BOSNIA - DISPLACED CROAT COMMUNITY DENIED VOTER

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 SARAJEVO 001435 SIPDIS EUR/SCE (HYLAND, FOOKS),NSC FOR HELGERSON E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/09/2018 TAGS: PREL PGOV PINR KDEM BK SUBJECT: BOSNIA - DISPLACED CROAT COMMUNITY DENIED VOTER REGISTRATION Classified By: Ambassador Charles English, for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). ¶1. (C) SUMMARY: On 28 August, the Central Election Commission (CEC) rejected the voter registration applications of 2,048 displaced Bosnian Croats, provoking howls of criticism from Croat political parties that they and their voters were victims of discrimination. The CEC's decision rests on complicated interpretation of Bosnian law and regulations. Over the past several days, the decision has prompted Croatian government officials, including PM Sanader, to ask High Representative Lajcak to intervene. Republika Srpska-based (RS) parties blocked a September 3 Croat attempt to amend the BiH Election Law, which would have definitively resolved the matter in favor enfranchising the Posavina Croats. The Ambassador has also contacted the Chairman of the CEC to discuss the issue and urge that the CEC find a solution consistent with Bosnian law that ensures the displaced Posavina Croats can enjoy their legitimate voting rights. The CEC is slated to discuss possible resolutions over the next several days. It is difficult to envision an outcome that makes everyone happy, ensuring that the political brouhaha over the Posavina Croats' voting rights is likely to drag on through the end of the municipal election campaign. END SUMMARY. Croat Diaspora Voter Registration Denied -------------- ¶2. (SBU) On 28 August, the CEC rejected the voter registration applications of 2,048 displaced Bosnian Croats -- originally from the Posavina region in the RS but currently living in Croatia -- for out-of-country voting by mail. These individuals submitted documents that had been issued by an "unauthorized office" in Slavonski Brod, Croatia, as proof of Bosnian citizenship. (Note: A number of birth registry books from the Posavina region were taken to Croatia during the 1992-1995 war. End Note.) The CEC's decision provoked a hue and cry from the Croat political parties, including HDZ-BiH and HDZ-1990, who charged that their voters were victims of discrimination. ¶3. (SBU) The CEC based its rejection of the applications on an opinion of the Bosnian Ministry of Civil Affairs, which considered certificates issued by an unauthorized office invalid. Our contacts in CEC told us that the Slavonski Brod office was an authorized office until a 2002 decision that all voters must provide citizenship documentation issued by a government office located in Bosnia. This 2002 decision was the basis for the Civil Affairs Ministry's conclusion that the displaced Croats' application documents were invalid. Three groups -) the NGO Feniks, HDZ-1990, and HSS -) appealed to the CEC on September 4 and presented it with evidence that the same voters were permitted to vote in 2006 using the contested citizenship certificates. Options are Limited -------------- ¶4. (C) These displaced Croats theoretically could still vote in person, but this would require proof not only of Bosnia citizenship but of permanent residence in Bosnia (the latter requirement does not apply to voting by mail). Everyone who votes in person must present a Bosnian ID at the voting station. The CEC was told on September 4 that 1,823 of the 2,040 Croats in question hold Croatian citizenship and have permanent residence in Croatia, so their only option would be to change their permanent residence back to their pre-war Bosnian municipality. According to the press, few Croats will do so, as it would entail giving up health and retirement benefits in Croatia. Prelude: Miscommunication and Red Tape -------------- ¶5. (C) The problems associated with the registration process for these Croats are not new, and attempting to resolve them has been plagued by years of miscommunication. Our contacts in the CEC and OHR told us that the coalition of small Croat parties, HSS/NHI, sent letters to the Ministry of Civil Affairs, the Ministry of Security, and the State Investigation and Protection Agency (SIPA) in 2005, requesting that the documentation located SARAJEVO 00001435 002 OF 002 in Croatia be sent to Bosnia. HSS/NHI never received responses and did not follow up until this summer, when the NGO "Feniks" worked extensively to register Croat displaced persons for the municipal elections. ¶6. (C) Feniks and the CEC also crossed wires on whether the documents from Slavonski Brod were sufficient to register, which led to the last-minute scramble for a solution once this group discovered the documents would not be honored. Feniks representatives claim the CEC notified them in late July that these Croats' birth certificates would provide valid evidence of Bosnia citizenship despite the fact that the certificates are now located in Croatia. But our contacts in OHR told us that the CEC only had told the would-be voters that it had received their applications and did not provide information on their validity. OHR Gets Involved -------------- ¶7. (C) Croatian PM Ivo Sanader and Croatian Ambassador to Bosnia Josip Vrbosic each called HighRep Miroslav Lajcak to discuss this issue. Lajcak then wrote a letter to the CEC asking for further deliberation on a possible solution within the framework of the BiH Election Law. He urged that, should a resolution not be possible, the CEC should issue an official decision rejecting the voter registration applications quickly so that the people in question could seek legal remedy. Lajcak also wrote to Sanader to inform him of his actions and to seek Sanader's support in transferring the citizens' registry books back to Bosnia. Ambassador Urges Workable Solution -------------- ¶8. (C) Ambassador called CEC Chair Arnautovic to urge that the CEC seek to resolve the issue in a manner that ensures these Croats can enjoy their legitimate voting rights. Arnautovic told Ambassador that the CEC is balking at most proposed solutions out of fear that they might deviate from the letter of the Bosnian law. One CEC member stated he plans to propose allowingQroats to vote on unconfirmed ballots by placing them on special voting lists, but Arnautovic told Ambassador that this solution would not be plausible for legal reasons. Ambassador encouraged Arnautovic to find a workable solution within the law. ¶9. (C) Arnautovic observed that the Head of the Croat Caucus in the Bosnian Parliament had proposed amending BiH Election Law to extend the registration and voting deadlines at parliament's September 3 session, but RS representatives blocked it. Arnautovic asked the Ambassador to urge the HighRep to use his Bonn powers to extend the deadline for Diaspora registration and for the submission of ballots in order to allow the Croats to vote. The Ambassador noted that use of the Bonn Powers was unlikely. Comment -------------- ¶10. (C) The CEC promised to rule on the complaint filed by Feniks, HDZ-1990, and HSS by September 11. In the meantime, OHR suggested that CEC could amend a bylaw to BiH Election Law (a move the CEC could take on its own without parliamentary approval) to provide for these Croats to vote. In a follow-up conversation with the Ambassador on September 8, Arnautovic said that he would table his own proposal that would allow the Croats to vote, which he hoped would receive support from his CEC colleagues. The Croat parties will be upset if their constituents are unable to cast ballots in RS municipalities where they believe those votes could translate into a stronger Croat presence in municipal government. If the Posavina Croats are allowed to vote, the RS-based parties will be unhappy, and are likely to accuse the CEC of over stepping its authority or violating Bosnian law. In other words, whatever the outcome of the CEC's deliberations, this political tempest is likely to hover over Bosnia for the remainder of the election campaign. ENGLISH