CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 26 avril 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB042F7C6 { width:162.94pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .sCF71F55 { width:100%; border-collapse:collapse } .s89854C45 { width:19.36%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE3DA80B3 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .s478C9F36 { width:49.38%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sF6397F91 { width:31.26%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2810C127 { width:19.36%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s78C2F550 { margin-left:31.34pt; padding-left:4.66pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold } .sB9E5B1F { width:49.38%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s91F74358 { width:31.26%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE22134D3 { margin-left:36pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 }     FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 414/11 KONGRESNA NARODNA STRANKA and Others against Bosnia and Herzegovina The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 26   April   2016 as a Chamber composed of:   Angelika Nußberger, President,   Ganna Yudkivska,   Khanlar Hajiyev,   Erik Møse,   Faris Vehabović,   Síofra O’Leary,   Carlo Ranzoni, judges, and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar. Having regard to the above application lodged on 30 December 2010, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS 1.     The applicants are the National Congress Party for the Protection of the Human Rights of War Veterans and Citizens, and of Justice and Morals in Bosnia and Herzegovina ( Kongresna narodna stranka zaštite ljudskih prava boraca i građana, pravde i morala Bosne i Hercegovine ; “the Party“) and 45 citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina (“the applicants“). A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. 2.     The applicants were granted leave by the President to be represented by the president of the Party and one of the applicants, Mr. E. Imširović (Rule 36 § 2 of the Rules of Court). The Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina (“the Government”) were represented by their Deputy Agent, Ms Z. Ibrahimović. A.     The circumstances of the case 3.     The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 4.     The Party was established on 25 December 1997 under the laws of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The applicants are members of the Party. 5.     The Party participated in the 2006 elections for the House of Representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Almost all of its candidates declared themselves Bosniacs. 6 .     On 30 June 2010 the Party’s registration for the 2010 elections was refused because it was submitted out of time. The Party failed to lodge an appeal against that decision. 7.     On 11 June 2014 the Party’s registration for the 2014 elections was refused for failure to comply with the procedural requirements (a failure to pay a required deposit and to submit a list of signatures in support of its candidacy). On 18 June 2014 that decision was upheld by the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (“the State Court”). 8.     The applicants claim that they do not declare affiliation with any of the “constituent peoples” (namely, Bosniacs [1] , Croats [2] and Serbs [3] ). They describe themselves as “a person from Tuzla”, “a Muslim”, “a Catholic”, “a person from Sarajevo”, “a person from Krajina”, “a person from Herzegovina”, “a refugee”, “a war veteran” and the like; while three of them describe themselves as belonging to the Roma and Albanian ethnic minorities respectively. B.     Relevant domestic law and practice and international documents 9.     The relevant domestic law and practice and international documents were outlined in Sejdić and Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina ([GC], nos. 27996/06 and 34836/06, ECHR 2009) and Zornić v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (no. 3681/06, 15 July 2014). Notably, the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina makes a distinction between members of “constituent peoples” (persons who declare affiliation with Bosniacs, Croats and Serbs) and “others” (members of ethnic minorities and persons who do not declare affiliation with any particular group because of intermarriage, mixed parenthood or other reasons). 10 .     In the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, a person’s ethnic affiliation was decided solely by that person, through a system of self-classification. Thus, no objective criteria such as knowledge of a certain language or belonging to a specific religion existed. Moreover, there was no requirement of acceptance by other members of the ethnic group in question. Since the Constitution contains no provisions regarding the determination of one’s ethnicity it appears that it was assumed that the traditional self-classification would suffice. 