On 22 September, the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina held its 130th plenary session.
From the decisions adopted at the plenary session, the Constitutional Court singles out the following:
U 10/22 - Deciding on the Request of six Delegates of the House of Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Constitutional Court established that the Republika Srpska lacks constitutional jurisdiction to regulate legal matters that are subject matter of the Law on Immovable Property Used for the Functioning of the Public Authority because this issue falls within jurisdiction of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Constitutional Court rendered the contested law ineffective. The court reiterated its position from earlier decisions that the State tried to solve this issue through the formation of the Commission for State Property. The High Representative for BiH also acted in this direction. However, the Constitutional Court stated that this issue has not yet been resolved and that there is a true necessity and a positive obligation for BiH to resolve this issue as soon as possible.
U 12/22 - Deciding on the Request of the Cantonal Court in Sarajevo, the Constitutional Court established that Article 71(2)(c) of the FBiH Bankruptcy Law is compatible with the right to property and the right to prohibition of discrimination.
U 15/22 - The Constitutional Court rejected as inadmissible the Request of Šefik Džaferović, Chairman of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, for review of the constitutionality of the Decree on Public Procurement Control in all Institutions Founded by the Sarajevo Canton as the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina is not competent to take a decision.
U 18/22 – Deciding on the Request of the Municipal Court in Zavidovići, Court Section in Maglaj, the Constitutional Court established that Article 56, paragraph 3 of the Law on Misdemeanours of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in the part reading as follows: When the misdemeanour order has been delivered through postal services, it shall be considered that the delivery has been made upon the expiry of five working days after the authorised body has mailed it. When the misdemeanour order has been left on a motor vehicle, the date of delivery shall be the date on which it has been left on a motor vehicle, is not in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the European Convention because it may result in the loss of the defendant's right to access the court.
U 20/22 - the Constitutional Court rejected the Request of the Municipal Court in Sarajevo for a review of the constitutionality of the relevant provisions of the Law on Civil Service in Canton Sarajevo for the reason that the Constitutional Court is not competent to take a decision.
AP 1347/22 - In this case, the Constitutional Court established that there has been no violation of the appellant’s right to a fair trial when ordinary courts responded to all the objections of the appellant and when they gave clear, detailed and relevant reasoning on all decisive issues in the proceedings from which it stems that all the standards of the right to a fair trial were complied with during the criminal proceedings against the appellant. In addition, considering the proceedings as a whole, the Constitutional Court established that there has been no violation of the right to a fair trial under in the segment of a trial within reasonable time either.
All decisions adopted at the plenary session will be delivered to the applicants/appellant within one month and published as soon as possible on the website of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina.