The ECHR deems that Croatia violated regulations on effective investigations in the cases of two men: one of whom was killed and the other went missing during the Croatian Homeland War.
In the Jularic case, Marta Jularic, a Croatian national, filed a complaint after the investigation into the killing of her husband by the Yugoslav People’s Army in Vukovar on 3 October 1991 "was stayed on the ground that the suspects and some of the witnesses resided in the occupied territory of Croatia where the authorities could not exercise their power" in 1997. The investigation resumed in November 2000.
In the Skendzic and Krzanric case, the applicants are three Croatian nationals who live in Otocac. The applicants - Josipa Skendzic and her two children Tamara Krznaric and Aleksandar Skendzic - have not seen the husband and father, M.S., born in 1948 and of Serbian ethnic origin, since his arrest by the Croatian police on suspicion of terrorism on 3 November 1991 at the family flat in Otocac.
According to police officials' testimonies, M. Skendzic was briefly detained in the Otocac police station and later transferred to the police station in Gospic. The attempts by his family to get to the truth about what happened to him after that have been futile so far.
"The last known attempt to identify those responsible for M.S. was in February 2005 when the investigating judge assigned to the case heard evidence from a number of witnesses. The criminal investigation into the disappearance is still pending," said the European court.
At the request of the family, Croatian courts issued a decision in March 1998 that M.S. was to be presumed dead as of 2 November 1996.
In 2006 and 2007, Mrs Josipa Skendzic made complaints to the OSCE Mission to Croatia and the Constitutional Court about the lack of progress in the investigation and its ineffectiveness. The constitutional complaint is still pending.
In May 2005, Croatian courts awarded the applicants HRK 230,000 each in damages following civil proceedings, establishing that the State was responsible for Mr. Skendzic's disappearance and death. "In that decision the courts acknowledged the applicants’ mental suffering owing to the fact that they still do not know the exact circumstances of their husband and father’s death or the place of his grave."
"The Court therefore found that the inquiries into the killing of Ms Jularic’s husband as well as the disappearance of M.S. had been ineffective, in violation of Article 2. The inquiry into M.S.’s disappearance had also lacked independence," the ECHR said.
The Court found that the resulting compensation awarded in the Skendzic and Krznaric case "had actually exceeded the amount the European Court usually awarded in similar cases." Therefore, the Court in Strasbourg "rejected the applicants’ claim in respect of non-pecuniary damage. It further held that Croatia was to pay the applicant EUR 3,000 for costs and expenses."
As for the Jularic case, "the Court held that Croatia was to pay Ms Jularic EUR 30,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage. No claim for costs and expenses was submitted."
In the three months following the delivery of this judgement, "any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court."
If such a request is made, a panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.