|
brcko Arbitral Tribunal
for
Dispute Over the Inter-Entity
Boundary in Brcko Area
_________________________________
Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina
v.
Arbitration
for the Brcko area
The Republika Srpska
_________________________________
15 March 1998
Appearances:
For the Federation of Bosnia and
Herzegovina:
Frank McCloskey
Edward O. Delaney
Barnes & Thornburg
Jay D. Zeiler
Akin, Gump, Strauss,
Hauer & Feld
For the Republika
Srpska:
Nikola Kostich
Styler, Kostich, LeBell
Dobroski &
McGuire
John M. Adams
1.
This Tribunal's Award
of 14 February 1997 (hereinafter "the Award") established an international
supervisory regime in the disputed Brcko region but concluded that it would be
inappropriate at that time to make a judgment as to what "final allocation of
political responsibilities . . . following the period of interim supervision"
would best achieve implementation of the Dayton Accords and the development of
representative local government in the Brcko area. Award Para. 104(II)(A). It
also authorized either party to request, between 1 December 1997 and 15 January
1998, further action affecting the Award with respect to the allocation of
political responsibilities in the area. Id. A timely request was made by the
Federation; the Tribunal then conferred with counsel for the parties and adopted
an agreed schedule for written submissions and oral hearings; eight full days of
hearings were held in Vienna in the period 5-12 February 1998; and the parties'
final written submissions were completed on 4 March 1998.(1)
2.
As indicated in the
Award, the principal source of the legal and equitable principles that must
guide this Tribunal is the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and
Herzegovina, referred to hereinafter as the "Dayton Accords". Under those
Accords this Tribunal has a duty to allocate political responsibilities in the
Brcko area in such a way as to give the fullest possible effect to Dayton's
commands for country-wide freedom of movement, the return of displaced persons
and refugees, the re-establishment of a multi-ethnic society, and the
democratization of the political process -- all in the interests of regional and
international peace. See Award Paras. 95-99. Under this mandate the Tribunal
must "review the facts as to whether these principles are now being honored in
the disputed area, and as to how such compliance might be assured in the
future." Award Para. 83.
3.
To ease inter-Entity
tensions in the Brcko area and maximize the parties' compliance with the Dayton
Accords during 1997, the Award provided for the installation of an international
supervisor with authority to issue such orders and regulations as might be
necessary to guide the parties toward full Dayton compliance and to promote and
protect the legitimate interests of both parties in the Brcko area. In addition,
the Award essentially put the parties on notice that in any further proceedings
the Tribunal would pay close attention to the parties' subsequent compliance
records. Accordingly, the central factual issues upon which both parties
focussed their attention during the Vienna hearings were: first, the extent to
which the parties had succeeded in achieving compliance with the Dayton Accords
over the preceding 12 months; and, second, the degree to which each Entity could
be expected to serve as a reliable "guardian" of the parties' interests in the
future.
4.
Without attempting
here to summarize all of the hearing evidence, the main themes of the testimony
were these:
1.
The Federation came
forward with voluminous evidence to show that throughout 1997 officials of
Republika Srpska ("the RS") -- in flagrant violation of the Dayton Accords and
the Award -- stubbornly resisted all efforts by the Supervisor and the
Federation to achieve, within the Brcko area, freedom of movement, the return of
displaced persons and refugees, and the establishment of democratic multi-ethnic
government. In light of this obstructionism, Federation President Ejup Ganic
testified in support of the Federation's claim to have Brcko transferred to the
Federation, arguing that such a step was necessary to achieve "justice" in two
respects -- all former residents of Brcko should be allowed to return and
reoccupy their Brcko homes, and the Federation's citizens generally should enjoy
an open economic gateway through Brcko to Croatia and the rest of Europe.
Recalling that Serb forces ethnically cleansed the Brcko area during the war and
asserting that, as evidenced by certain recent political developments noted
below (see Paras. 9-11), infra), the RS now is allegedly in a state of
"disarray," the Federation argued that the RS cannot be trusted to adequately
safeguard Federation interests in the areas.
2.
At the hearings the RS
laid heavy emphasis on its interest in territorial continuity (i.e., in
maintaining the Brcko corridor connection between the RS's eastern and western
halves), the theory being that maintenance of such a corridor under the
exclusive control of the RS is absolutely vital strategically in order to allow
(for example) RS armed forces to move as necessary throughout the Entity. To the
RS, any thought of placing the Brcko corridor under Federation control is an
anathema, particularly because of the alleged "disunity" within the Federation
government.
5.
As a threshold matter,
in seeking to achieve an "equitable result" (see Award Para. 88), the Tribunal
must consider the events of 1997 and the latest political developments as they
may affect the Brcko area and the prospects of long-term compliance with the
Dayton Accords. In reaching the decision articulated below, therefore, the
Tribunal has relied upon the following facts established by the evidence
submitted by the parties during the course of the arbitration.(2)
6.
In March 1997 U.S.
Ambassador Robert W. Farrand was selected to serve as the Supervisor in the
Brcko area. Since April, when he actually arrived on the scene, Ambassador
Farrand and his staff have vigorously and skillfully pressed forward with the
herculean task of building, from scratch, new programs for achieving real
freedom of movement in the area, bringing about the return to Brcko of former
residents (particularly Bosniac and Croat residents), creating a whole new
system of multi-ethnic municipal government, and revitalizing the local economy.
7.
Despite the tremendous
efforts of the supervisory team, the hearing record clearly establishes that
throughout the last year RS authorities in Brcko, directed by the Serbian
Democratic Party ("SDS") headquartered in Pale, effectively resisted all of the
supervisory programs looking toward Dayton compliance in the Brcko area. To give
a few examples, the RS police in Brcko, acting on the orders of the
Pale-controlled Minister of the Interior, systematically thwarted freedom of
movement north of the IEBL in various ways including the use of illegal
checkpoints and unjustified arrests; there was systematic intimidation of any
Bosniacs or Croats who explored the possibility of returning to their former
homes in the area; those few Bosniac and Croat families who still lived in the
area were put under pressure to leave; on 1 May 1997, when a Bosniac group came
to Brcko to confer with the Supervisor, they were stoned as they left, and no
one was prosecuted; on 28 August 1997 a major riot and an attack, apparently
sponsored by Pale, were launched not only on visiting Bosniacs but on IPTF,
SFOR, and other international personnel, causing many injuries and great
property damage, again without any subsequent prosecution; and in advance of the
September municipal elections, the SDS caused such serious registration
irregularities that the registration process had to be cancelled and restarted
under increased international supervision.(3) The apparent
objective of all these Pale-sponsored Dayton violations was to maintain the
Serbs-only "ethnic purity" of the region and thus completely frustrate the
Dayton objective of returning Bosnia and Herzegovina to its pre-war
multi-ethnicity.
8.
This is not to say
that the Federation's record of compliance with the letter and spirit of the
Dayton Accords was perfect. For example, there is considerable evidence that
Federation authorities have acted to inhibit the return of former Serb residents
to Sarajevo and other communities within the Federation. The absence of full
Dayton implementation in the Sarajevo area is particularly relevant because
several thousand Serbs who formerly lived in Sarajevo are now living in the
Brcko homes of Bosniacs and Croats who would like to return to Brcko - but
cannot do so because the Serb occupying their Brcko homes are unable to return
to Sarajevo. Thus while Federation authorities complain that the RS has been
refusing to let Bosniac and Croat DPs return to Brcko, to a substantial degree
they themselves are contributing to the problem. See generally Sarajevo
Declaration of 3 February 1998. Nonetheless, during much of 1997 the RS's
systematic resistance to Dayton in the Brcko area appeared clearly to be tipping
the balance of the equities in favor of the Federation's claim to either
exclusive or shared control of Brcko.
9.
