Herzegovina'.
1. The Committee considers that, whatever the circumstances, the right to self-determination must not involve changes to existing frontiers at the time of independence (uti possidetis ju-ris) except where the states concerned agree otherwise.
2. Where there are one or more groups within a state constituting one or more ethnic, religious or language communities, they have the right to recognition of their identity under interna-tional law.
As the Committee emphasized in its Opinion No. 1 of 29 November 1991, published on 7 De-cember, the - now peremptory - norms of international law require states to ensure respect for the rights of minorities. This requirement applies to all the Republics vis-à-vis the minorities on their territory.
The Serbian population in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia must therefore be afforded every right accorded to minorities under international convention as well as national and interna-tional guarantees consistent with the principles of international law and the provisions of Chapter II of the draft Convention of 4 November 1991, which has been accepted by these Republics.
3. Article 1 of the two 1986 International Covenants on human rights establishes that the prin-ciple of the right to self-determination serves to safeguard human rights. By virtue of that right every individual may choose to belong to whatever ethnic, religious or language com-munity he or she wishes.
In the Committee's view one possible consequence of this principle might be for the members of the Serbian population in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia to be recognized under agree-ments between the Republics as having the nationality of their choice, with all the rights and obligations which that entails with respect to the states concerned.
4. The Arbitration Committee is therefore of the opinion:
(i) that the Serbian population in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia is entitled to all the rights concerned to minorities and ethnic groups under international law and under the provisions of the draft Convention of the Conference on Yugoslavia of 4 November 1991, to which the Republics of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia have undertaken to give effect; and
(ii) that the Republics must afford the members of those minorities and ethnic groups all the human rights and fundamental freedoms recognized in international law, including, where appropriate, the right to choose their nationality.


ŠTO U PRIJEVODU ZNAČI, SRBI SU OVDJE NACIONALNE MANJINE NA OSNOVU NJIHOVOG PRAVA NA SAMOPREDJELJENJE DA SE IZJAŠNJAVAJU KAO PRIPADNICI SUSJEDNE NACIJE... I NA KRAJU DA "ZAČINIMO"...


On 20 November 1991 the Chairman of the Arbitration Committee received a letter from Lord Carrington, Chairman of the Conference on Yugoslavia, requesting the Committee's opinion on the following question put by the Republic of Serbia:
Can the internal boundaries between Croatia and Serbia and between Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia be regarded as frontiers in terms of public international law?
The Committee took note of the aide-mémoires, observations and other materials submitted by the Republics of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Slovenia and Serbia, by the Presidency of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) and by the `Assembly of the Serbian People of Bosnia-Herzegovina'.
1. In its Opinion No. 1 of 29 November, published on 7 December, the Committee found that `the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is in the process of breaking up'. Bearing in mind that the Republics of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, inter alia, have sought international recognition as independent states, the Committee is mindful of the fact that its answer to the question before it will necessarily be given in the context of a fluid and changing situation and must therefore be founded on the principles and rules of public international law.
2. The Committee therefore takes the view that once the process in the SFRY leads to the creation of one or more independent states, the issue of frontiers, in particular those of the Republics referred to in the question before it, must be resolved in accordance with the following principles:
First - All external frontiers must be respected in line with the principles stated in the United Nations Charter, in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV)) and in the Helsinki Final Act, a principle which also underlies Article 11 of the Vienna Convention of 23 August 1978 on the Succession of States in Respect of Treaties.
Second - The boundaries between Croatia and Serbia, between Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia, and possibly other adjacent independent states may not be altered except by agreement freely arrived at.
Third - Except where otherwise agreed, the former boundaries become frontiers protected by international law. This conclusion follows from the principle of respect for the territorial status quo and, in particular, from the principle of uti possidetis. Uti possidetis, though initially applied in settling decolonisation issues in America and Africa, is today recognized as a general principle, as stated by the International Court of Justice in its Judgment of 22 December 1986 in the case between Burkina Fase and Hali (Frontier Dispute, (1986) Law Reports 554 at 565):
Nevertheless the principle is not a special rule which pertains solely to one specific system of international law. It is a general principle, which is logically connected with the phenomenon of the obtaining of independence, wherever it occurs. Its obvious purpose is to prevent the independence and stability of new states being endangered by fratricidal struggles...
The principle applies all the more readily to the Republic since the second and fourth paragraphs of Article 5 of the Constitution of the SFRY stipulated that the Republics' territories and boundaries could not be altered without their consent.
Fourth - According to a well-established principle of international law the alteration of existing frontiers or boundaries by force is not capable of producing any legal effect.
This principle is to be found, for instance, in the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV)) and in the Helsinki Final Act; it was cited by the Hague Conference on 7 September 1991 and is enshrined in the draft Convention of 4 November 1991 drawn up by the Conference on Yugoslavia.

