A matrix, produced and regularly updated by the Office of the High Representative (OHR), summarised in appendix 2, lists twenty agencies engaged in rule of law and criminal justice reform projects in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) in August 2004. Of these, sixteen were involved in working on reform and reconstruction of the courts and associated structures in BiH. The level of involvement of the international community is indicative of the importance that is placed on the courts in the post-war reconstruction of BiH. Figure 6.1, below, gives some indication of the level of OHR interventions in the field of judicial reform. From the commencement of the High Representative's executive ‘Bonn Powers’ in 1997 to the start of 1999, no decisions were taken with reference to the judicial system, and from 1999 to 2001, a total of just fourteen decisions out of 230 (6 per cent) relate to the judicial sector, including the decision to enact a law on a state court, discussed below. Yet the following years see a large increase in both the absolute number and overall proportion of decisions in this area.

What this makes clear is that from a relatively slow start, OHR involvement in the judicial sector has increased, and was maintained from the closing weeks of Wolfgang Petritsch's mandate throughout that of Paddy Ashdown.

These OHR interventions built on the ongoing assessment of the judicial system in BiH carried out under the auspices of the UN between 1998 and 2000. This chapter examines a package of three major transformations in the courts of BiH, each carried out by mainstream civilian missions, particularly OHR and Independent Judicial Commission (IJC). The first is a restructuring exercise across all courts of BiH other than the minor offence courts. This merged a number of courts within each of the two entities and introduced a state level criminal jurisdiction. The second, accompanying restructuring, is formed by two stages of procedures to remove unsuitable judges and prosecutors. Suitability was assessed in terms of a range of factors including legal qualifications, evidence of political bias, and misconduct in office. The first stage involved an internal review process carried out by judges and prosecutors themselves. This was followed by a reappointment procedure whereby sitting judges and prosecutors applied for jobs in an open competition.