Anonymization ‘Threat’ to Bosnian Justice Criticised

Most judges and prosecutors believe that providing transparent and complete information about trials builds confidence in judicial institutions and generally prevents such crimes from reoccurring.Victims say the names of those convicted of war crimes need to be known, that is, those who killed their children, husbands, grandparents and others.Human rights activists and representatives of non-governmental organizations also believe that anonymity brings transitional justice into question, not only in Bosnia but also in the region.Nevertheless, the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina currently renders all court documents anonymous and the Prosecution of Bosnia and Herzegovina does not provide indictments of war crimes, so journalists and the public cannot access them at all.This practice started in February 2012 the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina changed and amended the Rulebook on Gaining Access to Court Information and Cooperation with the Community.Instead of providing names and surnames, only the initials of those convicted of war crimes, their lawyers, the places where the crime have happened, as well as the names of private companies, institutions and the like are put.The Court made these changes and amendments after applying the opinion of the Agency for the Protection of Personal Data of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which said if this change was not applied, sanctions would follow.As the Court begins application of the change, the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council of Bosnia and Herzegovina has forwarded the same opinion to all judicial institutions for further use.Bad precedent:
Refik Hodzic, Communications Director of the International Center for Transitional Justice, ICTJ, considers this implementation of anonymity by the judiciary in Bosnia unprecedented, saying it sets a benchmark for the international legal system.“There is no similar example anywhere where in cases of such importance for society the court case is cleaned of the information in this way,” Hodzic said.According to him, several cases transferred from the ICTY to the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina for further processing are in danger of being forgotten, because these cases, if they are not already, will also be cleaned of all their information.“Since the decision on anonymization, the official website of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina has published five second-instance verdicts and four first-instance ones in which the names of convicted persons are not known, nor shall be known,” Anisa Suceska-Vekic, director of BIRN Bosnia and Herzegovina, recalled.Dzenana Karup-Krusko, a journalist, says reporters are the voice of the public and judicial institutions need to bear in mind their responsibility to the public.“There is a public message, not only from the trial, but from the indictments, verdicts and all court documents,” she said.“If the state decides that judges are protected and that no one has the right to document, criticize and monitor their work, they should introduce censorship,” Karup-Krusko, added.Danka Prodanovic, Secretary of the District Prosecution Office in Bijeljina, explains that in Bjeljina, the full names and surnames are now reduced to initials.“Information regarding the person against whom an indictment is raised is being reduced, which is not good for law enforcement institutions or for the state as a whole,” Prodanovic said.Prosecutor Sabina Sarajlija agrees, saying that provision of information builds trust in juridical institutions and a healthy society.“Transparency is important… because the public gains insight into the work of the judiciary, and needs to see what these socially unacceptable norms of behaviour are,” Sarajlija said.Contradictory practice:
Sevima Sali-Terzic, Senior Legal Adviser at the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, considers anonymity contradictory, as trials are open to the public.“As neither the media nor anyone else is denied the opportunity to follow the trial, which is open to the publi