OVO GORE NAVEDENO SLUŽI SAMO DA OPET RAZOČARAM SVE ONE KOJI SANJAJU "OTCJEPLJENJE OD NAMETNUTE BE-I-HA" I KOMADANJE BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE, A DA UJEDNO OPOMENEM BOŠNJAČKE LOPOVSKE POLITIČARE DA DOBRO OTVORE OČI KADA BUDU PREGOVARALI O NOVOM USTAVU BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE!!! AKO NAS IZDAJU I PRODAJU, NIGDJE SE NEĆE SAKRITI, TO IM JA GARANTIRAM!!!

I da pitam @simi5, imaš li još nekih stvari da dodaš?

[popajic]

@Real Khan
OVO GERE NAVEDENO SLUŽI SAMO DA OPET RAZOČARAM SVE ONE KOJI SANJAJU "OTCJEPLJENJE OD NAMETNUTE BE-I-HA" I KOMADANJE BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE, A DA UJEDNO OPOMENEM BOŠNJAČKE LOPOVSKE POLITIČARE DA DOBRO OTVORE OČI KADA BUDU PREGOVARALI O NOVOM USTAVU BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE!!! AKO NAS IZDAJU I PRODAJU, NIGDJE SE NEĆE SAKRITI, TO IM JA GARANTIRAM!!!

Znas i sam da je sa njihovim ocima sve u redu.I vazda im sirom otvorene,ali ne iz istih razloga zbog kojih bi to gradjanstvo zeljelo.Sto opet njih plaho sekira...
Ako ocekujes(mo) da OVI postojeci dobro i posteno odrade svoj posao kao sto su ga odradili i jos odradjuju,onda smo stvaaarno - necu da budem prost .

[Real Khan]

@Real Khan
OVO GORE NAVEDENO SLUŽI SAMO DA OPET RAZOČARAM SVE ONE KOJI SANJAJU "OTCJEPLJENJE OD NAMETNUTE BE-I-HA" I KOMADANJE BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE, A DA UJEDNO OPOMENEM BOŠNJAČKE LOPOVSKE POLITIČARE DA DOBRO OTVORE OČI KADA BUDU PREGOVARALI O NOVOM USTAVU BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE!!! AKO NAS IZDAJU I PRODAJU, NIGDJE SE NEĆE SAKRITI, TO IM JA GARANTIRAM!!!

Znas i sam da je sa njihovim ocima sve u redu.I vazda im sirom otvorene,ali ne iz istih razloga zbog kojih bi to gradjanstvo zeljelo.Sto opet njih plaho sekira...
Ako ocekujes(mo) da OVI postojeci dobro i posteno odrade svoj posao kao sto su ga odradili i jos odradjuju,onda smo stvaaarno - necu da budem prost .

Ja sam ih lijepo upozorio i dao do znanja da znamo šta mogu, i šta MORAJU... Nemaju nikakvih izgovora u stilu "nije se moglo više..." Ako učine išta više protiv Bosne, kunem se Bogom jedinim da se neću smiriti dok ih jednog po jednog ne "smirim"... Ovo mišljenje imaju i moji borci, a nadam se i većina ostalih bosanskih patriota. Znam da nas ima dovoljno!

[omar little]

Samo se vi opet igrajte vatrom. Iz SFRJ je proistekla državnost BiH na temelju ravnopravnosti konstitutivnih naroda. Urušivši temelje svoje države referendumom 1991. izazvali ste rat koji se završio nacionalnim udaljavanjem idubokim nepoverenjem. Da li ste svesni šta radite?

Jesam li ja jedina, koja kad cita ovaj post, i postove ovog korisnika/ce, bukvalno cuje u pozadini "od topole, od topole"?
FUJ!

