Abstract: The article is devoted to the study of the influence of institutions of consociative democracy on the processes of pacification and democratization in post-conflict societies. The introductory part defines two approaches to the study of consociative democracy: the first, which recommends consociative democracy as a desirable democratic model for deeply divided societies, and the second, which considers consociation solely as a successful conflict management mechanism without democracy. This article also analyzes the possibility of implementing consociative democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina as a vivid example of a post-conflict state, where even 30 years after the civil war, disorder and fear of a re-outbreak of interethnic conflict prevail. In this paper, the author tried to explain the reasons that make it difficult to apply consociative democracy in the Balkans in general and in Bosnia and Herzegovina in particular. The research is based on the methodology of A. Leiphart, which is based on a comparative analysis of empirical studies of the experience of political development in a number of states. The methodology is based on a systematic approach, which allows us to consider the object of research as an integral set of elements, as well as a cultural approach that helps to understand the specifics of the interaction of various segments of society in the state chosen for analysis. The novelty of the research lies in a special approach to the study of consociative democracy, which focuses more on the successful establishment of peace in post-conflict societies, rather than on the establishment of democracy in these territories. The author uses the model of A. Leiphart, which assumes consociative democracy as a political model with segmental pluralism, which includes many grounds for dividing people into representatives of certain groups in multi-component societies. Such differences may be religious, linguistic, racial, ethnic, or regional in nature.
The main conclusions of this study are the theses that the main function of consociative institutions in post-conflict societies is to prevent the recurrence of violence, not to build democracy. Also, an analysis of the implementation of consociative democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina shows that the theoretical doctrines of consociation are not easy to apply in practice in the conflict societies of post-Yugoslav states.

Abstract: The subject of this article is the current political situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The article presents the definition of the concept of constitutional power in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is considered how international organizations influence the constitutional power in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The author examines in detail such aspects of the topic as the current legal state of Bosnia and Herzegovina, domestic and foreign policy, the influence of international presence and many others. The focus is on the question of who and how currently governs Bosnia and Herzegovina. The article presents a detailed analysis of the functions and work of the High Representative and the Peace Implementation Council.
The novelty of the research lies in the fact that the article is a detailed constructive analysis of international interference in the functioning of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The role of the High Representative is also described in detail as one of the main contradictions of the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The author comes to the conclusion that there is an absolute discrepancy between reality, that is, facts with the idea of the way and functioning of this state. The specificity of Bosnia and Herzegovina lies in the fact that a number of international institutions directly affect both the domestic and foreign policy of the country. The factor of internal influence is integrated into its political system through the penetration of international law there. It is noted that unlike other European countries with a complex history, Bosnia and Herzegovina lacks an initiative approach to solving problems and developing the state. The author comes to the conclusion that the role of the High Representative is one of the main contradictions in Bosnia and Herzegovina and that the illegitimate appointment of High Representative Christian Schmit throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina deepens the ethno-political conflict and puts the Serbs in the Republika Srpska in an even more difficult situation.