From the historical perspective, the Republic of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina have a long tradition of “bankruptcy supervisors”. Hence, from a historical perspective, such an institute is not terra incognita in their legislations. By examining position de lege lata of the bankruptcy trustee in the aforementioned countries, we come to the conclusion that in both national legislatives, the manager has a similarly regulated position. By opening of the bankruptcy proceedings (the so-called, zero hour rule) he becomes a representative of the bankruptcy debtor and the body of the bankruptcy proceedings. In the function of this body of bankruptcy proceedings, are embodied, on the one hand, the powers of the out-of-court body of bankruptcy proceedings and, on the other hand, the legal representative of the debtor and the manager of the assets of the bankruptcy debtor (who is managing the property on behalf of and for the creditors account). He is the central body of the bankruptcy proceedings, and has the role of “supervisor” to which the court and creditors entrusted the task of managing the debtor’s bankruptcy assets. Therefore, our efforts in this paper are focused towards the analysis of Croatian solutions regarding the election, appointments and revocation of the bankruptcy trustee, all for comparison and possible suggestions de lege ferenda for the Bosnian-Herzegovinian legislator, because they are in the process of comprehensive reform of regulations, due to the harmonization of regulations with EU acquis communautaire (based on the Stabilization and Association Agreement). We consider it important to point out that the length of the paper does not allow for a detailed analysis of the new(er) Croatian insolvency regulations, so we are forced to restrict ourselves only to the aspects that we consider crucial for the potential functionalization of the bankruptcy trustee position in BosnianHerzegovinian law