Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Application of International and EU Law in Bosnia and Herzegovina

  • Chapter
Judicial Application of International Law in Southeast Europe

  • 387 Accesses

Abstract

The application of international law in national legal systems is a well-established question in legal literature. Both the globalisation and internationalisation of legal systems have given rise to questions that need to be answered legally, by laws and jurisprudence, and in legal literature. The question of the enforcement of inter- or supranational obligations is directly linked to this application. The goal of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) to become a member of the EU has raised the question of the application of supranational law (EU law) in BiH, both in terms of preparing for membership and the country’s status after entering the EU. The Europeanisation of the national constitutions is already taking place. For BiH, this is evident in the signing of the SAA and confirmed by the jurisprudence and literature oriented towards EU law. Formally, the EU is not a state and the treaties are not a constitution. Nevertheless, the European treaties deal with constitutional questions and provide answers in a legally binding way. At the same time, international law has taken on the characteristics of constitutional law. Hence, we have to clarify the relationships between international, supranational and constitutional competences, particularly the competences of the courts, the ECtHR (European Court of Human Rights), the ECJ (European Court of Justice) and national constitutional courts. The need for such clarification is also based on the principle of the effectiveness of legal protection as an integral part of the principle of the rule of law. The complexity of jurisdiction at the multi-system level can be described as ‘conflicts among courts of different levels in networking legal systems’. Other Member States of the EU and their constitutional courts likewise struggle with the hierarchy of norms and clarification of competences, both in terms of EU law and international law. It is remarkable that the Solange decision of the German Constitutional Court of 1974–1986 is used as a model both in jurisprudence and legislation. The key idea here is the ‘model of co-operation’ (Kooperationsverhältnis) instead of extremely divided competences creating a strict hierarchy among different legal systems. Articles 52 and 53 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU guarantee a minimum standard of protection and acknowledge the guarantees provided by the ECHR. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU aims to achieve coherence in the protection of human rights at the different national, supra- and international levels. To this end, the ECJ and ECtHR respect each other’s decisions to ensure the greatest possible coherence of human rights standards by respecting other courts that are responsible for the protection of human rights.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Denza (2006), p. 423; Keller (2003); Menzel (2011); Amrhein-Hofman (2003), p. 146; Pfeffer (2009).

  2. 2.

    Emmerich-Fritsche (2007), pp. 41–50, 62–89; Payandeh (2010).

  3. 3.

    Frowein (1987a), pp. 54–68; Meron (2008), pp. 247–301; Geiger (2010), Art. 4 EUV recital 37–48; Kaczorowska (2011), pp. 385–421, 924–960.

  4. 4.

    Chalmers et al. (2010), p. 184; Menzel (2011), p. 352.

  5. 5.

    Frowein (1987b), pp. 469–485.

  6. 6.

    Kaczorowska (2011), pp. 198–234; Ullerich (2011), pp. 52, 69, 173; Streinz (2007), p. 395.

  7. 7.

    Frowein (1987c), pp. 451–468; Bieber (1991), pp. 393–414; Pernice (2000), pp. 205–232.

  8. 8.

    Kleinlein (2011); Klabbers et al. (2009); Geiger (2010), Art. 6 EUV recital 19–22.

  9. 9.

    Ekardt and Lessmann (2006), pp. 381 f.; Nunner (2009); Sauer (2008), in particular pp. 261–344; Stender (2004).

  10. 10.

    Munding (2010).

  11. 11.

    Sauer (2008).

  12. 12.

    Kaczorowska (2011), pp. 296–364; Geiger (2010), Art. 4 EUV recital 29–35.

  13. 13.

    Frowein (1987d), pp. 407–431.

  14. 14.

    Bleckmann (2011), pp. 149–219; Geiger (2010), Art. 4 EUV recital 29, 34, 35.

  15. 15.

    Geiger (2010), Art. 4 EUV recital 29, 34, 35; Nunner (2009), pp. 159–164.

  16. 16.

    Nunner (2009), pp. 50–408.

  17. 17.

    Borowsky (2011), pp. 628–641, 667–715; Jarras (2010), Art. 52 recital 23–25, 34, 60–65, Art. 53; Stender (2004), pp. 82–85.

  18. 18.

    Schneiders (2009), pp. 145–265; Brummund (2010).

  19. 19.

