Sejdić and Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina
European Court of Human Rights
Application nos. 27996/06 and 34836/06 (2009)
- Written by Kelly Simon, JD
Facts
The Bosnia and Herzegovina (defendant) constitution (Bosnian constitution) allowed only members of the country’s “constituent peoples” to stand for election to the country’s presidency or legislature. Bosnia and Herzegovina’s constituent people consisted of Serbians, Croatians, and Bosnians. The Bosnian constitution’s clear and unequivocal intention was to prohibit individuals of other ethnicities from running for office. Such a limitation was considered essential to restoring peace and ending the country’s violent civil war. In the years since the adoption of its constitution, Bosnia and Herzegovina joined the Council of Europe and ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the convention). Jakob Finci, who was Jewish, and Dervo Sejdić, who was Roma (plaintiffs), were not considered members of the country’s constituent peoples. Finci and Sejdić wished to run for office; however, each was prevented from running by the ethnic-based limitation within the Bosnian constitution. In 2006, Finci and Sejdić lodged applications against Bosnia and Herzegovina in the European Court of Human Rights, arguing that the terms of the Bosnian constitution, which prevented Finci and Sejdić’s candidacies because of their ethnicities, violated the convention.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.