Bosnia and Herzegovina, Human Rights Ombudsperson for Bosnia and Herzegovina

Bosnia and Herzegovina, Human Rights Ombudsperson for Bosnia and Herzegovina

Fourth Annual Report presented

On 16 February 2000 the Ombudsperson for Bosnia and Herzegovina, Dr. Gret Haller, presented her forth Annual Report to the public. She explained that her Office has finished its forth year of the mandate given by Annex 6 of the Dayton Peace Agreement. She also pointed out that the Office expected the Draft Organic Law for the State Ombudsman of Bosnia and Herzegovina to be adopted in the course of 2000. Therefore, she considered as very important for the continuity of the work of her Office not to change the legal basis for the functioning of the Office at the same moment when the change in the person of the Ombudsperson would occur (i. e. on 15 December 2000). Therefore, Dr. Haller informed the public during her press conference in Sarajevo, that she would finish her (non-renewable 5 years long) mandate at the end of April 2000. She formally informed the Chairman-in-Office of the OSCE (appointing authority pursuant to Article IV, para. 2 of Annex 6) about this and invited them to appoint her successor.

N.B.: Chairman-in-Office of the OSCE appointed Mr. Frank Orton, former judge of the District Court of Malmo, Associate judge of the Court of Appeal for Skane and Blekinge, judge referee to the Supreme Court of Sweden, Director of Swedish Broadcasting Commission and Swedish Ombudsman against Ethnic Discrimination, as the Ombudsperson for Bosnia and Herzegovina, as of 1 May 2000.

Special report on violation of property rights of the catholic church and violation of the freedom of religion of catholic believers in diocese of Banja Luka

The Human Rights Ombudsperson for Bosnia and Herzegovina, adopted the above Special Report on 5 April 2000 pursuant to para. 6 of Article V of Annex 6 to the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and presented it to Mr. Milorad Dodik, the Prime Minister of the Republika Srpska.

The Special Report addressed the usurpation of certain number of premises located on the territory of the Municipality of Banja Luka and the neighbouring municipalities, owned by the Catholic Church. In substance, due to the inertia of the relevant local authorities the illegal use of property of the Church is still unresolved, despite numerous requests thereof.

The Ombudsperson referred to Article 28 of the Constitution of the Republika Srpska which guarantees the equality of all religious communities before the law and their freedom to perform religious affairs and services. She considered that in the present case there has been a violation of property rights, guaranteed by Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention"), and Article 9 of the Convention (freedom of religion). In this respect the Ombudsperson concluded that the bodies of the Catholic Church, their clergy and their believers were prevented from returning to the church premises, currently occupied by third persons, due to the failure of the competent authorities of the Republika Srpska to undertake effective and appropriate measures to restore the property to them. She, therefore, considered that they were prevented from practising religious ceremonies and freely manifesting their religious beliefs using their full existing capacities.

The Ombudsperson recommended the Government of the Republika Srpska to take all necessary steps in order to restore the possession over the mentioned premises to the Diocese of Banja Luka within one month from the date of receipt of this Special Report.

Law on the Republika Srpska Ombudsman has been passed and three ombudsmen of the Republika Srpska appointed

On 8 February 2000 the National Assembly of the Republika Srpska adopted the Law on Ombudsmen of the Republika Srpska. After many negotiations with international community, especially representatives of the OSCE and the Council of Europe, one of the important conditions for the accession of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the Council of Europe has thus been fulfilled. Pursuant to Article 8 of the Law three persons shall compose the institution of the Ombudsman: (of Serb, Bosniak and Croat nationality). They will be elected by the National Assembly of the Republika Srpska by a two-thirds majority, following proposal by the High Judicial Council. However, pursuant to Article 38 of the same Law, on the entry into force of the present Law, the Human Rights Ombudsperson for Bosnia and Herzegovina shall appoint, after consultation with the President of the Republic, the President of Parliament and the Prime Minister, the Office of High Representative and the Head of Mission of the OSCE in Bosnia and Herzegovina, three persons to exercise provisionally, for a period of twelve months, the powers of the Ombudsman. The Office of the Ombudsperson is very pleased to inform that in the course of March and April the Ombudsperson received 72 applications for the post, interviewed 32 candidates and completed the proceedings of consultations with the relevant authorities. She appointed the following three persons as Ombudsmen of the Republika Srpska: Mr. Franjo Crnjac, Mr. Darko Osmić and Ms. Slavica Slavnić.

Kosovo ombudsman support unit visited the Office of the Ombudsperson

The Venice Commission, the UN Interim Civil Administration, the Office of the UN Special Representative of the Secretary General, UNHCHR and OSCE drafted a preliminary regulation to create an Ombudsman institution in Kosovo.

The Ombudsman Support Section for the OSCE/Kosovo has been created to support the establishment of the Institution. Two members of the Section visited our Office in Sarajevo from 19 to 21 January 2000 to find out about our experience in establishment of an institution in a similar environment.

Ms Pirkko K. Koskinen, Co-ordinator of the Section and former Deputy Ombudsman in Finland, and Ms Inga Reine, Ombudsman Advisor, were interested in staffing procedures, complaints handling and training needs. They were given useful information related to the very beginning of the work of this Office at the meetings with the Ombudsperson, Senior Deputy Ombudsperson, Deputy Ombudsperson for Public Relations, Executive Officer and Information Technology Manager.

