Post-Conflict Judicial Reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina The False Promise of Judicial Independence

Introduction

Chapter 1: History of judicial reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Chapter 2: Understanding judicial independence

Chapter 3: Understanding judicial accountability

Chapter 4: Reconciling judicial independence with judicial accountability

Chapter 5: Dedication and motivation in the judiciary

Chapter 6: How does this theory, and the survey data collected, help us understand what has happened in the post-war BiH judiciary?

Conclusion

Appendix: The Surveys

Biography

David Pimentel is Allan G. Shepard Professor of Law at the University of Idaho. He has an M.A. (Economics) and a J.D. (Law) from University of California Berkeley, and a Ph.D. (Law & Politics) from University of Graz. A U.S. Supreme Court Fellow in 1997-98, he went to Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) in 2002 where he led the Independent Judicial Commission’s Court Restructuring project, returning to Sarajevo in 2010-11 as a Fulbright Scholar to study the impact of BiH’s court reforms. In the meantime, he served as the Chief of Court Management at the UN’s International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, and as Head of Rule of Law for South Sudan for the UN Mission there. He has written and consulted extensively on rule of law promotion, judicial structure and governance, and court reform around the world, including in BiH, Montenegro, Iraq, Nepal, Thailand, South Sudan, and Mozambique.

"This is a groundbreaking study on judicial reform in Bosnia with broad implications. Beyond Bosnia, it offers essential insights, based on impressive research spanning decades, on how international reform efforts overemphasized judicial independence, with relevance for judicial reform globally."

- Florian Bieber, Professor of Southeast European History and Politics and Director, Centre for Southeast European Studies, Graz School of Interdisciplinary Transnational Studies, University of Graz

"This is an exceptional and deeply persuasive work. Drawing on rare longitudinal empirical data and a lifetime of engagement with comparative constitutional law, the author offers a nuanced and convincing reassessment of judicial independence and accountability in post-conflict settings. The book makes a major contribution to comparative constitutional scholarship on rule-of-law and judicial reforms and will be indispensable reading for scholars, practitioners, and policymakers alike."

- Jens Woelk, Professore ordinario di diritto costituzionale comparato, Full Professor of Comparative Constitutional Law, University of Trento