European Court of Human Rights - case of Pejaković and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (2007) (excerpts)

European Court of Human Rights - case of Pejaković and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina (2007) (excerpts)

(...)

27. The Court notes that the present case is nearly identical to Jeličić (cited above) in which the Court found a violation of Article 6 of the Convention as well as a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. It is true that section 27 of the 2006 Act has recently been amended and that this could eventually lead to the full enforcement of the judgments at issue. Nevertheless, it would appear that this has not yet happened. Furthermore, while there is no doubt that the public debt to which the Government referred constitutes an important burden for the State, the Government failed to substantiate their claim that the enforcement of the judgments ordering the release of “old” foreign-currency savings (such as those in the present case) would indeed endanger the macroeconomic stability and fiscal sustainability of Bosnia and Herzegovina. That being so, the Court does not see any reason to depart from its well-established case-law pursuant to which it is not open to a State authority to cite lack of funds as an excuse for not honouring a judgment debt (see Jeličić, cited above, § 39). The remaining arguments of the Government were either already rejected in Jeličić (cited above, §§ 41 and 44) or became moot following the amendment of section 27 of the 2006 Act.