11.     In accordance with the 1995 Constitution (Articles IV § 1 and V), only persons declaring affiliation with a “constituent people” are entitled to stand for election to the House of Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly and the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina. COMPLAINT 12.     The applicants complained that they were not able to participate in the 2010 elections for the House of Peoples and the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina on account of their non-affiliation with a “constituent people”. They relied on Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention and Article 14 of the Convention. The Court ex officio communicated this complaint also under Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 to the Convention. THE LAW 13.     The Government submitted that the application should be rejected as an abuse of the right of application because the applicants had attempted to mislead the Court into believing that their case was similar to Sejdić and Finci . However, it was not until after their failure to register properly for the 2010 elections that the applicants raised the discrimination complaint relying on that judgment. Moreover, a majority of the Party’s candidates for the 2006 elections had declared themselves Bosniacs. The Government further submitted that the applicants had failed to lodge an appeal against the decision of 30 June 2010 before the State Court (see paragraph 6 above) and that they could not claim to be the victims of the alleged violations because they had not participated in the 2010 elections by their own fault. 14.     The applicants did not dispute the Government’s arguments, but focused instead on alleged irregularities in domestic proceedings in which a fine was imposed on the Party in 2008 for a breach of a regulation on party funding which is not the subject of the present case. 15.     The Court reiterates that the concept of “abuse” within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 of the Convention must be understood to mean any conduct on the part of an applicant that is manifestly contrary to the purpose of the right of individual application as provided for in the Convention and that impedes the proper functioning of the Court, or the proper conduct of the proceedings before it (see S.A.S. v. France [GC], no. 43835/11, §§ 66-67, ECHR 2014 (extracts) and Gross v. Switzerland [GC], no. 67810/10, § 28, ECHR 2014). An application is likely to be dismissed on this ground inter alia if it has been established that it is knowingly based on untrue facts and false declarations (see, for example, Drijfhout v . the Netherlands (dec.),   no.   51721/09, 22 February 2011, and Bagheri and Maliki v.   the Netherlands (dec.), no. 30164/06, 15 May 2007), or that significant information and documents have been deliberately witheld, either where they were known from the outset (see Puusep v. Estonia (dec.), no.   67648/10, 7 January 2014, and Keretchashvili v. Georgia (dec.), no.   5667/02, 2   May 2006) or where new significant developments have occurred during the procedure (see Komatinović v. Serbia (dec.), no.   75381/10, 29   January   2013, and Predescu v. Romania , no. 21447/03, §§   25-27, 2   December   2008). 16 .     Turning to the present case, the Court notes that the applicants complained about their alleged ineligibility to stand for the 2010 elections for the House of Peoples and the Presidency based on their non-affiliation with any of the “constituent people”. In that respect, the Court observes that the Party’s registration for these elections was refused because it was submitted outside the prescribed time-limit. Furthemore, as regards their ethnic origin, the Court notes that the applicants describe themselves as “a person from Tuzla”, “a Muslim”, “a Catholic”, “a person from Sarajevo”, “a person from Krajina”, “a person from Herzegovina”, “a refugee”, “a war veteran” and the like; while three of them describe themselves as belonging to the Roma and Albanian ethnic minorities respectively. 17.     The Court notes that there are no objective criteria for oneʼs ethnic affiliation, which depends solely on oneʼs own self-classification (see paragraph 10 above; see also Sejdić and Finci , cited above, § 11, and Zornić, cited above, § 9). In Zornić the Court concluded that Bosnia and Herzegovina should provide every citizen with the right to stand for elections to the Presidency and the House of Peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina without discrimination based on ethnic affiliation and without granting special rights for “constituent peoples” to the exclusion of minorities or citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina (ibid, § 43). 