PRACTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS AGAINST BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA IN CASES OF WAR DAMAGE

Abstract

The paper analyzes the practice of the European Court of Human Rights against Bosnia and Herzegovina regarding non-execution of court decisions in cases of war damage. Legislation regulating this issue, which allows the state to postpone the execution of court decisions for a certain period of time for reasons of preserving the financial stability of the state. However, the author argues that the issue of paying war damages in Republika Srpska should have been analyzed in more detail and that the current legislation is not in accordance with the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, primarily with the principle of legality developed in the practice of the Court. In this sense, the legal framework governing the payment of war damages is not available, sufficiently clear, predictable and does not provide protection against the arbitrary actions of domestic authorities. Therefore, it can be reasonably argued that the decision of the Court in the case of Knežević and others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, which concerned the payment of war damages, could have been different in the sense of establishing a violation of the rights of the applicants.