A/HRC/25/49/Add.1 smaller institutions. Some of these cultural institutions in Republika Srpska contest that the above-mentioned seven institutions should be the nation-wide “State institutions”, advocating instead for parallel institutions in both the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republika Srpska, with dual membership in international organizations, such as the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. Cultural institutions in Republika Srpska receive financial support from the Government of Republika Srpska for their operational part and salaries, and seem to be functioning well. 11. The Ministry of Civil Affairs provided funds to the above-mentioned seven institutions until 2010. Institutional funding was replaced by project grants in 2012. This new financing modality enabled the funding of projects developed by Republika Srpska cultural institutions on an equal basis with the above-mentioned institutions. The latter, however, no longer receive operational costs or salaries owing to the controversy over whether the State or the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina should finance them. As a result, they are struggling to keep their collections protected and their doors open. 12. The Special Rapporteur met with representatives of many of these institutions in both Sarajevo and Banja Luka, and expresses her concern at the fate of the seven institutions, their collections and, consequently, the opportunities for people of Bosnia and Herzegovina to have access to and enjoy their own cultural heritage. The Special Rapporteur received testimonies that cooperation works well between some institutions across the entities, for example, between the Contemporary Art Museum of Banja Luka and the National Gallery of Sarajevo, enabling Bosnia and Herzegovina to be represented at the Venice Biennale in 2013 after a long absence. This is not, however, always the case, and relations between the two libraries do not seem satisfactory. While the Sarajevo Library continues to send a copy of its deposit collection to the Banja Luka Library, the latter does not reciprocate. 13. The Special Rapporteur notes with interest that, in November 2013, the Federation Government decided to temporarily take responsibilities for five of the seven abovementioned institutions (all except the National Museum and the Kinoteka) and to cofinance them until a permanent decision is adopted at the State level to resolve their status. This is a welcome development. 14. The Special Rapporteur was also informed that the status and fate of other prominent cultural institutions remain uncertain, such as the Olympic Museum in Sarajevo, which was heavily targeted during the war, together with its sports installations, and the Anti-Fascist Council of National Liberation of Yugoslavia (AVNOJ) Museum in Jajce. Many see these two institutions as testimonies of the history of Yugoslavia. B. Population and identity 15. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the main population groups, which were also the parties to the conflict, are those termed by the Dayton Agreement as “constituent peoples”: Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs. Today, most Bosniaks and Croats live in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, while most Serbs live in Republika Srpska. Generally, most Bosniaks are Muslim, Croats are Roman Catholic and Serbs are Orthodox Christians. Seventeen recognized national minorities in the country constituted less than 1 per cent of the population in the 1991 census.5 They comprise Albanians, Czechs, Germans, Hungarians, Italians, Jews, Macedonians, Montenegrins, Poles, Roma, Romanians, Russians, Ruthenians, Slovaks, Slovenes, Turks and Ukrainians. 5 A/HRC/22/49/Add.1, para 4. 5