It is assumed that the project, which remains strictly confidential, involves an exchange of the Muslim enclave of Gorazde for a Serb region around Sarajevo and rejects the Bosnian-Serb demand to divide the city. This was one of the first cases where the Court of Justice had to address the question of the legal nature of the Constitution. By commenting on the obiter dictum concerning Annex IV (of the Constitution) and the rest of the peace agreement, the Court has in fact created «the ground for the legal unity» of the peace agreement as a whole[9], which also implies that all annexes are in hierarchical equality. In subsequent decisions, the Court upheld this decision by using other annexes to the peace agreement as a direct basis for the analysis, and not only in the context of the systematic interpretation of Annex IV. However, having rejected the applicants` application, the Court did not address the controversial issues of legality of the procedure in which the new Constitution (Annex IV) came to power and replaced the old Constitution of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. . . .