Drawn Curtains Yielding Unresolved Inquiries

In a landmark decision on 25 June 2025, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) Grand Chamber ruled in favour of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), potentially overturning previous judgments that found discriminatory violations in the country's ethnic quotas. The case, Kovačević v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, has far-reaching implications for power-sharing arrangements and ethnic quota systems across Europe.

Mr. Kovačević, the applicant in the case, claimed violation and discrimination as a citizen in both his passive and active right to vote. However, the ECtHR Grand Chamber declared his complaint inadmissible, stating that he did not have "victim status" for all his complaints. This decision could mark the end of efforts to "liberalize" the exclusive ethnic power-sharing system in BiH, potentially allowing mono-ethnic parties to maintain control and uphold ethnic segregation in public institutions.

The ECtHR's decision legitimizes the entrenched ethno-national power-sharing system enshrined in the Bosnian constitution. This ruling appears to overrule earlier case law that had criticized BiH's ethnic quotas as discriminatory and inconsistent with human rights standards. The decision validates the de facto "ethno-national cartel of power" in BiH, effectively quashing future legal challenges aimed at reforming or dismantling the strict ethnic allocation of political positions.

The implications for BiH's political future are significant. The ruling likely entrenches the power balance between Bosnia's constituent peoples, making constitutional reform and EU accession more difficult. Beyond BiH, this ruling is predicted to have far-reaching consequences for other power-sharing arrangements and ethnic quota systems in Europe and potentially beyond. Since many multi-ethnic societies employ some form of political quotas to guarantee representation, the Court's endorsement of a rigid ethnic quota system may serve to legalize comparable arrangements elsewhere. However, it might also entrench divisions and reduce incentives to pursue genuinely integrative constitutional reforms.

The detailed reasoning behind the ECtHR Grand Chamber's decision is yet to be published. Once published, it could potentially establish a normative principle for the conformity of all power-sharing systems based on the ECHR, requiring effective political democracy without discrimination based on ethnic affiliation. The decision raises uncertainties about the nature of "indirect elections" to the House of Peoples, the applicant's victim status, and the misuse of the application.

It is important to note that since 2009, the ECtHR has found BiH to violate Article 3 Protocol No.1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the right to free elections, five times. The Grand Chamber's decision could have consequences for all bi-cameral systems among the member states of the Council of Europe, potentially questioning the need for democratic legitimation for second chambers of parliament if not directly elected.

In summary, the key points from the ECtHR Grand Chamber decision and its wider impact are:

Affirmation of strict ethnic quota systems: The Court essentially authorizes the Bosnian constitutional model, which is based on guaranteed ethnic representation and restrictions on candidates depending on their ethnicity.
Overruling prior ECtHR judgments: It reverses earlier case law that found such ethnic quotas to violate the right to non-discrimination and political participation, undermining past legal foundations for reform efforts.
Implications for Bosnia’s political future: The ruling likely entrenches the power balance between Bosnia’s constituent peoples, making constitutional reform and EU accession more difficult.
Broader legal and political impact: Other multi-ethnic countries with power-sharing systems might invoke this ruling to justify similar ethnic quotas, influencing international standards on minority rights and democratic representation beyond Europe.

The decision originates from BiH but may have far-reaching political consequences for other power-sharing systems. As the full written judgment explaining the detailed legal reasoning is not yet available, these conclusions rely on the summary and expert analysis following the ruling. Thus, the Court’s approach and argumentation may be further clarified upon publication of the full decision. Nevertheless, the immediate effect is to uphold a rigid ethno-national political order under the guise of human rights law, with wide-ranging consequences for constitutional law in multi-ethnic societies.

The ECtHR's ruling in favor of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) could potentially stifle efforts to liberalize exclusive ethnic power-sharing systems, allowing mono-ethnic parties to maintain control and uphold ethnic segregation in public institutions, which contradicts the principles of human rights and democracy.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) Grand Chamber's decision legitimizes entrenched ethno-national power-sharing systems, overruling earlier case law that had criticized BiH’s ethnic quotas as discriminatory and inconsistent with human rights standards, which could legalize similar arrangements in other multi-ethnic societies.
The implications of the ECtHR Grand Chamber's decision extend beyond BiH, raising questions about the need for democratic legitimation for second chambers of parliament if not directly elected, and potentially influencing international standards on minority rights and democratic representation, particularly in other power-sharing systems across Europe and beyond.