Although that was the
situation through much of 1997, the political picture in the RS began to change
in July of that year. A serious and public rift opened up between the SDS Pale
leadership (including Messrs. Karadzic, Krajisnik, and Buha) and President
Biljana Plavsic, who separated herself from the Pale group and set up her own
headquarters in Banja Luka. While the old SDS nationalist anti-Dayton themes
continued to dominate the political rhetoric in the eastern part of the RS and
in Brcko, Mrs. Plavsic moved to a more progressive stance, separated herself
from the SDS, formed a new party (the SNS), and began to embrace the Dayton
Accords with apparent enthusiasm. The rift between the two elements has steadily
widened since July.
10.
An event which may (or
may not) turn out to be a vital turning point occurred on 18 January 1998. At
that time various groups in the RS National Assembly, including supporters of
Mrs. Plavsic, broke away from earlier alignments and installed Milorad Dodik as
Prime Minister of the RS in outright defiance of the SDS. In a speech given that
night Mr. Dodik openly rejected the philosophy of the SDS, called upon the RS to
comply with "the European Convention on Human Rights as an integral part of the
Dayton Agreement," espoused the principle of regional democratic governments
throughout the RS, criticized "the previous government" for having "obstructed
the Dayton agreement in every way possible," and called for the complete
"democratization" of RS society.
11.
The possibility that
the emergence of Mr. Dodik represents a fundamental change in direction in RS
politics (as distinguished from a short-lived effort to influence this
arbitration proceeding) receives support from Mr. Dodik's testimony before this
Tribunal. Declaring that he had never been a member of the SDS and had always
opposed nationalism, Mr. Dodik described in detail a whole series of reforms
that he had managed to put in place within the first 20 days of his elevation,
all pointing toward a rejection of SDS principles and future cooperation with
the Federation. Although he said he strongly favors keeping Brcko within RS
territory, he went on to say that, if nationalist politics were put to one side
and Bosnia and Herzegovina became truly democratic, the "IEBL will be an
irrelevant issue" -- apparently meaning that the IEBL would cease to have any
more political effect than the border between, for example, two internal
political districts of a Western European country. He specifically agreed that
Bosniacs and Croats should be permitted to return to Brcko and that they should
be allowed to control the local administration in Brcko if they earned that
right at the ballot box.
12.
In the Tribunal's
view, the most impressive point made by Mr. Dodik was and is his recognition of
the ideal that Bosnia and Herzegovina should become such an integrated
multi-ethnic democratic state that the boundary between the two Entities will
cease to be relevant. This position suggests the possibility that, if Mr. Dodik
survives politically through the RS election scheduled for September 1998 - and
if at the end of the year he and his colleagues in the new RS government still
appear to be moving toward his declared objective -- the equities of the
situation will be much more evenly balanced than they are today. Conversely, the
coming months obviously could bring a very different result: Mr. Dodik may lose
his influence or change his position, in which case the RS's claim to exclusive
control of the area would be seriously jeopardized.
13.
Since some witnesses
at the Vienna hearings called for the immediate termination of the international
supervisory regime that was established by the Award, the Tribunal will turn
first to the question of whether or not to continue the interim international
supervisory regime in the Brcko area.
14.
The short answer is
that, no matter what ruling the Tribunal might now make on the question of the
location of the IEBL, there would be an evident need for continuing
international supervision well into the future. Specifically, any change in the
status of Brcko (by placing it within Federation territory or creating a
"neutral district") would bring with it a need for supervision during the period
of adjustment -- and, in light of the RS's continuing course of conduct since
Dayton and continuing tensions in the area, the same sort of regime would be
required for maintenance of the status quo. In fact, this continuing need has
been recognized by senior leaders of both Entities, who have acknowledged that,
no matter what the Tribunal's ruling today, some level of international
supervision should continue in order to reduce existing tensions in the area.
Given Supervisor Farrand's hearing testimony that the new multi-ethnic
institutions which he has been nurturing in the Brcko area are still very
"shallowly rooted" -- and particularly given the continuing influence of the SDS
in the Brcko area -- the need to continue the current supervisory regime for a
further period of time seems overwhelmingly clear(4). This
Supplemental Award provides accordingly.
