Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina held today its regular 60th session of the Grand Chamber.
Pursuant to Article 18(3) of the Rules of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Constitutional Court rejected a number of appeals lodged in an untimely fashion, either after the expiration of time-limit for the submission of appeal or prematurely, and in the cases in which it was established that the appellants failed to use all available legal remedies in the preceding proceedings.
On this session, the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina adopted, inter alia, 19 decisions in the cases where the appeals were lodged against the ruling on detention and the prohibition measures.
Deciding on the appeals related to Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 6(1) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in regards to the adoption of a decision on admissibility and merits within a reasonable time-limit, the Court adopted a number of decisions establishing a violation of the appellants’ rights to a fair trial and dismissed a certain number of appeals as ill-founded in cases in which it found no such violation.
Expressly for the illustration purposes, we note the following:
Deciding on the case no. AP 3439/17, the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina dismissed as ill-founded the appeal of Mr. Acik Can lodged against the Verdicts of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, ruling of the Ministry of Security of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the ruling of the Ministry of Security of Bosnia and Herzegovina – Service for Foreigners Affairs in respect of the right to his private and family life referred to in Article II(3)(f) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the right to an effective remedy under Article 13 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in conjunction with the right to private and family life referred to in Article II(3)(f) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the right to a freedom of movement and residence under Article II(3)(m) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
The Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina rejected as inadmissible the appeal by Mr. Acik Can lodged against the Verdict of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, ruling of the Ministry of Security of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the ruling of the Ministry of Security of Bosnia and Herzegovina – Service for Foreigners Affairs in respect of the right to a fair trial referred to in Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 6(1) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms Cantonal Court as being ratione materiae incompatible with the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Mr. Acik Can, citizen of both the Republic of Turkey and the Republic of Serbia, lodged an appeal with the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina against the Verdict of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, ruling of the Ministry of Security of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the ruling of the Ministry of Security of Bosnia and Herzegovina – Service for Foreigners Affairs, challenging the Verdict of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina no. S1 3 U 023396 17 Uvp of 9 August 2017. The appellant claims that his right to freedom of movement has been violated by the challenged decisions by which his right to permanent residence was cancelled and a measure of expulsion from the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina for the period of four years was pronounced. To corroborate that claim, the appellant presents essentially the same allegation the Constitutional Court has already decided upon within the scope of its analysis of the alleged violation of right referred to in Article II(3)(f) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and concluded that the decision on cancelation of the right to permanent residence and pronounced measure of expulsion are based on the requirements stipulated by law, adopted in the proceedings prescribed by law in which the appellant had all necessary procedural safeguards, and that the motivation and reasoning of the challenged decisions indisputably indicate the conclusion that the relevant interference has been proportionate to the legitimate aim regarding the protection of public order and national security of Bosnia and Herzegovina, i.e. that it represents a measure necessary in the democratic society with the aim of compliance with the rule of law.
The Constitutional Court, therefore, concluded that there has been no violation of the right to private and family life, home and correspondence referred to in Article II(3)(f) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms when the decision cancelling the right to permanent residence and the pronounced measure of expulsion are based on the requirements stipulated by law, adopted in the proceedings prescribed by law in which the appellant had all procedural safeguards, and that the motivation and reasoning of the challenged decisions indisputably indicate to the conclusion that the relevant interference has been proportionate to the legitimate aim relating to the protection of public order and national security of Bosnia and Herzegovina, i.e. that it represents a measure necessary in the democratic society with the objective of respecting the rule of law. For the above reasons there has been no violation of the appellant’s right to freedom of movement and residence referred to in Article II(3)(m) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 to the European Convention.
The Constitutional Court also concluded that there has been no violation of the right to an effective remedy under Article 13 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in conjunction with the right to private and family life given that the appellant had a possibility and used the remedies available to him in the relevant proceedings.
In the cases in which the Constitutional Court established that the violation of the appellants’ rights to a fair trial has occurred, the competent courts or administrative bodies were ordered to complete the proceedings in an expedited procedure and to inform the Court, within three months’ time-limit as of the date of delivery of the relevant decisions, on the measures untaken with the aim of enforcement of the relevant decisions.
The Court rejected the appeals that were manifestly prima facie ill-founded. The facts the appellants presented to the Court in those cases could not have in any manner justified the claim of the appellants that there was a violation of their rights protected by the Constitution or that the parties to the proceedings bear the consequences of the violation of rights protected by the Constitution.
All decisions taken at the session are to be delivered to the appellants within one month time-limit and posted on the official website of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