    Stender (2004), pp. 69–85; Jarras (2010), Art. 52 recital 65; Nunner (2009), pp. 227–242, 249–258; Borowsky (2011), pp. 667–704.

  20. 20.

    The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina was signed between the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia on 14 December 1995.

  21. 21.

    Trnka (2006), p. 41.

  22. 22.

    Amrhein-Hofman (2003); Emmerich-Fritsche (2007), pp. 90–103.

  23. 23.

    Pfeffer (2009), pp. 85, 90; Amrhein-Hofman (2003), pp. 146–295.

  24. 24.

    Amrhein-Hofman (2003), pp. 80–144; Pfeffer (2009), p. 82.

  25. 25.

    Denza (2006), p. 429; Ademović et al. (2012), p. 37; Stein et al. (2012), p. 58.

  26. 26.

    Ademović et al. (2012), p. 39.

  27. 27.

    Pobrić (2000), p. 20.

  28. 28.

    Official Gazette BiH, No. 29/2000.

  29. 29.

    The decision on the giving of consent by the Parliamentary Assembly for the signing of the SAA is published in OG BiH, No. 11/08, international agreements supplement.

  30. 30.

    Degan (2000), p. 15.

  31. 31.

    Schilling (2010), pp. 2–15; Steiner et al. (2007), pp. 3–456; Addo (2010), pp. 83–152.

  32. 32.

    Kälin and Künzli (2005), pp. 22–35; Schilling (2010), p. 16.

  33. 33.

    Steiner et al. (2007), pp. 475–668; Kälin and Künzli (2005), pp. 17–22.

  34. 34.

    Pfeffer (2009), p. 147; Steiner (2006), p. 753; Addo (2010), in particular pp. 287–342.

  35. 35.

    Borowsky (2011), pp. 628–641, 667–715; Frowein (1987d), pp. 407–431.

  36. 36.

    Schneiders (2009); Geiger (2010), Art. 6 EUV; Kaczorowska (2011), pp. 235–255; Munding (2010).

  37. 37.

    Ademović et al. (2012), p. 38.

  38. 38.

    Steiner and Ademović (2010), p. 154, with further references.

  39. 39.

    Dougan (2007), p. 934.

  40. 40.

    European Court of Human Rights, 22.12.2009, Applications Nos. 27996/06 and 34836/06 (Sejdić and Finci); Kulenović et al. (2010), p. 18.

  41. 41.

    SAA signed on 16.6.2008; OJ of Bosnia and Herzegovina No. 5/08, international agreements.

  42. 42.

    Dougan (2007), p. 934.

  43. 43.

    The development of the practice of the ECJ slowly began with the decision of 12 November 1969, 29/69 - Stauder [1969] ECR 419, para 7; now provided for under Art. 6(3) TEU; Samardžić and Meškić (2012), pp. 11–35.

  44. 44.

    CC, U 7/97 of 22.12.1997.

  45. 45.

    CC, U 7/98 of 26.2.1999.

  46. 46.

    CC, U 40/00, of 2.2.2001.

  47. 47.

    CC, U 5/09 of 25.9.2009, 30.

  48. 48.

    Ibid; Ademović et al. (2012), p. 38.

  49. 49.

    The Interim Agreement was published in the OG BiH international agreements supplement, No. 5/08 and entered into force on 30 June 2008.

  50. 50.

    Vöneky (2009), para. 27.

  51. 51.

    Http://www.consilium.europa.eu/App/accords/Default.aspx?command=details&id=297&lang=EN&aid=2008023&doclang=EN. Accessed 1 March 2011.

  52. 52.

    Case C-192/89 S. Z. Sevince v. Staatssecretaris van Justitie [1990] I-3461, 9.

  53. 53.

    Ibid.

  54. 54.

    Case C-277/94 Z. Taflan-Met v. Bestuur van de Sociale Verzekeringsbank [1996] I-4085, 18.

  55. 55.

    Case 30/88 Greece v. Commission [1989] I-3711, 16.

  56. 56.

    Schmalenbach (2007).

  57. 57.

    Case C-192/89 S. Z. Sevince v. Staatssecretaris van Justitie [1990] I-3461, 24.

  58. 58.

    Vöneky (2009); K. Schmalenbach, u Ch. Calliess/M. Ruffert, Art. 310, para 34.

  59. 59.

    Vukadinović (2010).

  60. 60.

    OG BiH, No. 48/05; amendments OG BiH Nos. 76/07 and 80/09.

  61. 61.

    Vukadinović (2010).

  62. 62.

    Case 104/81 Hauptzollamt Mainz v. C.A. Kupferberg & Cie KG a.A [1982] 3641, 4.

  63. 63.

    Popović (2010).

  64. 64.

    Rodin (2003).

  65. 65.

    CC, 20.03.2007., AP-379/07, MPA “Posavina promet” d.o.o, para 17; CC, 9.5.2007, AP-813/06, Rahman Selimović, para 17.

  66. 66.

    Steiner and Ademović (2010), p. 165.

  67. 67.

    Ibid, p. 163; See also Marković (2011), p. 344.

  68. 68.

    OG BiH, Nos. 26/04, 7/05, 48/05 and 60/10; OG FBiH, Nos. 43/99, 32/00 and 29/03; OG RS, Nos. 38/00, 40/00, 47/02, 38/03, 66/03, 66/03 and 20/07; OG DB, Nos. 19/06, 19/07 and 25/08.

  69. 69.

    OG FBiH, Nos. 23/99, 45/00, 2/02, 6/02, 29/03, 68/05, 91/07, 84/08, 88/08, 7/09 i 63/10; OG RS, Nos. 127/08, 58/09, 100/11; OG DB, Nos. 11/01, 10/02, 14/02, 1/03, 8/03, 4/04, 19/07, 34/07.

  70. 70.

    Since the break-up of Yugoslavia, this Act (Official Journal of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Nos. 29/78, 39/85, 46/85, 45/89, 57/89) by virtue of succession has remained applicable in two slightly different versions in each entity of Bosnia and Herzegovina: the Obligations Act of Republika Srpska (OJ of Republika Srpska, Nos. 17/93, 57/98, 39/03, 74/04) and the Obligations Act of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (OJ of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Nos. 2/29, 13/93, 13/94 and Official Journal of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, No. 29/03).

  71. 71.

    See in more detail, Steiner and Ademović (2010), p. 577; Meškić (2011a), p. 355; Trnka (2006), p. 274; Begić (1997), p. 300.

  72. 72.

    CC BiH, 25.06.2004, U 68/02, para 41.

  73. 73.

    The theory of ‘implied powers’ seeks to make the restrictive interpretation of listed competences more flexible. For the EU, this theory means that institutions have the necessary powers to execute the powers listed in the Treaties; Joint cases 281, 283, 285 and 287/85 Germany v. Commission [1987] I-3203.

  74. 74.

    Case 165/87 Commission v. Council [1988] I-5545; Nettesheim (2003), pp. 389–441.

  75. 75.

    CC BiH, 18.2.2000, U 5/98-II, para 29; CC BiH, 28.09.2001, U-26/01, para 26; CC BiH, 10.5.2002, U 18/00, paras 47 and 51; CC BiH, 28.5.2010, U 12/09, para 31.

  76. 76.

    CC BiH, 28.5.2010, U 12/09, para 31: ‘the State and the Entities have the joint obligation not only to ensure the highest level of protection of human rights but also to guarantee an equal implementation of these rights.’

  77. 77.

    Human Rights Commission within the CC, 13.06.2006, CH/02/12468 et al., para 152.

  78. 78.

    This is suggested by the title of the chapter ‘Concurrent competences’ in Steiner and Ademović (2010), p. 585.

  79. 79.

    E.g. Steiner and Ademović (2010), p. 580; Begić (1997), p. 300; Kurtćehajić and Ibrahimagić (2007), p. 274. For an opposite opinion, see Pobrić (2000), p. 344. With regard to certain responsibilities, authors argue in favour of the exclusive competence of the state, e.g. macroeconomic stability in BiH. See European Commission Delegation to BiH (2003), p. 42.

  80. 80.

    Meškić (2011b), p. 54.

  81. 81.

    CC BiH, 25.06.2004, U 68/02, para 41.

  82. 82.

    Case 15/81 Schul [1982] I-1409, para 33.

  83. 83.

    CC BiH, 5.10.2002, U 18/00 No. 30/02.

  84. 84.

    CC BiH, 28.5.2010, U 12/09, para 30.

  85. 85.

    CC BiH, 18.2.2000, U 5/98-II, para 29.

  86. 86.

