engleski

Religion in Consociational State: Any Lessons To Exchange Between Africa and Europe?

It is more than 15 years since the end of the most horrifying war on the European continent in the last century. War which was happening in the house much divided: Bosnia and Herzegovina. War was ended with the Dayton Agreement in which Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia were involved together with US Government and European parties. Dayton agreement brought so wanted peace and ended demonic destructions. But, as every compromise it has brought (not just) a few problems. In this Article I am focusing on the issue which was always felt but never recognized, at least not recognized on that level or in that sense. That is the issue of introducing discriminatory ethnic and therefore religious representation in the country which is member of the Council of Europe, an association where sectarian way of making politics has been abandoned long, long time ago. By signing the Dayton Agreement parties and their supporters accepted inequalities which all of them (at least formally) are saying that are against: political powers accepted mathematics which leads to decision process which allows only three mayor groups to decide for all. The question is who should win - peace with some human rights or human rights in its purest form? I deeply believe that United States, France or any EU Country at least in rational sense would never accept anything which is against liberty, equality and fraternity, but Bosnia is not Ohio or Cote d’Azur - it is really a house much divided. Recent developments in the Council of Europe connected with the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in Sejdić and Finci v Bosnia and Herzegovina in which one Roma and one Jewish citizen of the Federation won the case, forces Bosnia to change its Constitution and allow non Croatian, non Bosniac and non Serbian to be elected for the presidential bodies of the Republic. On 24th of January 2012 Council of Europe requested from Bosnia and Herzegovina to allow to all its citizens to be equal or will face expulsion from the Council. Basically it means that Bosnia has to “demolish” basic law of the country which brought peace. All three major groups are strongly connected to three religions: Croatians are strongly connected to Roman Catholicism, Bosniacs to Muslim Religion and Serbs are Eastern Orthodox Christians. Having national representation actually means having religious representation in the heart of Europe in 21st century. Having this means having Lebanon on the European soil. This article opens questions on comparison between those two countries and asking for its justification or condemnation. As Obeid wrote in Harvard Kennedy School Review in 2010 that in „Lebanon you are never simply Lebanese. You are Sunni from Beirut, Maronite Catholic from Jounieh, or Shia from the South“. We can detect similar for Bosnia: you are never just Bosnian ; you are Croatian and Catholic, Serbian and Orthodox and Bosniac and Muslim. This article shows that there are countries where religion can firm its special national identity which prevents from having strong national unity – unity which would be different from the identity of the religious and ethnic groups which are part of the big and to some extent artificial existence. In those systems as small as you are as far from the decision making process you will be. But you might have peace?

Law, Religion, Africa, Europe, Consociational State

nije evidentirano