On 14 July 2022, the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina held its 128th plenary session in Brčko, at which it considered several requests for review of constitutionality and one appeal.
Following the plenary session, on 15 July 2022, the Constitutional Court held a press conference in Brčko. At the press conference, the Constitutional Court informed the public of the cases decided during the first six months of this year.
The 128th plenary session and press conference in Brčko represent a continuation of a very successful cooperation between the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina and AIRE Centre. The Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina held its plenary session outside its court seat in order to make the local communities and citizens throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina more familiar with its work. This was concluded at the Fourth Conference of the Judicial Forum for Bosnia and Herzegovina, which was devoted to the “Publicity and Transparency of the Judicial System – European Standards and Practice in BiH”, held in May 2021.
Of decisions adopted at the plenary session, the Constitutional Court singles out the following:
U 15/21 – The Constitutional Court, in deciding on the request lodged by seven delegates of the Council of Peoples of the Republika Srpska for review of the constitutionality of the Law on Non-Applicability of the Decision of the High Representative Enacting the Law on Amendment to the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina, established that the Law on Non-Applicability of the Decision of the High Representative Enacting the Law on Amendment to the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina, is not compatible with Article I(2) and III(3)(b) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Constitutional Court noted, inter alia, that the High Representative substituted himself for the institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina by enacting the Law on Amendment to the Criminal Code of BiH. In the present case, the institution he substituted himself for is the Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, instead of which he enacted the mentioned law. Thus, according to the Constitutional Court, in addition to the fact that the mentioned law is considered to be a law of Bosnia and Herzegovina, it is also considered a decision of the institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
AP 1788/22 – In this case, the Constitutional Court established that there had been a violation of the right to a fair trial as the verdict of conviction was based to a decisive degree on the testimonies of the witnesses who had entered into a plea-bargaining arrangement with the Prosecutor’s Office. In addition, the ordinary court had failed to provide a sufficiently logical and convincing reasoning as to what circumstantial evidence made a system of solidly and logically connected indications. This would corroborate the testimonies of the mentioned witnesses and point to a sole possible conclusion that it was precisely the appellant who had perpetrated the criminal offense he was charged with.
All decisions adopted at today’s plenary session will be delivered to the applicants/appellants
ithin one month and published at the earliest possible date on the website of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina.