Promoting Safe and Peaceful Repatriation under the Dayton Agreements

Elizabeth Andersen¹

Full text available: PDF format ^*

I. Introduction

Among the greatest difficulties presented by the peace plan for Bosnia-Herzegovina negotiated in Dayton last fall will be the repatriation and reintegration of refugees and displaced persons scattered throughout Bosnia-Herzegovina, neighboring states, and other European countries. The challenge is two-fold: first, to conduct repatriation in a manner that does not subject returnees to renewed threats of persecution or otherwise violate their rights under the Dayton Agreements² and international law; second, to ensure that repatriation does not undermine the peace, but rather maximizes the chance that it will prove lasting. While these responsibilities will obviously fall heavily on the shoulders of the parties to the Dayton Agreements themselves, the present analysis focusses on the role to be played by the western European countries currently playing host to hundreds of thousands of refugees. Specifically, it is the intent of this analysis to underscore the dangers of western European plans to pursue swift repatriation early in the peace process. Such plans threaten the rights of displaced persons, including rights acquired under the Dayton Agreements that are not only important to the individual returnees but also to efforts to obtain enduring peace and stability in the region.

By way of background, the article begins with a brief description of the problem--the numbers of displaced persons and their legal status in countries of asylum. Next, the article reviews two particularly relevant components of the Dayton Agreements: the Agreement on Refugees and Displaced Persons, attached as Annex VII to the Framework Agreement; and the Agreement on Elections, attached as Annex III to the Framework Agreement. In particular, this discussion emphasizes provisions establishing the rights of displaced persons to participate in elections and to return to their pre-war homes, arguing that these rights are critical to efforts to counter the effects of ethnic cleansing and to rebuild a peaceful, heterogeneous society in Bosnia-Herzegovina. This discussion is followed by a brief description of the repatriation plan developed by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (the "UNHCR") and the faster-track repatriation foreseen by some western European states. In conclusion the article then explains how these latter plans may compromise the rights of displaced persons, including the rights to participate in elections and to return to their pre-war homes, thereby jeopardizing the long-term prospects for peace in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

^* The free viewer (Acrobat Reader) for PDF file is available at the Adobe Systems.

1 Fulbright Fellow, Human Rights Watch/Helsinki. All opinions expressed in this article are the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the institutions with which she is affiliated.

2 The peace plan for Bosnia-Herzegovina consists of a General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina (the "Framework Agreement"), together with a new Constitution and a number of additional issue-specific agreements annexed to it. The entire plan contained in this package of agreements will be referred to herein collectively as the "Dayton Agreements."

© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law
All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster
This site is part of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European Law at the European University Institute.
This file was last modified: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 12:23PM