Talk:State Investigation and Protection Agency
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | This article is ratedC-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Thecontentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates tothe Balkans or Eastern Europe, a contentious topic. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with thecontentious topics procedures before editing this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to thepurpose of Wikipedia, any expectedstandards of behaviour, or anynormal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. |
"Essentially, it is Bosnia and Herzegovina's equivalent to the American SWAT or the Russian SOBR."
Wrong, extremely wrong. SIPA is the equivalent of the American FBI or the Russian Investigative Committee. SIPA is a federal investigating authority and is NOT a special intervention (commando-type) team.178.164.154.159 (talk)08:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 | Thisedit request has been answered. Set the|answered= parameter tono to reactivate your request. |
The sentence in the first paragraph that says "As of March 2025, SIPA has no jurisdiction in Republika Srpska, one of the two entities of Bosnia & Herzegovina" is factually incorrect and the source included as a reference is tenuous at best. This line should be removed entirely or replaced with factual information, such as "SIPA still has total jurisdiction over the entirety of Bosnia & Herzegovina, including the smaller entity of the two, Republika Srpska".2A00:23C7:6B01:ED01:B894:E22B:D6F4:7647 (talk)16:16, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not done for now: please establish aconsensus for this alterationbefore using the
{{Edit semi-protected}} template.Cannolis (talk)19:36, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply] | Thisedit request has been answered. Set the|answered= parameter tono to reactivate your request. |
The site claims that SIPA has no jurisidction in one of the entities. This is misleading - a precise statement would be, that the RS Assembly enacted laws to prohibit (among others) SIPA from operating in that entity, in response to the guilty verdict of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (this is in the source already cited, index.hr).What's missing is that as a response the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (temporarily, full decision pending) annulled those laws by the RS Assembly - citationcitation. This makes the claim on the page that "SIPA has no jurisdiction..." patentlywrong.
Therefore I suggest that the sentence "As of March 2025, SIPA has no jurisdiction in Republika Srpska, one of the two entities of Bosnia and Herzegovina." be changed to "In March 2025 theentity national assembly enacted a law (among others) to prohibit SIPA from acting on the territory of the entity. However, theConstitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina has temporarily annuled the set of laws enacted, pending a full decision, as the result of an appellation raised by the member of thePresidency of Bosnia and HerzegovinaDenis Bećirović."
Nitroerg542 (talk)18:05, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able toedit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details.Valorrr (talk)14:45, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]