[Prozor]

ma eto, jadni cetnici, sa cijelom JNA, dobro opremljenim seseljevcima, arkanovcima, niskim specijalcima...svojom TO, mup-om, naoruzanim sds-ovcima, rumunskim, ruskim, bugarskim, grckim i inim dobrovoljcima, JSO - crvenim beretkama, belim orlovima, osvetnicima, hrvatskim srbima iza ledja... su morali da nesto pokrenu kad su zlocesti bosanci odlucili da imaju drzavu, onako sa jednom puskom na svakog cetvrtog, od kojih su dvojica ispod 20...

[Brkic1978]

Prozor pazi da ne zaboravis nekoga.

[Prozor]

[simi5]

Kane odgovoriću ali pošto nemam nameru da kopiram nego da pišem treba mi malo više vremena.

[Real Khan]

E sad smo se usrali od straha

Jesam li tebe išta pitao...? Ako si se usrao, idi i operi se i kupi nove pelene

[Real Khan]

Kane odgovoriću ali pošto nemam nameru da kopiram nego da pišem treba mi malo više vremena.

Pa hajde više, ja osijedio čekajući. Baš me zanima kako ćeš pobiti argumente Badinterove komisije (pretpostavljam da je to "nepravedna komisija koja se urotila protiv naroda i narodnosti Socijalističke Federativne Republike Jugoslavije i posebno protiv srpskoga "pravednog" naroda, i njihovog pacifističkog političkog i vojnog rukovodstva,...)

Morao sam u cijelosti ubaciti originalnu verziju Mišljenja Badinterove komisije, jer šta god da sam napisao drugo, bio bih vjerovatno optužen za neobjektivnost... Ovako više volim dobre stare hladne pravne činjenice...

[Mujko]

Mislim, da je uredjenje Velike Britanije i Bosne i Hercegovine susta suprotnost.Engleska, Skotska i Vels su nekada bile neovisne drzave zasnovane na kraljevstvu tj. monarhiji.Zbog toga je Engleski narod, nacija i skotski narod, jednostavno nacija.
Bosna i Hercegovina je poznata po jednom drugacijem sistemu Bosanstva i Hercegovstva koje su se kroz historiju pojavljivale.Uvijek su u Bosni i Hercegovini preovladavali visi interesi jedinstva Bosne i respektovanja Hercegovackog bica kao nerazdvojnog elementa ujedinjenog Bosanstva.zbog toga je jedinstveni jezik za Bosnu i Hercegovinu, Bosanski jezik.Znaci preovladava onaj visi interes bosanske tolerancije drustva i nacionalnog bica.

[osa]

Mislim, da je uredjenje Velike Britanije i Bosne i Hercegovine susta suprotnost.Engleska, Skotska i Vels su nekada bile neovisne drzave zasnovane na kraljevstvu tj. monarhiji.Zbog toga je Engleski narod, nacija i skotski narod, jednostavno nacija.
Bosna i Hercegovina je poznata po jednom drugacijem sistemu Bosanstva i Hercegovnistva koje su se kroz historiju pojavljivale.Uvijek su u Bosni i Hercegovini preovladavali visi interesi jedinstva Bosne i respektovanja Hercegovackog bica kao nerazdvojnog elementa ujedinjenog Bosanstva.zbog toga je jedinstveni jezik za Bosnu i Hercegovinu, Bosanski jezik.Znaci preovladava onaj visi interes bosanske tolerancije drustva i nacionalnog bica.

hercegovništva, jeli ta riječ iz bosanskog jezika.

[Mujko]

I am sorry.Hercegovstvo.Nisam pazio na detalje mog termina.

[Real Khan]

I am sorry.Hercegovstvo.Nisam pazio na detalje mog termina.

Ma daj bolan, ja nikad nisam čuo za ovaj termin, a moj djed je porijeklom iz Hercegovine. Pa i on mi je govorio da su Hercegovci regionalci, kao i Krajišnici ili Posavci,itd. ali smo svi mi u stvari BOSANCI. Pa majka mu stara kako se zvala Bosna od svog prvog pominjanja u historiji!!! Shvataš li ti da je Hercegovina (ili HUM) samo dio Bosne i nikada nisu postojali Hercegovci kao narod. Osvijesti se bolan nebio, pa uzmi knjige i čitaj... ako nisi učio u školi idi ponovo. I na kraju mani se gluposti...