Starting with a structural meaning of freedom of opinion for a \u201cdemocratic society\u201d, the European Court has recently added a new, special, rather significant dimension to the notion of pluralism, which can be primarily described by the motto and term of cultural pluralism. To this end, a good example is the judgment Gorzelik et al. v. Poland<\/i>. In this case the European Court describes the role of pluralism in a democratic society in the following manner:<\/p>\n
\u201cFor pluralism is also built on the genuine recognition of, and respect for, diversity and the dynamics of cultural traditions, ethnic and cultural identities, religious beliefs, artistic, literary and socio-economic ideas and concepts. The harmonious interaction of persons and groups with varied identities is essential for achieving social cohesion [emphasis by author]. It is only natural that, where a civil society functions in a healthy manner, the participation of citizens in the democratic process is to a large extent achieved through belonging to associations in which they may integrate with each other and pursue common objectives collectively.\u201d154<\/sup><\/span><\/p>\n This does not only mean that the State should, first and foremost, protect minorities \u2013 which is undoubtedly necessary in Bosnia and Herzegovina \u2013 but, also, that a pluralist society is not composed solely of rigid groups, but that it is built through presumed interaction of individuals and groups of a society, which should be distinctive by diverse identities and, certainly, that that possibility is guaranteed. In other words: minorities must not become rigid and obsessive by themselves; there must be a possibility to discuss affiliation to minorities in a free and open debate. By adopting such case law, the ECHR creates a completely new study of anthropology, philosophy and political sciences which is narrowly related to the theory of deliberative democracy and which, as a precondition for the existence of a pluralist society, sees the necessary presence of a freedom-loving debate, differing opinions and the necessary flexibility of individual and collective identities.155<\/sup><\/span><\/p>\n This new emphasis on pluralism is significant for Bosnia and Herzegovina, because it better corresponds to the linguistic meaning of line 3 of the Preamble of the Constitution of BiH than to the meaning that the very Constitutional Court of BiH has assigned to it. Admittedly, the European Court has still not received the cases pending against Bosnia and Herzegovina concerning the mentioned problem. However, it would be better and safer to recommend that the social dynamics be followed in order for the development of pluralism not to be halted by rigid constitutional structures.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"