Bosnia's Constitutional Court Invalidates Republika Srpska Government Appointment

The Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina held its 166th plenary session on January 22 and 23, 2026, during which it ruled on requests for abstract constitutional review, as well as on a large number of appeals.

Among the most significant decisions was the ruling in Case U-29/25, which concerns a constitutional dispute between Bosnia and Herzegovina and the entity of Republika Srpska, related to the appointment of the President and members of the Government of Republika Srpska.

The request for a review of constitutionality was submitted by eleven members of the House of Representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including the First Deputy Speaker of the House of Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as additional eleven members of the House of Representatives.

However, on August 23, 2025, Dodik adopted a decision proposing a candidate for the position of President of the Government of Republika Srpska. Based on that proposal, the contested decisions on the appointment of the Government were adopted on September 2, 2025.

The Constitutional Court concluded that such conduct raises serious concerns regarding the rule of law, which is one of the fundamental principles of the constitutional order of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as stipulated in Article I/2 of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The Court further emphasized that the dispute also involves non-compliance with the decisions of the institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as regulated by Article III/3(b) of the Constitution. For this reason, the Constitutional Court established that it has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate this matter.

On the merits of the case, the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina concluded that the contested decisions were contrary to the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina for the period from their adoption on September 2, 2025, until their repeal on January 18, 2026.

The Court found that the decisions were adopted on the basis of an act signed by a person who did not possess a valid constitutional mandate, thereby directly undermining the constitutional order and the principle of legality.

The ruling of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina in this case has a broader constitutional significance, as it reaffirms the obligation to respect the decisions of state institutions and confirms that no level of government, including the entities, can act outside of the framework of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina.