The Constitutional Court holds that it is not possible to consider within its jurisdiction under Article VI(3)(c) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina the request specified so that the Constitutional Court should order the executive branch of government something that has already been stipulated under law as the obligation thereof or, as stated by the applicant, so that the Constitutional Court should order the application of the laws that ceased to have effect after the enactment of the 1996 Law on Defence. In addition, the Constitutional Court once again emphasises that the courts, by applying the relevant legal framework, dismiss the statement of claims relating to the same legal issue and they do so not because of a lack of the implementing regulations but because of the nullity provision of the contracts referred to by the plaintiffs in such cases. Since the applicant demands that the Constitutional Court orders the executive branch of government to act in accordance with the Law that is not contested by the applicant and which already contains the obligation of the executive branch of government to bring its acts into line with the Law, and taking into account the essence of the request in question, the Constitutional Court holds that it is not competent to take a decision.
• Decision on Admissibility No. U 3/15 of 21 January 2016 published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 10/16
On the basis of Article VI(3)(c) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the applicant requested the review of compatibility of Article 16 of the Decision on Utility Tax with Article II(3)(e) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 6(1) of the European Convention. In accordance with Article VI(3)(c) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Constitutional Court has jurisdiction to review whether the law on whose validity the court decision relies is compatible with the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, with the European Convention or with the laws of Bosnia and Herzegovina. For all of the above, the Constitutional Court in the particular case is not competent to take a decision as the applicant does not request the review of a law but of a decision of an administrative authority.
• Decision on Admissibility No. U 9/17 of 30 November 2017 published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 93/17
Considering that in the particular case it is requested to review the compatibility of Trnovo Municipal Council decisions which have the nature of implementation acts issued for the purpose of execution of the relevant legal regulations on the basis of which they were adopted, the Constitutional Court holds that the challenged decisions do not have the nature of law within the meaning of Article VI(3)(c) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and consequently, the Constitutional Court cannot establish its competence in the particular case.
• Decision on Admissibility No. U 12/18 of 27 September 2018 published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 76/18
In the present case, the Constitutional Court notes that the merits of the dispute pending before the applicant constitute a decision on the constitutionality of the Instruction on Amendments, according to the plaintiffs’ request. The applicant, however, even before deciding on the plaintiffs’ legal standing to sue and the applicant’s subject-matter jurisdiction, actually submitted the entire statement of claim to the Constitutional Court for decision-making. In addition, the plaintiffs, who requested that the applicant establish the unconstitutionality of the impugned act, were thus placed in the same position as the entities authorized to initiate a constitutional review proceeding before the Constitutional Court under Article VI(3)(a) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Namely, in this way the plaintiffs’ request for review of the constitutionality before the applicant would be granted the status of a request for constitutional review before the Constitutional Court, as the Constitutional Court would have to decide on the basis of arguments on the unconstitutionality alleged in the actions. In view of the above, the Constitutional Court concludes that this is not about the situation referred to in Article VI(3)(c) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and that it is not competent to take a decision on the specific request of the applicant.
• Decision on Admissibility No. U 1/19 of 28 March 2019 published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 29/19
