bosnia report
New Series No: 27-28 January - May 2002
 
Three comments on BR 23/24/25 Chronology of Events
by OHR

Office of the High Representative

Emerika Bluma 1

71000 Sarajevo

26 November 2001

 

To the editor of Bosnia Report

 

I am concerned that Bosnia Report’s chronology of events, in issue 23/24/25 (June-October 2001) contains several assertions that I do not feel are correct:

1. Concerning the High Representative’s Decision of 11 January established the Constitutional Commissions in both Entities, you state that it falls far short of harmonizing the country’s institutions in such a way as to implement adequately the decisions of the BiH Constitutional Court. The High Representative’s decision actually urges and enables the Entity Parliaments to undertake the constitutional reform process by the themselves, in the spirit of ownership. This was the intention of the decision. At the same time, the OHR is constantly promoting and steering this process.

2. On the third mobile phone license (31 July 2001), your report that the original tendering was non-transparent and rigged against BiH interests is wrong. The tender was fully transparent, and in line with the highest international standards set by the World Trade Organization - it was certainly not rigged against BiH interests. On the contrary, it would have opened the BiH market to competition providing BiH with approximately 400 million KM worth of investment in infrastructure and many hundreds of much-needed, long-term jobs.

3. The comments on Aluminium Mostar are not accurate. The legal audit conducted by an independent team of lawyers to clarify the ownership structure of the company was commissioned by OHR, but is in no way a binding instrument. This report is one of the elements at the disposal of the parties in question, the Government of the Federation on one side and the management of the company on the other, to arrive at a settlement in this dispute over the ownership of the enterprise. The High Representative has stated that OHR is ready to act as a facilitator in resolving these issues but will certainly not impose a decision. In this spirit, OHR will continue to favour a settlement that will not disrupt Aluminium Mostar’;s operations and that fully promotes fair and non-discriminatory treatment for the employees.

I am sure you will agree that the accuracy of reporting provided by publications such as yours is vital for the development of BiH as a modern European state. I hope, therefore, that you will find a way to emphasize these corrections in your next edition.

Yours sincerely,

Oleg Milisic, OHR spokesperson

 

contents
contents

   Table of contents

  Latest issue

  Archive

  Search

  Support the Institute

  Subscriptions

 
home | about us | publications | events | news | Library | contact | bosnia | search | bosnia report | credits