The President of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mirsad Ćeman, warned that this institution is facing serious consequences due to the incomplete composition of judges, stating that the number of pending cases reached 13,625 at the end of last year, while before the emergence of, as he said, the judicial deficit, there were less than 3,000.
At the press conference, where the results of the Court’s work for the year 2025 were presented, Ćeman said that 5,671 cases were received last year, while 2,503 were resolved, stressing that the Court without a functional Grand Chamber is not able to respond to the influx of cases within reasonable deadlines.
According to him, the Grand Chamber previously resolved more than 99 percent of cases, but due to the lack of judges, the Court now decides mainly in plenary sessions, which further slows down the work.
“I tell the authorities to choose the missing judges, choose them on time. Do not let anyone, motivated by anything, cast doubt on the constitutionality, legality and legitimacy of the Constitutional Court”, said Ćeman, assessing that the Court, even with a reduced composition, remains constitutional, legal and legitimate.
He emphasized that the continuous flow of appeals from all over Bosnia and Herzegovina shows that citizens still have confidence in the Constitutional Court, but that due to the existing circumstances, the Court cannot decide within a reasonable time, which, as he stated, leads to more and more frequent appeals from citizens to the European Court of Human Rights due to the violation of the right to a trial within a reasonable time.
Ćeman said that the Court currently has more than 5,000 draft decisions prepared, but that it cannot decide on them due to limited resources and work exclusively in plenary sessions.
He especially thanked the international judges, stating that without their additional involvement, the Court would almost be on the verge of complete paralysis.
The Vice-President of the Court, Valerija Galić, warned that non-execution of the decisions of the Constitutional Court is a question of the constitutional order, the rule of law, and citizens’ trust in state institutions.
She reminded that the decisions of the Constitutional Court, according to the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, have a final and binding character, but that they have been facing the problem of non-implementation for years, citing as examples the cases related to the Statute of the City of Mostar, the Law on the Sale of Apartments with Occupancy Rights and the Election Law of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
“Individual authorities continued to apply the provisions previously declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court, while systemic problems related to the length of court proceedings, execution of final judgments, old foreign currency savings, military apartments and other issues were recorded in appellate cases,” said Galić.
She stated that it was precisely the non-implementation of the Constitutional Court’s decisions that led to the European Court of Human Rights finding human rights violations in cases from Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Speaking about the statistics from Strasbourg, she said that in 2023, the European Court considered 312 items from BiH, of which 306 were declared inadmissible or deleted from the list, while in 2024, out of 142 petitions, 140 were rejected or deleted.
According to the data she presented, during 2025 the European Court received 328 petitions from Bosnia and Herzegovina, of which 326 were declared inadmissible or deleted from the list, while two verdicts were issued in which the violation of rights from the European Convention was determined.
International judge Angelika Nußberger assessed that the Constitutional Court of BiH is a specific and advanced European institution due to the combined composition of domestic and international judges and the direct application of the European Convention on Human Rights.
She said that international judges actively participate in the work on all cases and administrative issues after the Court was left without a full composition, which further slowed down the processes due to the need to translate a large number of materials.
“For outside observers, despite the lack of two judges, the work is not blocked. The Constitutional Court is working, and its jurisprudence is relevant for the entire region and Europe,” said Nußberger.
Judge Larisa Velić emphasized the importance of the transparency of the work of the Constitutional Court and bringing the institution closer to the public through the publication of decisions, newsletters and professional publications.
She stated that through its practice, the Court decides on the most important socio-political issues, including state property, forests, agricultural land, water resources and the question of the competence of different levels of government.
Speaking about the role of the High Representative, Velić recalled that the Constitutional Court took the position in 2000 that it did not have the authority to review the powers of the High Representative, but that it could assess the constitutionality of the laws passed by the High Representative.
Speaking about the composition of the Constitutional Court, Mirsad Ćeman emphasized that judges are not elected as representatives of the people, but according to the territorial principle defined by the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
“Constitutional judges are not elected as representatives, nor as members of any nation, but two are elected from the RS and four from the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina,” said Ćeman.
He added that the Constitution and the rules of the Court do not require ethnic composition when making decisions, but only the existence of the necessary majority, stressing that the vote of each judge is equally valid, regardless of whether it is a domestic or international judge.
Speaking about state property, Judge Velić recalled that the Constitutional Court had previously taken the position that the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina should pass a law on state property, and that the temporary ban on the disposal of state property defined what is considered state property.
According to her, state property consists of immovable property that belonged to Bosnia and Herzegovina on the basis of the succession of the former SFRY, as well as property that was owned by the former Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including forests, rivers, agricultural land and water.
Velić warned that the failure to adopt the law on state property still represents a serious problem, especially in the context of the implementation of the Law on Southern Interconnection, adding that she expects new cases before the Constitutional Court in connection with that issue.
She also emphasized that the eventual conversion of land through spatial plans or expansion of construction zones does not mean an automatic change of ownership.
She reminded that according to the previous Law on construction land, the municipality became the holder of the right of disposal after the conversion of the land, but that such a solution is no longer possible since 2003.
At the conference, the “Yearbook of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina 2025” was presented, as well as an overview of the work and functioning of the Court in the current circumstances, it says Radio Sarajevo.
