| Popis: |
За Босански устав 1910, чија је годишњица била 2010, наши преци су, у недостатку бољега, живели, борили се и умирали. Он је за њих, као и данашњи устав за нас, био знак слободе, закона и реда. Зато је стогодишњица овог Устава, чији су доносиоци били странци, важна и за данашње уставно питање у Босни и Херцеговини. Bosnian Constitution of 1910 was passed in difficult times and strained inner and international circumstances. In such condition of a colonial occupation and political organization on national and religious basis, this constitution, as it was the case with all movements for liberation, was not a product of a battle of the population with the foreigners but was an “imposed compromise”. There did not exist any organized national and political power for such kind of struggle. Those who were present, like leaders of the newly arisen civic political groups, avoided any action on side of the people, partly because of the feudal and clerical interests. It was because of their class interests that they were adjustable to the foreign authorities. The powers of opposition, like workers and their movement, were at the beginnings of founding and organizing themselves and lacked the support of the far numerous peasant masses and contact with other progressive social forces. This constitution was imposed by foreign invader in form of the “extraordinary” gift which did not satisfy the population because it served to extinguish the revolutionary national fire. At the same time, it reflected reactionary beliefs of the foreign aggressor and represented, formally, a kind of progress while being, in fact, in its greater part, a confirmation of the existing state formed in the long period of the occupational absolutistic rule. B&H remained dependent on the Monarchy, with bureaucratic Government which was in no way responsible to the Sabor, which was national representative body of “little influence”, without constituent initiative and with limited legislative functions. This is why the Constitution of 1910, with its main regulations represented a new form of the old absolutism and in its essence was an “illusion”. Of utmost importance were Hungarian jealousy and fears that solving of the Bosnian question would be followed by settling of the Yugoslav issues. Also, the Austrians were suspicious of the population, especially of the Serbs. Because of such politics, and, after the Constitution, the problem of Bosnia and Herzegovina remained an “open wound”, said in words of the very joint Minister of finances, Stefan Burijan, a longstanding supreme chief of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s government. Bearing in mind the “wound” which Bosnia and Herzegovina experienced with the Constitution of 1910 in World War I, in order that the Constitution of Deiton should not become a new “permanent wound”, a new constitution should preserve the principles of Deiton. It should, also, have “special connections” of not only of Republika Srpska with Serbia but of Muslim-Croatian’s Federation with Croatia, too. Also, both of them, as well as the State of Bosnia and Herzegovina have similar or same ethnical and religious structure with those of Serbia, Croatia and Montenegro. The State of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as Republika Srpska and the Federation should involve in a struggle which would suppress Serbian and Croatian separatism. It should, also, calm the Bošnjaks and prevent possible pretensions of Serbia and Croatia on Bosnia and Herzegovina. In this way, the new Constitution could have a better future than the Constitution of Deiton, and, especially, the Bosnian Constitution of 1910 have had. Recueil de l’histoire de bosnie et herzegovine, 7 |