Other international contacts

In the reporting period the Office of the Ombudsperson participated in the following events outside the country:

First Council of Europe Roundtable with National Human Rights Institutions/Third European Meeting of National Institutions, Strasbourg 16-17 March 2000;
42 Plenary Meeting of the European Commission for Democracy through Law (the Venice Commission) 31 March-1 April 2000,
Conference on the Role of National Human Rights Institutions (such as Ombudsman), Podgorica, Montenegro, 13-14 April 2000,
Conference on the Role and Institution of Ombudsman, Prague 27-28 April 2000,
Study visit at the Ombudsman Institution in Sweden 8-14 May 2000, organized by the Swedish Government under the auspices of the Stability Pact-Task Force on Good Governance;
Seminar on " The Institution of Ombudsman in Europe and the Challenge of Consolidation of Democracy", Athens, 12-13 May 2000.

Appendix: Case summary

Case statistics (1 June 2000)

Provisional files	10.965	Adopted reports:
		Final reports	757
Registered cases	4.485	Special reports	19

Investigations:		Proceedings initiated before the
opened	1.295	HR Chamber on the basis of
not opened	831	the Final reports	52
closed	184

Cases referred to HR Chamber before		Final and Special reports forwarded
the adoption of the Final report	122	to the High Representative
		and referred to the
		Presidency/President of the respondent
		Party for further action	383

Amicable solutions:

In the case of DČ.P. against the Republika Srpska binding administrative decision on the applicant’s reinstatement had not been enforced. In envisaged time limit given by the Ombudsperson to the RS Government in regard to the possible amicable solution, the applicant was reinstated into her apartment on 20 March 2000. Consequently, the Ombudsperson closed the investigation.

The cases of G.G. against the Republika Srpska and LJ. Ć. against the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina concerned the failure of the competent administrative organs to issue administrative decisions upon the applicants’ claims and to restore the possessions over the apartments to the applicants. In envisaged time limits given by the Ombudsperson to the RS and the FBiH Governments in regard to the possible amicable solutions, the applicants were reinstated into their apartments on 18 and 21 March 2000 respectively. The Ombudsperson closed the investigations in those cases.

In three cases of Z.B., F.B. and B.A. v. the Republika Srpska of 25 February 2000, binding administrative decision on the applicants’ reinstatement had not been enforced. In the envisaged time limits given by the Ombudsperson to the RS Government in regard to the possible amicable solutions, the applicants were reinstated into their apartments. The Ombudsperson, therefore, closed the investigations in the course of May 2000.

In the case of M.K. v. the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina of 26 May 2000, binding administrative decision on the applicant's reinstatement had not been enforced. In the envisaged time limit given by the Ombudsperson to the FBiH Government in regard to the possible amicable solution the applicant was reinstated. Consequently, the Ombudsperson decided to close the investigation.

The case of A. J. v. the Republika Srpska of 6 March 2000, concerned the failure of the competent administrative organ to issue administrative decision upon the applicant's claim for repossession of the apartment. In the envisaged time-limit given by the Ombudsperson to the RS Government in regard to the possible amicable solution, the competent Department of the Ministry for Refugees and Displaced Persons issued the decision in applicant's favour and reinstated him into his apartment. Consequently, the investigation in the case was closed.

Compliance with the recommendations of the Ombudsperson:

The case of R.K. against the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Final report of 17 December 1999 concerned the failure of the competent administrative organ to enforce its decision and to restore the possession over the apartment to the applicant. The Ombudsperson found violations of human rights and recommended that the FBiH Government ensure that the applicant be reinstated into the apartment. The Government fully complied with the Ombudsperson’s recommendation.

In the case of M.D`. v. the Republika Srpska of 24 April 2000, the applicant had been reinstated to his pre-war apartment after the Ombudsperson issued a Final report in the case (together with a group of similar cases). By the letter of 19 May 2000 the Government of the RS was informed that the Report in the case remained confidential.

Reports became public (forwarded to the OHR and referred to the Presidents of the Respondent Parties for further action) in the following cases as they were not complied with in the time limits given by the Ombudsperson:

the cases of Čankušić and 5 others, Čivša and 13 others, Miletić and 7 others, Pejić and 9 others (total of 38 cases), all against the Federation of Bosnia, Herzegovina, and the Final reports in the cases of Bubalo and 9 others and Dukić and 8 others (total of 19 cases) against the Republika Srpska. All reports concerned the failure of
the competent administrative organs to issue administrative decisions upon the applicants’ claims and to restore the possessions over the apartments/houses to the applicants.
the cases of Zagajac and 3 others, Porčo and 9 others, Patčev and 10 others, Fidler and 8 others and Lubura (total of 35 cases) all against the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. All reports concerned the failure of the competent administrative organs to enforce their decisions and to restore the possession over the apartments/houses to the applicants.
the cases of Damjanović and 19 others (“abandoned JNA apartments”) against the Bosnia and Herzegovina/the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
the case Baničević against the Republika Srpska, concerned the length of the civil proceedings in the labour dispute before the Court of the First Instance in Banja Luka.

Newsletter No. 21