CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 19 janvier 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .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 } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s8882C9BB { width:100.6%; border-collapse:collapse } .s3BB657EE { width:7.16%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sD35D798C { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .s355CA239 { width:25.26%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sBC330D85 { width:11.26%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sE2F54392 { width:21.4%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sC8A98521 { width:16.92%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s9CD85DE2 { width:18%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sC8ED3CBF { width:7.16%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sE2D594D1 { margin-left:33.01pt; padding-left:2.99pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt } .sCF499B1D { width:25.26%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s5CDDED00 { width:11.26%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2028752B { width:21.4%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE456770D { width:16.92%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s8D3B7E85 { width:18%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   Communicated on 19 January 2018   SECOND SECTION Application no. 79065/13 Sejda KRDŽALIJA and others against Montenegro lodged on 8 December 2013 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the deportation of the applicants’ family members by the Montenegrin authorities to the authorities of Republika Srpska in Bosnia and Herzegovina in May 1992, where they were later killed or went missing. The applicants complain, under procedural limb of Articles 2 and 3, about a lack of an effective investigation into the impugned event. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Have the applicants complied with the six-month time-limit laid down in Article 35 § 1 of the Convention? The Government are invited to submit a proof of when the judgment of the Court of Appeals of 17 May 2013 was dispatched to the applicants, as well as copies of delivery slips, if available, as a proof of when the applicants received it.   2.     Having regard to the procedural protection of the right to life (see paragraph 104 of Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, ECHR 2000-VII), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article 2 of the Convention? In particular, the Government are invited to inform the Court: (a) what investigative actions have been undertaken and when, (b) was the investigation conducted by independent authorities, and (c) who represented the State in the civil proceedings the applicants had instituted against the State?   3. Having regard to the procedural protection from torture and/or inhuman and degrading treatment (see paragraph   131 of Labita v.   Italy [GC], no.   26772/95, ECHR 2000-IV), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article   3 of the Convention?   APPENDIX     N o . First name LASTNAME Birth year Nationality Place of residence Representative   Sejda KRDŽALIJA 1949 Bosnia and Herzegovina Goražde T. Gorjanc-Prelević   Ramiza BIČO 1933 Bosnia and Herzegovina Goražde T. Gorjanc-Prelević   Sabina DOLOVAC 1985 Bosnia and Herzegovina Goražde T. Gorjanc-Prelević   Admira DRUSTINAC 1977 Bosnia and Herzegovina Wuppertal T. Gorjanc-Prelević   Fikreta HADŽIĆ 1955 Bosnia and Herzegovina Goražde T. Gorjanc-Prelević   Hizreta HASANBEGOVIĆ 1955 Bosnia and Herzegovina Goražde T. Gorjanc-Prelević   Mirzeta HOŠO 1951 Bosnia and Herzegovina Goražde T. Gorjanc-Prelević   Hikmeta PRELO 1953 Bosnia and Herzegovina Goražde T. Gorjanc-Prelević   Elmedina SELIMOVIĆ 1981 Bosnia and Herzegovina Goražde T. Gorjanc-Prelević