    Case C-281/98 Roman Angonese v. Cassa di Risparmio di Bolzano [2000] I-4139, para 34; Meškić and Samardžić (2012), p. 297.

  87. 87.

    CC BiH, 28.5.2010, U 12/09, para 30.

  88. 88.

    OG No. 50/08 and 35/09.

  89. 89.

    OJ EU 1997, L 28, p. 1.

  90. 90.

    These are the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (1979), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the 1966 and 1989 Optional Protocols thereto (1966).

  91. 91.

    OG BiH, No. 48/05, 76/07 and 80/09.

  92. 92.

    Court of BiH, decision No. S1 3 U 005412 10 Uvl, 15.3.2012., M.R.M. Ljubuški/ASA Auto d.o.o. Sarajevo (ASA Auto); See Meškić (2012).

  93. 93.

    Case 27/76 United Brands [1978] I-207, para 184.

  94. 94.

    Jung (2009), para 153.

  95. 95.

    Brinker (2009), para 36.

  96. 96.

    Case C-418/01 IMS Health [2004] I-5039, para 52; See also the decision of the Commission, 24.3.2004, COMP/C-3/37.792 (Microsoft), para 428; Henning and Stephanie (2005), p. 112.

  97. 97.

    The Supreme Court of Canada (1998), 2.S.C.R; See Alijević (2012).

  98. 98.

    Dicosola (2010).

  99. 99.

    Trnka (2006), p. 346; Dauster (2010), p. 11; Steiner and Ademović (2010), p. 99; Alijević (2010), p. 209; Dobrača (2005), p. 60; Sadiković (2003), p. 13, available at: http://www.soros.org.ba/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=64%3Austav-bih-ka-novim-rjeenjima&catid=49&Itemid=89&lang=ba. Accessed 15.4.2011.

  100. 100.

    Miljko (2001), p. 39; Trnka (2006), p. 349; Simović (2003), p. 22, available at: http://www.soros.org.ba/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=64%3Austav-bih-ka-novim-rjeenjima&catid=49&Itemid=89&lang=ba. Accessed 15 April 2011.

  101. 101.

    OJ EU 2010, C 83, 1–388.

  102. 102.

    Commission, 6.11.2007, Bosnia and Herzegovina Progress Report for the year 2007, COM (2007) 663, p. 13.

  103. 103.

    Commission, 6.11.2007, Bosnia and Herzegovina Progress Report for the year 2007, COM (2007) 663, p. 13; Commission, 5.11.2008, Bosnia and Herzegovina Progress Report for the year 2008, COM (2008) 674, p. 13; Commission, 14.10.2009, Bosnia and Herzegovina Progress Report for the year 2009, COM (2009) 533, p. 12; Commission, 9.11.2010, Bosnia and Herzegovina Progress Report for the year 2010, COM (2010) 660, p. 12.

  104. 104.

    Hartley (2003), p. 283.

  105. 105.

    Case C-99/00 Criminal proceedings against Kenny Roland Lyckeskog [2002] I-4839, para 14. On the basis of this judgment, the concrete theory is supported by eg. Karpenstein (2009), para 52; Stanivuković (2009), p. 106; Oppermann et al. (2009), p. 272; Haratsch et al. (2010), p. 247; Supporters of the abstract theory include Hartley (2003), p. 284; Wegener (2007), para 24.

  106. 106.

    Case 107/76 Hoffmann-La Roche AG v. Centrafarm Vertriebsgesellschaft Pharmazeutischer Erzeugnisse mbH [1977] 957, para 5.

  107. 107.

    Stanivuković (2009), p. 106.

  108. 108.

    Priebe (2008), p. 314.

  109. 109.

    Meškić (2011b).

  110. 110.

    Case C-224/01 Gerhard Köbler v. Austria [2003] I-10239, para 31.

  111. 111.

    Venice Commission, Opinion on the need for a judicial institution at the level of the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina, CDL-INF (98) 17, Strasbourg 1998, available at: http://www.venice.coe.int/docs/1998/CDL-INF%281998%29017-e.asp. Accessed 10 April 2011.

  112. 112.

    BiH Court Act, OG BiH Nos. 29/00, 15/02, 16/02, 24/02, 03/03, 37/03, 42/03, 04/04, 09/04, 35/04, 61/04, 32/07 and 97/09; Consolidated version published in OG BiH No. 49/09.

  113. 113.