- There are powerful arguments in favor of an immediate
final ruling on the question of the proper location of the IEBL in the Brcko
area -- i.e., whether the area in dispute should be transferred to the
Federation, whether it should remain within the territory of the RS, or
whether it should be declared a "special" or "neutral district" in the manner
forecast in the Award. See Award Para. 103.(5) Some of the
considerations are these:
- the Award contemplated a final decision now;
- both parties claim that they want such a decision
now; and
- the Tribunal would welcome the opportunity to
close the case and dissolve.
- On the other hand, before bowing to these
considerations the Tribunal must consider whether the time is yet ripe for the
adoption of what is intended to be "a long-term peaceful solution." Award
Para. 97. Although some progress has been made, there continue to exist today
several of the same factors that prompted the Tribunal a year ago to hold in
abeyance the final allocation of political control in the Brcko area. Most
importantly, tensions and instability in the region remain high, primarily
because of the resistance of the SDS leadership in the Supervisor's efforts to
promote Dayton compliance. The Tribunal must also take note of the facts that
the joint institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina have not yet become fully
effective and that various Entity institutions are still struggling with
organizational problems.
- Moreover, it seems clear to the Tribunal that a
reasonable delay in the IEBL decision is likely to provide the Tribunal with a
firmer foundation for selecting the most equitable result. As of this writing,
it seems entirely possible, given recent developments, that at the end of the
current year there will have been a significant change in the RS government's
posture toward Dayton compliance and cooperation with the Federation -- in
which event the solution that would be adopted today might well turn out, in
hindsight, to have been less equitable than it could have been. To be
specific, as of the end of 1997 the circumstances suggested the need for an
outright transfer of Brcko to the Federation, which would have given that
Entity exclusive control of Brcko when the supervisory regime ends -- and yet
significant changes in the RS political scenery by the end of 1998 could well
make one of the alternative solutions more equitable and more conducive to
regional stability over the long run. Recognizing that such a delay will
create another period of uncertainty, we nonetheless believe that the
potential long-term benefits to a delay, in terms of the equities, are worth
the cost of uncertainty for a few more months.
- It is important to consider whether such a
postponement, which would obviously benefit the RS, would be likely to do
injury to the interests of the Federation. Our conclusion is that those
interests should be well protected in the interim by the multiple shields of
the international community. As noted above (see Para. 4, supra), Federation
President Ganic's testimony focussed primarily on the interests of all
Federation citizens in having former residents of Brcko return to their Brcko
homes and in achieving an open economic gateway through Brcko to European
markets. Under the Dayton Accords, of course, both interests are completely
legitimate, and the Tribunal has every confidence that during the period of
delay these interests will be amply protected and promoted by the combined
forces of the Supervisor, the new Brcko multi-ethnic governmental institutions
(which include a multi-ethnic police force), the IPTF and SFOR. Moreover, the
proposed delay may well benefit the Federation: if it provides time for the
progressive forces in the RS to gather strength and begin to cooperate with
the Federation and the Supervisor's compliance programs all of Bosnia and
Herzegovina will benefit;(6) and,
conversely, if the opposite occurs, the Federation's claim to exclusive
control of Brcko will be that much stronger.(7) Indeed, the
resulting benefits should continue not only through the postponement period
but throughout the period of international supervision and beyond.
- All things considered, we incline to the view that the
final IEBL decision should be deferred until early 1999, at which point the
Tribunal will be able to take into account any significant developments that
may have occurred in this critical period of change. This Supplemental Award
therefore provides for a final arbitration phase at the end of 1998.(8)
- Referring to the Tribunal's duty to act according to
"relevant legal and equitable principles," some may argue that the foregoing
rulings are improperly based on purely "political" considerations and lack any
adequate basis in law or equity. For reasons previously explained, we
disagree. One of the unique qualities of the present arbitration is that it
inherently encompasses political considerations, requiring as it does that the
Tribunal allocate political responsibilities between the Entities in a manner
that will advance the goals of Dayton. Moreover, although the Tribunal has a
duty to make a final decision as soon as "that can be done consistent with
relevant legal and equitable principles" (Award Para. 102), it should not act
until matters have become sufficiently stabilized to allow it to put in place
a solution that is likely to endure over the long term. See Award Para. 101.