18.   While acknowledging that, the Court observes that the applicants use vague and undefined terms that appear to have been purposely chosen to obfuscate the issue (see paragraph 16 above). Moreover, almost all of the Party’s candidates for the 2006 elections declared affiliation as Bosniacs. Among them were three of the applicants in the present case, including the president of the Party Mr Imširović. They now claim not to belong to any “constituent people”. The applicants’ submissions failed to clarify this matter. 19.     As was mentioned before, the Party’s registration for the 2010 election was refused for failure to comply with the procedural requirements, not their failure to identify as members of “constituent peoples”. It is therefore apparent that the applicants have deliberately sought to misrepresent the facts of the case with a view to influencing the Court’s decision. That being so, the Court cannot but conclude that the applicants’ conduct was contrary to the purpose of the right of individual application, as provided for in Article 34 of the Convention. Therefore, it is appropriate to reject this part of the application as an abuse of the right of application, pursuant to Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention. 20.     In these circumstances, the Court does not consider it necessary to continue the examination of the case under Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 to the Convention on its own initiative. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Declares the application inadmissible.   Done in English and notified in writing on 19 May 2016. Claudia Westerdiek   Angelika Nußberger   Registrar   President Appendix   N o . Applicant’s name Birth date, place of residence and nationality   Vahida BEŠLAGIĆ 20/07/1959 Ključ BiH   Remzo BEZDROB 20/01/1964 Goražde BiH   Zehra ĆAMO 15/05/1961 Sarajevo BiH   Ibrahim CRNOGORAC 28/06/1932 Tuzla BiH   Abdulah DAUTOVIĆ 27/02/1942 Zvornik BiH   Mehmed DURAKOVIĆ 04/03/1957 Bijeljina BiH   Elmasa DŽEKIĆ 01/09/1966 Tuzla BiH   Kanaid DŽEKIĆ 23/07/1957 Tuzla BiH   Arif FAZLIĆ 01/03/1969 Mostar BiH   Mejra GAVRANOVIĆ 23/05/1952 Mostar BiH   Jusuf GOLOŠ 03/04/1970 Mostar BiH   Hakik HARBAŠ 23/08/1958 Bosanska Krupa BiH   Fejzudin HASANOVIĆ Kalesija BiH   Ibrahim HASANOVIĆ 10/08/1963 Bosanska Krupa BiH   Senad HASOVIĆ 20/07/1965 Goražde BiH   Enver IMŠIROVIĆ 06/08/1952 Tuzla BiH   Mair ISMAILI 25/03/1957 Tuzla BiH   Ekrem JULARDŽIJA 25/04/1965 Travnik BiH   Dževad KADRIĆ 20/08/1969 Goražde BiH   Muris KALAJDŽISALIHOVIĆ 17/08/1959 Bugojno BiH   Sanel KOPIĆ 03/03/1973 Kladanj BiH   Avdo KRVAVAC 29/04/1968 Mostar BiH   Ekrem KUKURUZ 04/04/1977 Gradačac BiH   Ekrem LUBENOVIĆ 10/04/1958 Travnik BiH   Dženan MAHMUTBEGOVIĆ 24/09/1974 Bugojno BiH   Ševal MALČINOVIĆ 15/06/1961 Tuzla BiH   Sead MEMIĆ 16/05/1954 Sarajevo BiH   Senija MEMIĆ 19/02/1959 Sarajevo BiH   Enver MIRVIĆ 27/09/1964 Goražde BiH   Abdurahman ODOBAŠIĆ 11/09/1983 Tuzla BiH   Husein ODOBAŠIĆ 25/03/1956 Tuzla BiH   Mahmud OLOVČIĆ 14/06/1969 Sarajevo BiH   Nurija OMERBAŠIĆ 12/08/1946 Sarajevo BiH   Ismet PALOŠ 20/03/1959 Bužim BiH   Mirsad REDŽIĆ 02/11/1960 Zenica BiH   Redin REDŽIĆ 30/04/1970 Mostar BiH   Dzemila ŠABANOVIĆ Tuzla BiH   Zlatija ŠABANOVIĆ Mostar BiH   Hatidža SANTIR Živinice BiH   Midhat ŠEHIĆ 01/06/1966 Tuzla BiH   Ramiz SEJFIĆ 09/02/1964 Bugojno BiH   Hanifa SERHATLIĆ 09/12/1946 Živinice BiH   Esad SINANOVIĆ 29/11/1954 Tuzla BiH   Selver SOFTIĆ 24/07/1960 Živinice BiH   Jusuf ŽIGIĆ 18/08/1961 Tuzla BiH   [1] Bosniacs were known as Muslims until the 1992-95 war. The term “Bosniacs” ( Bošnjaci ) should not be confused with the term “Bosnians” ( Bosanci ) which is commonly used to denote citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina irrespective of their ethnic origin. [2] The Croats are an ethnic group whose members may be natives of Croatia or of other former component republics of the SFRY including Bosnia and Herzegovina. The expression “Croat” is normally used (both as a noun and as an adjective) to refer to members of the ethnic group, regardless of their nationality; it is not to be confused with “Croatian”, which normally refers to nationals of Croatia. [3] The Serbs are an ethnic group whose members may be natives of Serbia or of other former component republics of the SFRY including Bosnia and Herzegovina. The expression “Serb” is normally used (both as a noun and as an adjective) to refer to members of the ethnic group, regardless of their nationality; it is not to be confused with “Serbian”, which normally refers to nationals of Serbia.