    OG BiH No. 63/10.

  114. 114.

    OG BiH No. 53/10.

  115. 115.

    Consumer Protection Act, OG BiH No. 25/06.

  116. 116.

    Competition Act, OG BiH Nos. 48/05 and 76/07; Act on Amendments to the Competition Act, OG BiH No. 80/09.

  117. 117.

    One exception exists, according to Art. 7(2) of the Court Act of BiH, which is constituted by jurisdiction over criminal acts established by the criminal laws of the entities and the District of Brčko, but again with very narrow conditions, namely when such criminal offences endanger the sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence, national security or international personality of Bosnia and Herzegovina; may have serious repercussions or detrimental consequences to the economy of Bosnia and Herzegovina; may have other detrimental consequences to Bosnia and Herzegovina or may cause serious economic damage or other detrimental consequences beyond the territory of an entity or the District of Brčko of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

  118. 118.

    Dauster (2010), p. 12.

  119. 119.

    Meron (2008), pp. 193–201.

References

  • Addo MK (2010) The legal nature of international human rights. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Ademović N, Marko J, Marković G (2012) Ustavno pravo. Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, Sarajevo

    Google Scholar 

  • Alijević M (2010) Uloga sudske vlasti u BiH. Anali Pravnog fakulteta Univerziteta u Zenici 3

    Google Scholar 

  • Alijević M (2012) Tekst preambule kao pomoćna metoda tumačenja Ustava. Anali Pravnog fakulteta Univerziteta u Zenici 5

    Google Scholar 

  • Amrhein-Hofman C (2003) Monismus und Dualismus in den Völkerrechtslehren. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Begić K (1997) Bosna i Hercegovina od Vanceove misije do Daytonskog sporazuma. Bosanska Knjiga, Sarajevo

    Google Scholar 

  • Bieber R (1991) Verfassungsentwicklung und Verfassungsgebung in der Europäischen Gemeinschaft. In: Wildenmann R (ed) Staatswerdung Europas? Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleckmann M (2011) Nationale Grundrechte im Anwendungsbereich des Recths der Europäischen Union. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Borowsky M (2011) Titel VII Allgemeine Bestimmungen über die Auslegung und Anwendung der Charta. In: Meyer J (ed) Charta der Grundrechte der Europäischen Union. Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinker I (2009) Art. 82 EGV. In: Schwarze J (ed) EU-Kommentar. Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • Brummund F (2010) Kohärenter Grundrechtsschutz im Raum der Freiheit, der Sicherheit und des Rechts. Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers D, Davies G, Monti G (2010) European Union law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Dauster M (2010) Ustav Bosne i Hercegovine: Nesavršena država-diskurs. Sveske za javno pravo 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Degan VĐ (2000) Međunarodno pravo. Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Rijeci, Rijeka

    Google Scholar 

  • Denza E (2006) The relationship between international and national law. In: Evans MD (ed) International law, 2nd edn. OUP, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dicosola M (2010) Constitutional courts and globalisation of law: the international judges. The cases of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo. www.juridicas.unam.mx/wccl/ponencias/12/199.pdf. Accessed 1 Apr 2013

  • Dobrača N (2005) Nezavisno pravosuđe s posebnim osvrtom na reformu pravosudnog sistema u Bosni i Hercegovini. Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Sarajevu, master’s thesis, p 60

    Google Scholar 

  • Dougan M (2007) When worlds collide! Competing visions of the relationship between direct effect and supremacy. Common Mark Law Rev 44

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekardt F, Lessmann V (2006) EuGH, EGMR und BVerfG: Die dritte Gewalt im transnationalen Mehrebenensystem. Kritische Justiz

    Google Scholar 

  • Emmerich-Fritsche A (2007) Vom Völkerrecht zum Weltrecht. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission Delegation to BiH (2003) Study on potential revenue sources for the institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Sarajevo, p 42

