Beglerović: The Prosecutor's Office Exposed Minors to Particular Pressure and Stress, Influenced by a Meeting Held in the Government of the Sarajevo Canton

(Patria) - The Municipal Court in Sarajevo has made a decision regarding two minors who were arrested on suspicion of falsely reporting bomb threats to schools and other institutions in the Sarajevo Canton.

Instead of a detention measure, the Municipal Court ordered temporary accommodation for the two minors, and they will be placed in the Sarajevo Canton Educational Center.

Following the hearing concerning the minors suspected of committing criminal offenses under Article 183, paragraph (2) and Article 247, paragraph (4) of the Criminal Code of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, attorney Damir Beglerović points out that on October 18, 2024, the Government of the Sarajevo Canton issued a statement on its official website announcing that a meeting was held attended by Sarajevo Canton Prime Minister Nihad Uk, Minister of Interior Admir Katica, Minister of Education and Upbringing Naida Hota-Muminović, Minister of Justice and Administration Darja Softić Kadenić, Minister of Labor, Social Policy, Displaced Persons and Refugees Enda Pavić Pečenković, Police Commissioner Fatmir Hajdarević, and Head of the Juvenile Department of the Sarajevo Canton Prosecutor's Office Advija Hajdo Balta, at which meeting they discussed measures for joint action by all institutions in the Canton.

This procedure violated the basic principle of the Law on Judicial and Prosecutorial Functions in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, prescribed in Article 3, namely that judges and prosecutors must be qualified, independent in their work, and beyond the reach of corruption or improper influence.

From the aforementioned statement, it is evident that prosecutor Advija Hajdo Balta, who is the acting prosecutor in the case, acted contrary to the cited provisions of the Law, in that she, under political pressure from officeholders, primarily gave a statement to the public, and then proposed restrictive measures, although in accordance with the Law on the Protection and Treatment of Children and Minors in Criminal Proceedings, she was obliged to act in a manner that protects minors, especially from media headlines and persecution.

In the context of the above, we point out that the European Court has examined in its practice the admissibility of applications in which applicants claimed that, due to statements made by public officials during criminal proceedings against the applicant or before the applicant was arrested and formally charged with a criminal offense, and which were published in the media, their right to the presumption of innocence was violated.

Thus, in the judgment Peša v. Croatia, when examining the admissibility of the application in relation to Article 6, paragraph 2 of the European Convention, when the Government argued that the applicant's complaints under Article 6, paragraph 2 of the European Convention were premature because the criminal proceedings against the applicant were still ongoing and he could raise the same objections using various legal remedies provided by domestic law, the European Court indicated that the legal remedies available to the applicant in the context of the criminal proceedings against him could be used in relation to judgments and other decisions rendered in those proceedings, and not in relation to statements made by public officials in the media, and therefore declared the application admissible in relation to Article 6, paragraph 2 of the European Convention (see European Court, Peša v. Croatia, application no. 40523/08, judgment of April 8, 2010, paragraph 132).

Furthermore, the Constitutional Court points out that the European Court in the case Ilgar Mammadov v. Azerbaijan concluded that Article 6, paragraph 2 of the European Convention is applicable in relation to a joint press statement by the Prosecutor's Office and the Ministry of Interior that was published before the applicant was arrested and formally charged with criminal offenses, since it is clear that the allegations in the statement are directly related to the criminal investigation initiated against the applicant and other persons in connection with the Ismayilli events, all as contained in the Decision of the European Court, Ilgar Mammadov v. Azerbaijan, application no. 15172/13.

All of the above indicates that the Prosecutor's Office, acting contrary to the aforementioned provisions of the law, exposed the minors to particular pressure and stress, all under the influence of the meeting held in the Government of the Sarajevo Canton, and also condemned them in its statements, stating that "the Court may impose an educational measure or a juvenile prison sentence on minor perpetrators of criminal offenses, upon a reasoned proposal by the prosecutor," although this is an early stage of the proceedings in which the individuals do not have the status of perpetrators of criminal offenses, thereby violating the basic principle of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina from Article 3, which prescribes that everyone is considered innocent of a criminal offense until their guilt is established by a final court judgment, stated Beglerović.