“Republika Srpska represents a free society where any restrictions on freedom of expression and movement are absolutely intolerable. This right is enshrined in the Constitution for all citizens of Republika Srpska, and as the President of the Republic, I will always stand with those whose rights are under threat,” stated RS President Milorad Dodik on the social platform Iks, denouncing attempts to suppress the rights of future academic citizens to voice their opinions on significant societal issues.

While this statement responded to the recent demonstrations in Banja Luka, which expressed solidarity with peers in Serbia—prompting the Banja Luka Gymnasium management to lockdown the school and prohibit student participation—it starkly contradicts Dodik’s announcements made the previous day.

Foreign-Funded Scum

“A law regulating non-governmental organizations is set to be introduced at the upcoming session of the National Assembly of Republika Srpska. This will be more stringent than our previous compromise proposal, which you rejected. Since you believed you could operate as you please, be prepared for a more rigorous framework,” declared Dodik regarding new regulations aimed at controlling NGO activities, following a signal from the US president regarding the suspension of aid to such organizations.

“There are various scoundrels who misuse foreign funding to tarnish the image of the Serbian people and Republika Srpska. We will not seek revenge, but we will assert that such actions will no longer be tolerated,” Dodik asserted firmly.

However, the contradictory nature of these statements raises questions about how the government intends to regulate NGOs while simultaneously limiting their operations. The move towards regulation began with the reinstatement of defamation laws into the Criminal Code of this Bosnian entity, and the introduction of a foreign agents law appears to be a subsequent measure.

“The prior draft was already severe; we can’t fathom what the new one will entail,” commented Aleksandar Žolja from the Helsinki Citizens’ Parliament Banja Luka, anticipating a challenging operational environment.

A Trigger from Trump

“Expect excessive bureaucracy directed at the Ministry of Justice, control announcements, and that’s merely the beginning. The more complex aspect involves extraordinary inspections and the fact that any citizen can file a complaint against you, reflecting the current public sentiment. Additionally, there will be restrictions on political engagement, which we do not partake in,” Žolja expressed concern over the ominous future.

Last May, when Brussels was critical of RS authorities regarding the proposed law for a special register aimed at enhancing the transparency of non-profit organizations, the discussion was abruptly retracted just before scheduled debate, purportedly for revision. While many presumed this was the end of the legislation, it was merely postponed until a new trigger emerged—specifically, US President Donald Trump’s suspension of global NGO funding.

Following the law’s withdrawal, Dodik elucidated his earlier initiative to draft it years back, claiming it aligned with a less stringent American framework. However, he acknowledged visible criticisms linked to European standards and noted that, due to Republika Srpska’s commitment to the European path, they would withdraw it for further alignment with European laws.

Less than a year later, Dodik now promises a more stringent law, even at the potential expense of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s European aspirations.

“We dismiss the European Union’s concerns. If this implies a disruption of our European path, so be it,” Dodik proclaimed while announcing the forthcoming legislation.

A Special Register for NGOs

Nonetheless, the withdrawn law is not entirely analogous to the American model, as has been suggested. The American Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) does not restrict political activities of NGOs based on foreign funding; rather, it eliminates tax benefits associated with such activities. A critical difference is that this law does not impact media and civil society organizations, nor does it restrict their funding sources.

The retracted law proposed the establishment of a special register for NGOs, required reporting on their operations, and the authority to ban NGO activities if they were deemed politically contrary to the Constitution of the RS.

Banja Luka lawyer Aleksandar Jokić raises concerns regarding the potential for increased rigor of these provisions, questioning the adequacy of the previous law, which already granted significant powers to the relevant minister.

“The previous text included labeling publications as those of foreign influence agents, maintenance of lists of these organizations, double financial reporting, and a ban on political and public interest activities. These wide-ranging powers rested with the minister, with the only remaining consideration being draconian penalties, loss of citizenship, and deportation of NGO members—then we could call it truly rigorous,” Jokić articulated sarcastically, although he admits he has ceased to be surprised by developments.

EU Delegation’s Warning

Last year, international representatives across Bosnia and Herzegovina, from various embassies to the OHR, cautioned against this law’s adoption, urging Banja Luka authorities to abandon the proposal. Currently, the EU Delegation to BiH has voiced concerns, asserting that any legislation limiting the NGO sector would represent a significant setback for fundamental freedoms and the European trajectory, contradicting priorities outlined in the European Commission’s opinion on BiH.

“Civil society organizations are vital to democratic societies, holding elected officials accountable, combating corruption, fortifying the rule of law, promoting environmental awareness, and advocating for women’s rights,” the EU Delegation to BiH emphasized, among other points.

Concerning the contentious law, its adoption would extend beyond NGOs, affecting media outlets registered as citizens’ associations, many of which may struggle to survive under its framework.

“If journalists resort to self-censorship following the criminalization of defamation—despite their courage—one can only imagine the fate of NGOs. Our focus will certainly be on adhering to our statutes. The assurance from RS President about protecting freedom of expression is undermined,” Žolja concluded, reflecting on Dodik’s earlier statement, apprehensive that the actions of NGOs could soon face criminalization.

News