    Google Scholar 

  • Frowein JA (1987a) Collective enforcement of international obligations. In: Hartwig M, Nolte G, Oeter S, Walter C (eds) Völkerrecht – Menschenrechte – Verfassungsfragen Deutschlands und Europas. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Frowein JA (1987b) Die Europäisiserung des Verfassungsrechts. In: Hartwig M, Nolte G, Oeter S, Walter C (eds) Völkerrecht – Menschenrechte – Verfassungsfragen Deutschlands und Europas. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Frowein JA (1987c) Wesentliche Elemente einer Verfassung. In: Hartwig M, Nolte G, Oeter S, Walter C (eds) Völkerrecht – Menschenrechte – Verfassungsfragen Deutschlands und Europas. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Frowein JA (1987d) Das Bundesverfassungsgericht und die Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention. In: Hartwig M, Nolte G, Oeter S, Walter C (eds) Völkerrecht – Menschenrechte – Verfassungsfragen Deutschlands und Europas. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Geiger R (2010) In: Geiger R, Khan D-E, Kotzur M (eds) EUV/AEUV Kommentar. C. H. Beck, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Haratsch A, Koenig C, Pechstein M (2010) Europarecht. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley TC (2003) The foundations of European community law. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Henning L, Stephanie P (2005) IMS Health vs. Microsoft – Befindet sich die Kommission bei kartellrechtlichen Zwangslizenzen (erneut) auf Konfrontationskurs mit dem EuGH? Europäisches Wirtschafts- & Steuerrecht 16

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarras HD (2010) Charta der Grundrechte der Europäischen Union. C. H. Beck, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Jung C (2009) Art. 82 EGV. In: Grabitz E, Hilf M (eds) Das Recht der Europäischen Union-Kommentar. Beck, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaczorowska A (2011) European Union law. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Kälin W, Künzli J (2005) Universeller Menschenrechtsschutz. Helbing Lichtenhahn Verlag, Basel

    Google Scholar 

  • Karpenstein U (2009) Art. 234 EGV. In: Grabitz E, Hilf M (eds) Das Recht der Europäischen Union-Kommentar. Beck, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller H (2003) Rezeption des Völkerrechts. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Klabbers J, Peters A, Ulfstein G (2009) The constitutionalization of international law. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinlein T (2011) Konstitutionalisierung im Völkerrecht. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulenović N et al (2010) Presuda Sejdić i Finci protiv Bosne i Hercegovine: Konkretne posljedice-prvi pregled. Sveske za javno pravo-Blätter für Öffentliches Recht 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurtćehajić S, Ibrahimagić O (2007) Politički sistem Bosne i Hercegovine. Magistrat, Sarajevo

    Google Scholar 

  • Marković G (2011) Ustavnopravni osnov za ostvarivanja ekonomskih prava u BiH. In: Pravni fakultet u Istočnom Sarajevu (ed) Zbornik radova, Aktuelnosti i značaj ljudskih prava i sloboda, Istočno Sarajevo

    Google Scholar 

  • Menzel J (2011) Internationales Öffentliches Recht. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Meron T (2008) The humanization of international law. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Meškić Z (2011a) Četiri osnovne slobode kao ustavni osnov za harmonizaciju entiteskih privatnopravnih propisa. In: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Tuzli (ed) Ustavnopravni razvoj Bosne i Hercegovine (1910–2010), Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta Univerziteta u Tuzli, Tuzla

    Google Scholar 

  • Meškić Z (2011b) Osnivanje Vrhovnog suda Bosne i Hercegovine kao uslov za članstvo u Evropskoj uniji. Sveske za javno pravo-Blätter für Öffentliches Recht 2

    Google Scholar 

  • Meškić Z (2012) Jurisdikcija Suda EU u praksi Suda BiH-Povodom odluke Suda BiH br. S1 3 U 005412 10 Uvl, 15.3.2012, M.R.M. Ljubuški/ASA Auto d.o.o. Sarajevo (ASA Auto). Sveske za javno pravo-Blätter für öffentliches Recht 3

    Google Scholar 

  • Meškić Z, Samardžić D (2012) Pravo Evropske unije I. GIZ, Sarajevo

    Google Scholar 

  • Miljko Z (2001) Apelaciona jurisdikcija Ustavnog suda Bosne i Hercegovine. In: Okrugli stolovi Ustavnog suda BiH, Ustavni sud BiH i druge sudske instance, Sarajevo

    Google Scholar 

  • Munding C-D (2010) Das Grundrecht auf effektiven Rechtsschutz im Rechtssystem der Europäischen Union. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Nettesheim M (2003) Kompetenzen. In: Von Bogdandy A (ed) Europäisches Verfassungsrecht – theoretische und dogmatische Grundzüge. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunner M (2009) Kooperation internationaler Gerichte. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppermann T, Classen D, Nettesheim M (2009) Europarecht. Beck, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Payandeh M (2010) Internationales Gemeinschaftsrecht. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Pernice I (2000) Der Europäische Verfassungsverbund auf dem Weg der Konsolidierung. Jahrbuch für das Öffentliche Recht 48

