Open Society Fund–Bosnia and Herzegovina

Open Society Fund–Bosnia and Herzegovina (OSF-BH) program priorities in 2006 focused on reforming education, empowering Roma associations, combating corruption, and strengthening the local governance.

The following briefs describe some of the foundation’s activities and achievements in 2006.

Survey Confirms Segregation in Bosnia’s Schools

Schools continue to use separate Bosnian, Croatian, and Serbian curricula, with some rural schools also physically separating children of different ethnicities. But surveys conducted by OSF-BH also revealed that students are ready for change, feeling that schools are not fostering critical thinking and ethnic pluralism. Foundation monitoring bolstered civil society efforts to encourage curricula reforms promoting tolerance and multiculturalism.

Report Provides Accounts of War Crimes

A publication on the International Criminal Tribunal’s prosecution of war crimes committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina provided detailed accounts of war crimes and their perpetrators, challenging years of claims that the information did not exist. The foundation published the report, distributing over 3,000 copies across the country and, with the help of the Soros foundation in Serbia, an additional 1,000 copies to Serbian officials and members of the judiciary.

Roma Voices Count in Increasing Numbers

“Our Voice Counts,” a project initiated by OSF-BH , informed Roma voters and increased Roma voter turnout. Tracking of 1,500 Roma in the project’s target areas indicated a 20 percent increase in Roma voting between the 2004 and 2006 elections. The project helped develop documents conveying Roma community concerns to all political parties, monitored the elections to ensure fair treatment of Roma voters, and assessed political party follow-up on campaign promises.

European Standards Produce Mixed Results for Local Governments

Working with the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, the foundation used European administrative standards to evaluate 30 municipalities. The assessment indicated that local governments depended too much on international donors, had uneven levels of administrative quality, and were not sharing information and good practices. On the other hand, many municipalities had formed effective public-private partnerships, developed codes of conduct for officials, and improved municipal asset management strategies.