The Law on Courts is one of the most important political issues of state power. Although its adoption was planned a few months ago, harmonization is still being done.
The aforementioned law has several disputed points, two of which are crucial. The first is the jurisdiction of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which is being established, and the second is the seat of the High Court. The higher court should have appellate jurisdiction, that is, it should decide on final verdicts in all cases that are initially decided at the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as the first instance instance.
The adoption of this law is important to the national government, because in this way they would send a message to the European Union that they have taken a step forward in the process of obtaining the status of a negotiator with the EU, but also because of the financial benefits of the reforms. However, numerous experts have already expressed their disagreement with the proposed law.
At the last meeting of the state authorities in East Sarajevo, it was said that an agreement had been reached to soon adopt the Law on Courts of BiH and the Law on Prevention of Money Laundering, which is extremely important so that BiH does not end up on the Moneyval blacklist.
Now the question arises as to what was specifically agreed upon, i.e. whether only a political message was sent from East Sarajevo two days ago or whether the details were negotiated. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Elmedin Konaković, said today that the positions have been approximated and that “the details are being ironed out” and that the mentioned law should be in the parliament at the end of the month.
Now the question arises in which part the positions are approximated, if it is known that there are different points of view regarding the seat of the High Court, which is implied by the new law.
Eastern Sarajevo or Banja Luka
The parties of the Troika advocate that the headquarters of the newly formed High Court be in East Sarajevo, while the request of the SNSD is for the court to be in Banja Luka. Travel expenses are only one segment of the story, but Milorad Dodik knows very well that the High Court in Banja Luka would mean that judges from Sarajevo would be less interested in applying for the competition or working in Banja Luka. This narrows the space for him to potentially have greater control over judges in the newly formed state court.
In practice, if, for example, Milorad Dodik is convicted in the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the first instance, hypothetically, the High Court as an appellate court would issue a final verdict. In the context of the inevitable influence of politics on the judiciary, the seat of the court cannot be ignored.
On the other hand, the Law on the Courts of BiH also deals with the issue of jurisdiction of the Court of BiH. And considering that there are criticisms that the new law reduces the competences of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, this is another important detail in the negotiations.
About competencies
The draft of the aforementioned law stipulates that the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina is competent for criminal offenses committed in the territory of two entities or in the territory of one entity and Brčko District.
In practice, this means that, for example, the case “Respirators” could not be conducted before the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, but only before the Cantonal Court in Sarajevo. This is also the case with other cantons. And criminal offenses committed in the RS would be judged by the courts of that entity.
“The jurisdiction of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina has indeed been reduced, because if it had not been reduced, why was it even necessary to change the provision relating to jurisdiction and the definition of where the criminal offense was committed? But they did not say anything about criminal offenses committed in the territory of one entity, regardless of the conditions set by the law and the jurisdiction of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina is not possible, i.e. for crimes committed on the territory of one entity, which are otherwise described as criminal offenses in the criminal law of the entity. If they are described in the criminal law of the entity and committed on the territory of the entity, then it is not possible that the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina has the jurisdiction to conduct the proceedings,” lawyer Asim Crnalić told Klix.ba earlier.
Considering that it is very rarely about criminal acts that were committed in both entities, this issue gains even more importance.
“Politicians are creating a territorial framework for the exclusion of their criminal responsibility. They will, if nothing else, influence the work of the courts through financing,” said Crnalić.
After all, the envisaged High Court would be competent for final judgments coming from the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina and would not decide on judgments of entity courts. Therefore, the question arises as to how far this is a reform step in general, Klix.ba reports.
