Vucic: Under what act does property in BiH belong to central authorities, and not to entities?

BELGRADE - Under what act does public property in Bosnia-Herzegovina belong to the country's central authorities, and not to its entities, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic asked on Tuesday in response to claims from the US embassy in Sarajevo that the conclusions adopted at a recent All-Serbian Assembly in Belgrade were an attack on the Dayton Agreement and Bosnia and Herzegovina state institutions.

In a video posted on his buducnostsrbijeav Instagram account, Vucic said criticism levelled at the Assembly by the embassy was "quite interesting."

He noted that the Dayton Agreement regulated the powers of the central authorities and the two entities.

"And I will ask those who said we trampled the Dayton Agreement - our partners from the US embassy in Bosnia and Herzegovina - the most specific question," Vucic added.

"How, where and since when anything says property belongs to the central authorities, and not to entities? Namely, Article 3 of the Bosnia and Herzegovina Constitution, and Annex 4 to the Dayton Agreement, envision that all state powers not explicitly assigned to BiH institutions shall belong to entities."

"Article 3.1 stipulates the powers of BiH institutions - foreign policy, external trade policy, customs policy, monetary policy, financing of BiH institutions and international obligations, the immigration, refugee and asylum policy, implementation of penal legislation, relations with Interpol, international communication, transport between entities and air traffic control," he said.

Vucic noted that, evidently, there was no mention of public property.

"So I am asking you, dear partners from the US embassy, to give me a specific answer as to how, on what grounds and based on what act you have come to the conclusion that property belongs to the central authorities, and not entities, as is clearly stated in the Dayton Agreement, which, among other things, was the reason for you to spark a crisis in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. At the same time, I expect you to answer, as you have said on several occasions already, that this has to do with a 2001 succession agreement, which entered into force in 2004," Vucic added.

He urged the US embassy not to respond in that way as doing so would be "very stupid."

"Succession regulates the rights and obligations of states that emerged in the territory of the former Yugoslavia, and not how public property will be distributed within one of the member states that emerged following the breakup of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia," Vucic also said.