We therefore think there is both legal and equitable justification for
ordering a relatively short delay to collect additional facts relating both to
probable future compliance with Dayton and the future relationship between the
two Entities.
- Finally, the Tribunal feels impelled to send an
obvious but important message to the RS's political leaders: given the RS's
systematic non-compliance with (indeed, defiance of) the Dayton Accords in the
Brcko area for much if not all of 1997, the Tribunal's final IEBL decision in
late 1998 or early 1999 will surely diminish the RS's position in the Brcko
area unless the RS by that time has carried the burden of demonstrating very
clearly that it has truly reversed course and committed itself to an
apparently permanent program of full Dayton compliance and revitalization of
the area. To carry that burden the RS will need to be in a position to show
significant new achievements in terms of returns of former Brcko residents,
unfettered freedom of movement, strong support for the multi-ethnic
governmental institutions including the multi-ethnic police force, and full
cooperation with the Supervisor and the authorities responsible for conducting
fair and democratic elections in September 1998.(9) Thus, in
any subsequent proceeding, the Tribunal will expect to receive from the RS
evidence displaying a very vigorous and consistent program of correction and
compliance throughout 1998.
- Although the Federation's responsibilities for Dayton
compliance in the Brcko area are of a lesser magnitude (given the present
placement of the IEBL) than those of the RS, the Tribunal should warn the
Federation that in the final IEBL decision its claims will be weakened by less
than full compliance with the obligation to allow former Federation residents
to return to their homes, particularly in Sarajevo. See Para. 8, supra.
- For the foregoing reasons the Tribunal adopts the
following orders and provisions, which shall form part of the Award, shall be
binding upon all Parties to GFAP Annex 2, and with which all Parties shall
comply and cooperate in full.
- The supervisory regime established by the Award (at
Para. 104(I)(B)) shall continue in existence, with the powers and
responsibilities therein provided. The Supervisor, being Deputy High
Representative for Brcko, shall enjoy in the Brcko area powers equivalent to
those conferred upon the High Representative by the Bonn Conference of
December 1997, including the power to remove from office any public official
considered by the Supervisor to be inadequately cooperative with his efforts
to achieve compliance with the Dayton Accords, to strengthen democratic
institutions in the area, and to revitalize the local economy.
- The Supervisor is authorized and encouraged to take
appropriate measures toward economic revitalization, including steps
.
to re-integrate the
economy of that portion of the pre-war Brcko Opstina that lies north of the IEBL
with the economies of surrounding regions,
a.
to create in the Brcko
area a duty-free or special economic zone to stimulate the region's economy,
b.
for the same purpose
to establish a program of privatization of state-owned and socially-owned
enterprises in the area, and
c.
looking toward the
re-opening of the Sava River port in Brcko, to activate the Bosnia and
Herzegovina Transportation Corporation and facilitate international support for
the port program.
- Pending further action by the Tribunal, to be taken
upon the request of either party, the IEBL within the pre-war Brcko Opstina
shall remain unchanged. The Tribunal will entertain and act upon any such
request that is received between 15 November 1998 and 15 January 1999. A
further decision by the Tribunal in response to such a request will be
rendered as soon as possible after the request has been received.
- The Tribunal hereby gives notice
0.
that any further
Tribunal action is likely to be significantly affected by the degree to which
the respective parties have acted in good faith to comply with the Dayton
Accords and the Tribunal's orders, and
1.
that among the
alternative solutions that will be seriously considered by the Tribunal, upon
proper request, will be
- the location or relocation of the IEBL in such a
way as to place Brcko and its surroundings within the territory of one
party or the other, and
- the conversion of the pre-war Brcko Opstina into a
"neutral district" beyond the exclusive control of either Entity.
- The English language text of this Supplemental Award
shall be the authentic text for all purposes.
Roberts B.
Owen
Presiding Arbitrator
(signed)
Cazim Sadikovic
Vitomir Popovic
Arbitrator
Arbitrator
15 March 1998
Endnotes
- As of this writing the two party-appointed members of
the Tribunal, Professor Cazim Sadikovic and Dr. Vitomir Popovic, have not
joined in this Supplemental Award. Following the Vienna hearings, all three
members of the Tribunal met and deliberated and exchanged views, and Messrs.
Sadikovic and Popovic subsequently expanded their views in detailed letters to
the Presiding Arbitrator. These documents make clear that a 2-1 majority
decision now is impossible, with the result that "the decision of the
Presiding Arbitrator will be final and binding upon both parties." See Award
Para. 5.
- Given the decision articulated below, it is necessary
here only to summarize certain key facts, rather than present detailed
findings of fact.
- Even during the second registration the SDS caused
such serious irregularities that election authorities imposed penalties on the
SDS (whose first three candidates were removed from the party's list) and the
head of the local election commission in Brcko (who was docked one month's
pay).
- Although the new institutions may be "shallowly
rooted," Ambassador Farrand and his staff have managed to achieve substantial
progress, particularly in the last few weeks. A multi-ethnic Municipal
Assembly, Administration, and Judiciary are in place; the Returns Commission
established by Ambassador Farrand has managed to achieve larger returns of DPs
and refugees into the Brcko area than has been accomplished throughout all the
rest of the RS; and the multi-ethnic police force under IPTF monitoring is a
policing significant new traffic over the Brcko highway bridge to Croatia and
is now patrolling throughout all areas of the city of Brcko as well as
outlying districts. Since all projects are still in the fledgling stage,
continuing international supervision is absolutely vital to their continued
progress and health.
- Although this is not the time to discuss the matter in
any depth, the Tribunal has preliminary doubts as to the validity of the RS's
repeated suggestions that any "neutral district" solution would violate either
the alleged Dayton 51-49 percent principle or the Constitution of Bosnia and
Herzegovina or both. We intend to keep an open mind on the issue, but our
preliminary analysis indicates that it would be perfectly possible to devise a
"neutral district" solution that would not be vulnerable to either criticism.
- Just as one example, the press reported on 27 February
1998 that, as a result of new RS attitudes, railroad traffic between the two
Entities is starting up for the first time since 1991.
- During his hearing testimony President Ganic made a
strong argument to the effect that, if uncertainty as to the location of the
IEBL is allowed to continue beyond 15 March 1998, (a) economic investment in
the area will be delayed, and (b) large numbers of Bosniac former residents of
Brcko will decide to abandon any plans for return, with the result that it
will no longer be possible to restore the pre-war multi-ethnic balance in
Brcko. While acknowledging the force of Mr. Ganic's argument, the Tribunal
believes that the outlook for a solid democratic multi-ethnic municipal regime
is sufficiently bright today that the relatively brief delay being ordered now
will not discourage would-be investors or returnees in significant numbers.
- The Tribunal recognizes that the delay
of approximately one year creates the risk that if the international community
should decide unexpectedly to withdraw its various Bosnian programs, including
SFOR, during the year or shortly thereafter -- i.e., shortly after the
Tribunal's IEBL decision -- enforcement of the latter decision would be at
least problematic. On the other hand, for one year the risk of such withdrawal
looks quite remote; there is every reason to believe that the various programs
will continue well beyond that point. Such risks will, however, militate
strongly against any additional delay beyond early 1999.
- A greater understanding of the potential
consequences of a failure to achieve these goals may be gained from reviewing
the very detailed "Proposed Final Order of the Arbitration Tribunal" that was
submitted by counsel for the Federation and served on RS counsel near the
conclusion of the present phase of the
arbitration.
|