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer R (2009) Das Verhältnis von Völkerrecht und Landesrecht. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Pobrić N (2000) Ustavno pravo. Slovo, Mostar

    Google Scholar 

  • Popović P (2010) Neki aspekti harmonizacije prava Republike Srpske sa Sporazumom o stabilizaciji i pridruživanju. Pravni život

    Google Scholar 

  • Priebe R (2008) Beitrittsperspektive und Verfassungsreformen in den Ländern des Westlichen Balkans. Zeitschrift Europarecht 43

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodin S (2003) Sporazum o stabilizaciji i pridruživanju u pravnom poretku Evropske zajednice i Republike Hrvatske. Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Zagrebu 53

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadiković Ć (2003) Za državu novog stoljeća-Bosna i Hercegovina kao savremena demokratska država. Fond otvoreno društvo Bosna i Hercegovina, Sarajevo

    Google Scholar 

  • Samardžić D, Meškić Z (2012) The principle of the ‘rule of law’ or ‘Rechtsstaatlichkeit’ as the basis for human rights protection in European Union law. Summer academy, The rule of law, human rights and the European Union, Skoplje

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauer H (2008) Jurisdiktionskonflikte im Mehrebenensystem. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Schilling T (2010) Internationaler Menschenrechtschutz. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmalenbach K (2007) Art. 310. In: Calliess C, Ruffert M (eds) Das Verfassungsrecht der Europäischen Union mit Europäischer Grundrechtecharta, Kommentar. Beck, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneiders B (2009) Die Grundrechte der EU und die EMRK. Nomos, Baden-Baden, pp 145–265

    Google Scholar 

  • Simović M (2003) Ustavnopravni osnov vladavine prava u Bosni i Hercegovini kroz funkcionisanje ustavnih institucija. Fond otvoreno društvo Bosna i Hercegovina, Sarajevo

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanivuković M (2009) Pojedinac pred sudom Evropskih zajednica. Službeni glasnik, Beograd

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein T, Von Buttlar C, Seidel-Hohenveldern I (2012) Völkerrecht. Heymanns, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner HJ (2006) International protection of human rights. In: Malcolm DE (ed) International law, 2nd edn. OUP, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner C, Ademović N (2010) Ustav Bosne i Hercegovine-Komentar. Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, Sarajevo

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner HJ, Alston P, Goodman R (2007) International human rights in context. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Stender H (2004) Überschneidungen im internationalen Menschenrechtsschutz. Berliner Wissenschaftsverlag, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Streinz R (2007) Die Europäische Union als Rechtsgemeinschaft. In: Kirchhof P, Papier H-J, Schäffer H (eds) Festschrift für Detlef Merten. C. F. Müller, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Trnka K (2006) Ustavno pravo. Fakultet za javnu upravu, Sarajevo

    Google Scholar 

  • Ullerich R (2011) Rechtsstaat udn Rechtsgemeinschaft im Europarecht. Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • Vöneky S (2009) Art. 310 EGV. In: Grabitz E, Hilf M (eds) Das Recht der Europäischen Union-Kommentar. Beck, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Vukadinović R (2010) Neposredna primjena Sporazuma o stabilizaciji i pridruživanju- Usklađivanje domaćeg prava sa pravnim tekovinama Evropske unije. Pravni život 59

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegener B (2007) Art. 234. In: Calliess C, Ruffert M (eds) Das Verfassungsrecht der Europäischen Union mit Europäischer Grundrechtecharta, Kommentar. Beck, München

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, University of Zenica, Fakultetska 3, 72000, Zenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina

    Zlatan Meškić & Darko Samardžić

Authors
  1. Zlatan Meškić
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Darko Samardžić
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zlatan Meškić .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Judge, Court of Justice of the European Union, Luxembourg, European Union

    Siniša Rodin

  2. Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

    Tamara Perišin

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Meškić, Z., Samardžić, D. (2015). The Application of International and EU Law in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In: Rodin, S., Perišin, T. (eds) Judicial Application of International Law in Southeast Europe. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46384-0_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation