Previous 10 / 28 Next

CH/02/12470 4. Law on Employment Relations and Salaries of Employees of Administrative Bodies in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (OG FBiH no. 13/98) 53. The Federation of BiH states that the procedural decision of 20 May 2001 ceasing the applicant’s labour relation was taken in accordance with Articles 125 and 168 paragraph 4 of the Law on Employment Relations and Salaries of Employees of Administrative Bodies in the Federation of BiH. 54. Article 125 provides as follows: “A ruling shall be issued on the cessation of employment. The ruling referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article must be issued within seven days from the day of occurrence of the circumstance which was the reason for the cessation of employment. The ruling on cessation of employment for the reasons stipulated by this Law shall be issued by the head of an administrative body, by the mayor in the city and by the municipal head in the municipality.” 55. Article 168 paragraph 4 provides as follows: “The provisions of this Law shall also apply to the members of armed forces of the Federation, unless otherwise stipulated by a different Federation law and other Federation regulations.” 5. Law on the Government of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (OG FBiH nos. 1/94, 8/95 and 58/02) 56. The Federation of BiH calls on Articles 18 and 19 of the Law on the Government of the Federation of BiH to show that the applicant has been discharged in accordance with a lawful procedure. 57. Article 18 provides as follows: “In carrying out their authorities as laid down in the Federation Constitution, the Federation Government shall take decrees with the force of law, ordinances, decisions, rulings and conclusions. The Federation Government shall take decrees with the force of law in accordance with the Federation Constitution. “ 58. Article 19 provides as follows: “Decrees shall regulate the most important issues from the scope of competence of the Federation Government, regulate in detail relations concerning implementation of laws, form administrative, technical, and other Government services and provide for principles of internal organisation of the Federation authorities of the state administration.” V. COMPLAINTS 59. The applicant complains of not being able to participate in the proceedings discharging him of his duties. Specifically, he did not have the possibility either to state arguments against the discharge or submit an appeal against the decisions. The applicant further complains of being prohibited by the Election Commission from running in the General Elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2002. The applicant therefore complains of a violation of Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention and Article 25(b) of the ICCPR in connection with discrimination. 10

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Obradovic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether the plaintiff's dismissal from the military banned him from participating in the General Election?

Alleged Acts: The plaintiff was the Assistant Minister of Defense and released from his duties. The decision was then published in the Official Gazette, to which the plaintiff denies knowing. The plaintiff submitted his application as independent candidate in the General Election in 2002. The Election Commission denied the plaintiff's application because he was discharged in 2001 by the SFOR. The plaintiff asserted he was discharged by the Federation of Ministry of Defense not the SFOR.

Procedural history: The plaintiff brought this case against the Election Commission's decision in 2002. The Court found that the applicant was discharged by COMSFOR. Further, the argument that the plaintiff did not receive the complaint is unfounded because it was publicly available and the plaintiff found out on when he applied to run for the position in 2002.

Summary: In August of 2002 the Election Law was amended to remove prohibit all former military officers from seeking public office. The court considered the evidence surrounding the decision to dismiss him from the military. Accordingly, because the Election Commission was not able to hear the application, the plaintiff was deprived of procedural and legal safeguards that are enacted to preserve fairness and legal certainty.

Conclusion: The provision violated the plaintiff's right to participate in the Election under art. 3 of the First Protocol of the Convention.

Legal Issue(s)

Candidate Registration

Applicable Law(s): First Protocol of the Convention, art. 3; European Convention on Human Rights, art. 6, 3; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 25.

Region: Europe and Eurasia

Country: Bosnia and Herzegovina

Language of Decision

English

Court: Appellate Court

Election Type: General

Date of decision: Oct 10, 2003

Geolocation

Latitude: 43.85360605

Longitude: 18.378217221182695

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

Bosnia and Herzegovina- Obradovic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Obradovic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina

Primary Documents

Notifications