The Constitutional Court concludes that there is a violation of Article II(3)(d) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 5(1) of the European Convention where the new detention order against the appellant, who is already being held in detention in accordance with the former ruling relating to the criminal offences in other proceedings, is issued to commence on the date when the former detention expires or is terminated, and where there are neither specific legal provisions nor clear-case law about it.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 1381/12 of 19 July 2012, paragraph 48, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 38/07; detention has suspensive effect, a violation of Article 5 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(d) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina established
The Constitutional Court concludes that there is no violation of Article II(3)(d) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 5(1)(c) in conjunction with paragraphs 2 and 3 of the European Convention where the decision on detention contains detailed and clear reasons in respect of the existence of the general requirement for ordering the detention under Article 132(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code of BiH and of the special requirement prescribed by item b) of the same provision, as the Court found that in addition to a grounded suspicion there existed a justified fear that the appellant, if released, would hinder the inquiry by influencing the witnesses and co-accused persons, while the circumstances of the case at issue indicated the existence of important general interests prevailing over the principle of respect for the right to liberty of the individual.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 1560/14 of 25 June 2014, paragraph 40; detention, no violation of Article 5 of the European Convention and Article II(3)
(d) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina established
The Constitutional Court concludes that there is no violation of Article 5(1)(c) and paragraphs 3 and 4 of the European Convention where the previous measure of detention was replaced with the measures prohibiting the appellants from leaving the place of residence or traveling or performing certain business activities and where the measures were imposed as less restrictive measures in accordance with the law, in order to secure their presence and the successful conduct of the criminal proceedings, and where the decisions imposing the prohibiting measures on the appellants were reviewed by the court every two months, so to examine whether the application of the prohibiting measures was still required.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 5432/14 of 15 April 2015, paragraph 44, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 40/15; prohibiting measures within the context of Article 5 of the European Convention, no violation of Article 5 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(d) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina established
The Constitutional Court concludes that there is no violation of Article 5 of the European Convention where the Court of BiH decided that the bail conditions were not met to replace the prohibiting measures imposed on the appellant, as the Court decided that the bail offered would not remove a risk that the appellant would avoid to attend further proceedings before the Court, and the Court provided the detailed and clear reasons for its decision.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 4597/14 of 14 May 2015, paragraph 37; criminal proceedings, prohibiting measures, bail, no violation of Article 5 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(d) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina established
The Constitutional Court concludes that there is no violation of Article II(3)(d) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 5(1)(c) and Article 5(3) of the European Convention where the appellant, as a minor, was imposed the detention measure, as the legal conditions to impose the said measure were met at the time when the decision on detention was passed and the Court gave the detailed and clear reasons in the challenged decisions, and where the Court concluded that the circumstances of the relevant case did not allow the use of a less restrictive measure
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 2010/14 of 8 December 2015, paragraph 48; juvenile detention, no violation of Article 5 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(d) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina established
The Constitutional Court concludes that there has been a violation of the right to freedom and security of person under Article II(3)(d) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 5 of the European Convention as the appellant was not provided with sufficient time and conditions to respond to the proposal and evidence which the Prosecutor’s Office presented in respect of the determination of detention, since they were delivered only a half an hour before detention hearing, although the appellant was suspected of having committed the criminal offences punishable by at least 10 years in prison or long-term sentence.
(d) Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 4326/16 of 22 December 2016, paragraph 44, a violation of Article 5 of the European Convention and Article II(3) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina
There has been a violation of Article II(3)(d) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Article 5(1)(c) of the European Convention as the applicants were detained three days from the day of the adoption of the decision of the ordinary court, wherein it was determined that the applicants had to be released immediately.
• Decision on Admissibility and Merits No. AP 3637/18 of 23 October 2018, paragraphs 70 and 71, published in the Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 83/18, a violation of Article 5 of the European Convention and Article II(3)(d) of the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina
