Restructuring the Court System: Report and Proposal fileRestructuring the Court System: Report and Proposal Annex A - Summary of Changes Republika Srpska No. of District Judges No

IJC Independent Judicial Commission Restructuring the Court System: Report and Proposal Annex A - Summary of Changes Republika Srpska

No. of District Judges No. of Basic Courts No. of Basic Judges

District Population current proposed percent

change current Proposed courts / branches

percent change* current proposed percent change

Banja Luka 650538 21 28 +33% 9 7 -22% 107 70 -35% Bijeljina 242576 7 12 +71% 4 3 -25% 33 29 -12% Doboj 269354 10 9 -10% 4 4 0 35 26 -26% Srpsko Sarajevo 156282 10 8 -20% 5 3 / 1 -20% 27 18 -33% Trebinje 114477 8 5 -38% 3 2 / 1 0 18 11 -39% Total 1433227 56 62 +11% 25 19 / 2 -16% 220 154 -30%

Federation

No. of Cantonal Judges No. of Municipal Courts No. of Municipal Judges

Canton Population current proposed percent

change current proposed courts / branches

percent change* current proposed Percent change

Una Sana 301072 15 12 -20% 7 5 -29% 45 45 0% Posavina 43695 5 4 -20% 2 1 -50% 11 6 -45% Tuzla 506296 35 20 -43% 9 5 / 1 -33% 94 59 -37% Zenica-Doboj 395404 22 16 -27% 10 6 / 1 -30% 76 52 -32% Bosanski-Podrinje 35235 4 4 0 1 1 0 5 6 +20%

Central Bosnia 239120 12 10 -17% 7 3 / 1 -43% 47 31 -34% Herzegovina-Neretva 217106 18 17 -6% 10 3 -70% 60 31 -48%

West 89012 5 4 -20% 2 1 -50% 12 9 -25%

Herzegovina Sarajevo 400219 37 29 -22% 2 1 -50% 75 92 +23% Canton 10 (Livno) 83949 5 4 -20% 3 1 / 1 -33% 9 7 -22%

Total 2311108 158 120 -24% 53 27 / 4 -42% 434 338 -22% Total for BiH

No. of Second Instance Judges No. of First Instance Courts No. of First Instance Judges

Entity

No. of Second Instance Courts

current proposed percent change current

proposed

courts / branches

percent change* current proposed percent change

Republika Srpska 5 56 62 +11% 25 19 / 2 -16% 220 154 -30% Federation 10 158 120 -24% 53 27 / 4 -42% 434 338 -22% Total 15 214 182 -15% 78 46 / 6 -33% 654 492 -25% *Court regional branches are included (counted as courts remaining open) for purposes of calculating this percentage.

Annex C - Court Consolidations

District of Banja Luka

Population in district: 650,538 Current number of courts: 9 Proposed number of courts: 7 Proposed number of branches: 0

Criteria** Basic Court

Current no. of judges

Case- load Index*

Population in area that court covers

Geographical Distances C P G

Recommendation

Banja Luka 48 31.6 290685 36km Kotor Varo� 49km Gradi�ka 55km Prijedor

+ + + Court remains but loses Ćelinac & Skender Vakuf / Kne�evo

Bosanska Gradi�ka / Gradi�ka 9 5.9 60446

33km Srbac 44km Kozarska Dubica 49km Banja Luka

+ + + Court remains

Kotor Varo� 4 1.4 19741 19km Kne�evo 21km Ćelinac 36km Banja Luka

- - o Court remains gaining Ćelinac & Skender Vakuf / Kne�evo

Bosanska/ Kozarska Dubica 5 2.3 34319

33km Prijedor 44km Gradi�ka 49km Novi Grad

- - o Merged with Prijedor

Mrkonjić Grad 6 6.6 32054 63km Banja Luka + - + Court remains Bosanski Novi / Novi Grad 7 4.7 40281 32km Prijedor

49km Kozarska Dubica o o o Court remains

Prijedor 15 6.3 100188 32km Novi Grad 33km Kozarska Dubica 55km Banja Luka

+ + + Court remains

Prnjavor 8 3.2 49040 30km Derventa 55km Banja Luka o o o Court remains

Srbac 5 2.3 24384 33km Gradi�ka 64km Prnjavor - - o Merged with Bosanska

Gradi�ka / Gradi�ka

*Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. The problem courts from a restructuring standpoint in Banja Luka District are in Kotor Varo� (- - o), Bosanska/Kozarska Dubica (- - o), and Srbac (- - o). None of these courts meet the criteria for continuation. Adding the municipalities of Ćelinac and Skender Vakuf / Kne�evo to Kotor Varo��s jurisdiction, however, should increase both population and case-filings for that court sufficiently to bring it up to minimally acceptable levels (o o o). Banja Luka Basic Court should welcome the relief of that caseload. Bosanska/Kozarska Dubica is best merged with the Prijedor court, 33km to the south. Srbac gravitates most logically toward Bosanska Gradi�ka / Gradi�ka; residents of Srbac already travel to Bosanska Gradi�ka / Gradi�ka for hospital services. District of Bijeljina Population in district: 242,576 Current number of courts: 4 Proposed number of courts: 3 Proposed number of branches: 0

Criteria** Basic Court Current no.

of judges Case-load Index*



Recommendation

Bijeljina 18 15.3 124288 50km Lopare 57km Zvornik + + + Court remains

Lopare 3 2.4 18632 50km Bijeljina - - + Merged with Bijeljina

Srebrenica 4 4.1 44175 54km Zvornik 68km Vlasenica o o + Court remains

Zvornik 8 4.0 55481 46km Vlasenica 54km Srebrenica 57km Bijeljina

o + + Court remains

*Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. The only problem in the Bijeljina District is the Lopare court (- - +). Although remote from Bijeljina, Lopare has neither the caseload nor the population sufficient to justify a court. Travel to Bijeljina is not difficult, however, and there is regular bus service. If travel proves to be a problem for Lopare residents, the Bijeljina Basic Court may consider holding �court days� in Lopare.

District of Doboj Population in district: 266,714 Current number of courts: 4 Proposed number of courts: 4 Proposed number of branches: 0

Criteria** Basic Court

Current no. of judges

Case-load Index*



Recommendation

Derventa 6 6.5 62183 30km Prnjavor 41km Doboj 54km Modriča

+ + o Court remains

Doboj 16 7.5 139037 28km Teslić 41km Derventa 50km Modriča

+ + + Court remains

Modriča 9 5.5 65494 50km Doboj 54km Derventa + + + Court remains

Teslić 4 3.4 48157 28km Doboj o o o Court remains *Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. All of the courts in Doboj District meet minimum criteria. Thus no changes are needed here. District of Srpsko Sarajevo Population in district: 165,282 Current number of courts: 5 Proposed number of courts: 3 Proposed number of branches: 1





Recommendation

Rogatica 3 1.7 17643 35km Sokolac 40km Vi�egrad - - o Merged with Vi�egrad

Sokolac 6 4.4 46991 35km Rogatica 51km Srpsko Sarajevo o o + Court remains

51km Vlasenica Srpsko Sarajevo 5 2.8 28119 51km Sokolac - - + Made a branch of Sokolac

Vi�egrad 5 2.2 28691 40km Rogatica 75km Sokolac - - + Court remains

Vlasenica 8 4.2 34838 51km Sokolac o - + Court remains

*Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9.

The District of Srpsko Sarajevo does not contain large cities in which to concentrate courts, posing problems for a reasonable restructuring plan. None of these courts carries a substantial caseload. The mountainous terrain and the distances between cities make consolidation difficult, however. On balance it makes the most sense to close the court in Rogatica, merging it with Vi�egrad. This brings Vi�egrad into minimally acceptable range on all three criteria (o o +). Although it is the seat of the district court, Srpsko Sarajevo is too small in terms of population and caseload to continue as a separate court. It should be merged with the Sokolac court; however, given its considerable distance from Sokolac, court facilities with minimal staff should remain open in Srpsko Sarajevo as a two-judge branch of the Sokolac court. Vlasenica (o - +) just barely misses the minimum criteria for population, but should be kept anyway, as it is too remote to have reasonable consolidation options.

District of Trebinje

Population in district: 114,477 Current number of courts: 3 Proposed number of courts: 2 Proposed number of branches: 1





Recommendation

Nevesinje 5 1.8 29573 112km Foča/Srbinje 119km Trebinje - - + Made a branch of Trebinje

Foča/Srbinje 5 3.2 35045 98km Srpsko Sarajevo 112km Nevesinje 143km Trebinje

o o + Court remains

Trebinje 8 4.2 49859 119km Nevesinje 143km Foča/Srbinje o o + Court remains

*Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. Geographic distance is a serious problem for the Trebinje District. Nonetheless, the caseload in Nevesinje (- - +) is too small to warrant a separate court there. Accordingly, Nevesinje should be merged with the Trebinje court, but remain open as a one-judge branch to meet the needs of the public in that area. Although Nevesinje is actually slightly closer to Foča/Srbinje, the roads to Trebinje are far superior, particularly in the winter.

Una Sana Canton (Bihać)

Population in canton: 305,049 Current number of courts: 7 Proposed number of courts: 5 Proposed number of branches: 0

Criteria** Municipal Court Current no.




Recommendation

Bihać 15 16.6 68385 25km Cazin 35km Bosanska Krupa + + + Court remains

Bosanska Krupa 5 3.9 29211 25km Cazin 35km Bihać 34km Bu�im

o - o Court remains

Bu�im 3 2.1 17781 34km Bosanska Krupa - - o Merged with Bosanska Krupa

Cazin 7 6.3 60122 25km Bihać 25km Bosanska Krupa 40km Velika Kladu�a

+ + o Court remains

Ključ 4 1.7 15972 35km Sanski Most 95km Bihać - - o Merged with Sanski Most

Sanski Most 6 3.9 64416 35km Ključ 125km Bihać o + + Court remains

Velika Kladu�a 5 4.4 49162 40km Cazin o o o Court remains *Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. The Bu�im (- - o) and Ključ (- - o) courts are the obvious candidates for closure in this Canton. Some suggestion was made that the municipality of Bosanski Petrovac could be carved off from the Bihać Municipal Court�s jurisdiction and given to Ključ to help bolster

its anemic case filings. But the addition of Bosanski Petrovac (pop. 8272) would still fail to bring the Ključ court into a case-filing and population range sufficient to meet the articulated criteria. Accordingly, Ključ should be merged with the court in Sanski Most, which may wish to initiate occasional �court days� in Ključ. Bosanska Krupa (o � o) is also marginal under the criteria, but benefits from the closure of Bu�im. Merging Bu�im back with Bosanska Krupa � which historically had jurisdiction for Bu�im � brings the merged court within the acceptable range (+ o o).

Posavina Canton (Ora�je)






Recommendation

Od�ak 5 2.2 16055 52km Od�ak - - + Merged with the Ora�je court Ora�je 6 2.8 27611 52km Ora�je - - + Court remains *Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. Neither court has the caseload or the population to justify itself. Accordingly, the two courts should be merged into one court based in Ora�je, the cantonal capital and the site of the greater population and case-filing activity. The Ora�je court may wish to schedule court days in Od�ak, to meet local needs there. The cantonal court will remain in Od�ak.

Tuzla Canton






Recommendation

Banovići 7 4.2 28636 13km �ivinice o - - Merged with �ivinice

Gračanica 10 4.4 63308

25km Srebrenik 35km Lukavac 48km Gradačac 50km Tuzla

o + + Court remains

Gradačac 9 2.7 47029 26km Srebrenik 48km Gračanica - o + Court remains

Kalesija 6 3.9 55707 25km Tuzla 30km �ivinice o + o Court remains

Kladanj 5 2.9 15672 34km �ivinice 49km Tuzla - - o Made a branch of �ivinice court

Lukavac 9 5.1 51521 15km Tuzla o o - Merged with Tuzla

Srebrenik 7 3.5 41661 25km Gračanica 26km Gradačac o o o Merged with Gradačac

Tuzla 33 19.5 150816 15km Lukavac 15km �ivinice 25km Kalesija

+ + + Court remains

�ivinice 8 5.5 51946

13km Banovići 15km Tuzla 30km Kalesija 34km Kladanj

+ o - Court remains

*Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. Clearly the Banovići (o - -) and �ivinice (+ o -) courts are too close together to warrant their continued existence as separate courts. Although Banovići has the better building at present, �ivinice has the higher population and higher caseload, and is better located on the main highway. The municipality of �ivinice has pledged its help in securing a suitable building for the court there. If there are delays in securing an adequate space in �ivinice for the combined court, it can operate out of the Banovići building, but the combined court should be relocated to �ivinice as soon as adequate space is available. The Kladanj court (- - o) is too small, both in caseload and population, to continue and should be merged with another court. The ideal candidate would be the Olovo court, also too small. But because Olovo is in the Zenica-Doboj Canton, that merger must await constitutional reform in the Federation that would allow cross-cantonal jurisdiction. In the meantime, Kladanj should be merged with the �ivinice court, 34 km away over a winding mountain pass. Three judges should be allowed to reside in the new court building in Kladanj, however, as a branch of the �ivinice court. That will keep the building in court hands for an eventual merger with Olovo. Although Lukavac (o o -) has adequate caseload and population, it is too close to Tuzla to warrant continued existence as a separate court. No one in Lukavac municipality will be seriously inconvenienced by having to travel to Tuzla to court.

Gradačac (- o +) and Srebrenik (o o o) are both marginal courts in terms of caseload and population, and they should clearly be merged. Where to merge them is a more difficult question. Gradačac has a slightly larger population and a long history. Srebrenik is a little more centrally located and has the larger caseload. Although Gradačac had the better building, the Srebrenik municipality has promised to build space to accommodate the newly merged court. Although the combined court could go either place, the balance favors Gradačac. The courts of Gračanica (o + +) and Kalesija (o + o) meet the criteria adequately and can continue as separate courts, provided that Kalesija gets a new building. Space has been identified there, but it is not clear if and when it will be made available to the court, which is severely cramped in its current quarters.

Zenica-Doboj Canton






Recommendation

Breza 5 2.7 13775 12km Visoko 24km Vare� - - - Merged with Visoko

Kakanj 8 4.6 43800 22km Visoko 29km Zenica o o o Court remains

Maglaj 5 2.6 23611 25km Zavidovići 34km Te�anj - - o Merged with Zavidovići

Olovo 4 1.2 12934 58km Visoko 72km Vare� - - + Made branch of Visoko court

Te�anj 8 3.8 58690 34km Maglaj 44km Zavidovići o + + Court remains

Vare� 4 3.3 10118 36km Visoko o - o Merged with Visoko

Visoko 8 4.7 40044

12km Breza 22km Kakanj 36km Vare� 51km Zenica 58km Olovo

o o o Court remains

Zavidovići 8 4.1 37942 12km �epče o o + Court remains

25km Maglaj 53km Zenica

Zenica 22 16.5 127972 29km Kakanj + + + Court remains �epče 4 2.2 26521 12km Zavidovići - - - Court remains for time being *Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. The courts in Breza (- - -) and �epče (- - -) are the two obvious candidates for closure as they fail all three criteria. Breza should be merged with the nearby court of Visoko. �epče municipality, however, is the subject of a carefully negotiated agreement acknowledged and implemented by the High Representative in a decision of October 6, 2000. Accordingly, notwithstanding its failure to meet the criteria, the court in �epče will be retained pending a full review of the High Representative�s October 6 decision and surrounding circumstances. Although Maglaj (- - o) has a fine building, it fails most of the criteria, and should also merge with Zavidovići. Olovo due to its poor caseload and population does not pass the test. However, due to its remote location, and as it cannot be merged with the Kladanj court until constitutional changes occur (see discussion of Kladanj above), it should, for the time being, be a made a one-judge branch of the Visoko court. The court in Vare� (o - o) serves an extremely small population and is much closer to Visoko. As �court days� should be sufficient to meet the needs of that community, the court can be merged with Visoko. Kakanj (o o o), Visoko (o o o), and Zavidovići (o o +) meet minimum standards. Kakanj is enjoying a vibrant economic development, and the other two courts will grow substantially with their absorption of neighboring courts.

Bosanski-Podrinje Canton (Gora�de)






Recommendation

Gora�de 5 4.5 35235 N/A o o + Court remains *Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. The court in Gora�de (o o +) meets the criteria, and even if it did not, it must remain as the sole municipal court in the canton.

Central Bosnia Canton (Travnik)






Recommendation

Bugojno 12 8.2 70162 48km Jajce 45km Travnik + + + Court remains

Fojnica 3 1.2 11074 21km Kiseljak 72km Travnik - - o Merged with Kiseljak

Jajce 5 2.2 22731 48km Bugojno - - + Made branch of Bugojno court

Kiseljak 4 2.1 27145 21km Fojnica 51km Travnik 60km Novi Travnik

- - + Court remains

Novi Travnik 5 4.3 24944 14km Travnik o - - Merged with Travnik

Travnik 11 4.6 51028

14km Novi Travnik 19km Vitez 51km Kiseljak 72km Fojnica

o o + Court remains

Vitez 7 5.6 32038 19km Travnik + - - Merged with Travnik *Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. As both Novi Travnik (o - -) and Vitez (+ - -) do poorly respectively in terms of population and geography, they should be merged with the nearby court in Travnik (o o +). In order to accommodate the larger municipal court in Travnik, the cantonal court can be relocated to the space vacated by the municipal court of Novi Travnik. Fojnica (- - o) and Kiseljak (- - +) are both small and are obvious candidates for merger. Together they meet minimum requirements (o o +), so the combined court can remain in Kiseljak. Jajce (- - +) does not have the sufficient caseload and population to justify its existence as a separate court. It is remotely located, however, and easily meets the criteria for continuation as a branch of the Bugojno (+ + +) court.

Herzegovina-Neretva Canton (Mostar)






Recommendation

Čapljina 5 4.8 19376

25km Čitluk 25km Stolac 45km Neum 34km Mostar

o - o Court remains

Čitluk 4 1.5 16298 20km Mostar - - o Merged with MC Mostar Jablanica 3 1.3 13021 23km Konjic - - o Merged with Konjic

Konjic 6 4.1 29817 23km Jablanica 60km Mostar 54km Prozor-Rama

o - + Court remains

Central Zone 5 0 n/a - Mostar I 13 7.4 + + Mostar II 14 5.5

Total 104997

20km Čitluk 40km Stolac 48km Jablanica +

+ -

Merged into MC Mostar

Neum 3 0.4 6680 45km Čapljina - - + Merged with Čapljina

Prozor-Rama 3 1.3 17056 31km Jablanica 54km Konjic - - + Merged with Konjic

Stolac 4 0.9 9861 25km Čapljina 40km Mostar - - o Merged with Čapljina

*Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. Neum (- - o) and Stolac (- - o), both seriously deficient under the criteria, should be merged into Čaplijna (o � o) which is currently marginal but which should gain a satisfactory level of population and caseload from the two mergers (+ o o). Čitluk (- - o) too fails the criteria and is only 20 km from Mostar. Mostar (+ + +) itself has been divided into three different courts, although there are efforts already underway toward unification. Čitluk should be added to the mix to create a single large court in Mostar. Jablanica (- - o) and Prozor-Rama (- - +) are both too small to justify their existence and should be merged with the Konjic court. As Prozor-Rama is more isolated, it is strongly recommended that �court days� be held there.

West Herzegovina Canton (�iroki Brijeg)






Recommendation

Ljubu�ki 4 2.7 22209 34km �iroki Brijeg - - o Court remains �iroki Brijeg 8 4.4 59090 34km Ljubu�ki o + + Merged with Ljubu�ki *Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. Although �iroki Brijeg (o + +) appears to meet the criteria far better than Ljubu�ki (- - o), these figures are misleading. In fact, the canton consists of four municipalities and �iroki Brijeg�s jurisdiction has been drawn to include three of the four, even though the Grude municipality gravitates more naturally toward Ljubu�ki. While mechanical application of the criteria would dictate that the court be kept in �iroki Brijeg, there is more to the picture than the numbers. Of the four municipalities, Ljubu�ki is considered as the main urban center in the area and attracts most of the economic activity, including twelve attorney�s offices. The caseload also seems to indicate that litigation cases per capita are significantly higher in Ljubu�ki than in �iroki Brijeg. Accordingly, notwithstanding the stated criteria, it actually makes more sense to keep the municipal court in Ljubu�ki. Given the new premises soon to be made available in �iroki Brijeg, it is proposed that the cantonal court be located there.

Sarajevo Canton



of judges Case-load

Index*

Population in area that court

covers Geographical Distances

C P G Recommendation

Sarajevo I 34 34.2 141377 n/a + + + Sarajevo II 41 55.6 258842 n/a + + -

Merge into one MC Sarajevo

*Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. The two Sarajevo municipal courts are located in the same building, and the population for both courts comes almost entirely from urban and suburban Sarajevo itself. As stated in the Preliminary Report, retaining two courts provides no benefits in terms of efficiency, administration or cost savings, and there is evidence that jurisdictional questions between the two courts consume staff and even judge time. Accordingly, the two courts should be merged.

Canton 10 (Livno)






Recommendation

Drvar 2 0.8 15665 110km Livno - - + Made a branch of Livno court

Livno 4 3.5 37559 40km Tomislavgrad 110km Drvar o o + Court remains

Tomislavgrad 3 2.3 30725 40km Livno - - o Merged with Livno *Explained on pp. 4-6 of the report and calculated on the spreadsheets at Annex E. **How the court satisfies the three objective criteria: Caseload (C), Population (P), and Geography (G), as explained on pp. 7-9. Given the relatively low population and the small caseload in this canton there is clearly no need for three municipal courts. Tomislavgrad (- - o) and Drvar (- - +) fail most of our criteria and should be merged with Livno. However due to the truly remote location of Drvar, it is proposed to keep it open as a one-judge branch of the Livno court.

Annex D - Number of Judges

District of Banja Luka

Current number of basic courts: 9 Proposed number of basic courts: 7 Current number of basic court judges: 107 Proposed number of basic court judges: 70

Number of Judges Criteria

Court current

adjusted caseload index

proposed


Distances C P G

District Court 21 27.2 28 650538 Banja Luka BC � minus Ćelinac & Skender Vakuf / Kne�evo

48 31.6 33 261368 36km Kotor Varo� 49km Gradi�ka 55km Prijedor

+ + +

Bosanska Gradi�ka / Gradi�ka � with Srbac

9 5 7.6 8 84830

(combined)

33km Srbac 44km Kozarska Dubica 49km Banja Luka

+ + o

Kotor Varo� � with Ćelinac & Skender Vakuf / Kne�evo

4 3.3 4 48058 (combined)

19km Kne�evo 21km Ćelinac 36km Banja Luka

o o o

Mrkonjić Grad 6 6.2 7 32054 63km Banja Luka + - +

Bosanski Novi / Novi Grad 7 4.5 5 40281

32km Prijedor 49km Kozarska Dubica

o o o

Prijedor � with Bosanska / Kozarska Dubica

15 5 8.1 9 134507

(combined)

32km Novi Grad 33km Kozarska Dubica 55km Banja Luka

+ + +

Prnjavor 8 3.0 4 49040 30km Derventa 55km Banja Luka o o o

Note: The populations of Ćelinac (17252) and Skender Vakuf / Kne�evo (12065) have been added to the Kotor Varo� and subtracted from Banja Luka, reflecting the transfer of jurisdiction over those two municipalities. While separate case-filing statistics are not readily available for Ćelinac and Skender Vakuf / Kne�evo, their addition to Kotor Varo� increases the population served by that court by 149%. Accordingly, caseload for that court has been projected at 149% higher than before, and the Banja Luka caseload has been decreased by a corresponding amount.

District of Bijeljina



Court current

adjusted caseload

index proposed


Distances C P G

District Court 7 10.9 12 242576 Bijeljina BC � with Lopare

18 3 17.9 19 142920

(combined) 50km Lopare 57km Zvornik + + +

Srebrenica 4 4.0 5 44175 54km Zvornik o o +

Zvornik 8 3.9 5 55481 54km Srebrenica 57km Bijeljina o + +

District of Doboj



Court current

adjusted caseload

index proposed


Distances C P G

District Court 10 8.4 9 266704

Derventa 6 6.1 7 62183 30km Prnjavor 41km Doboj 54km Modriča

+ + o

Doboj BC 16 8.4 9 90880 28km Teslić 41km Derventa 50km Modriča

+ + +

Modriča 9 5.3 6 65494 50km Doboj 54km Derventa + + +

Teslić 4 3.1 4 48157 28km Doboj o o o

District of Srpsko Sarajevo

Current number of basic courts: 5 Proposed no. of basic courts/branches: 3/1 Current number of basic court judges: 27 Proposed number of basic court judges: 18


Court current

adjusted caseload

index proposed


Distances C P G


Sokolac � with Srpsko Sarajevo Branch

6 5

5.2 2.5 9 75100

(combined)

35km Rogatica 51km Srpsko Sarajevo 51km Vlasenica

+ + +

Vi�egrad � with Rogatica

5 3 3.7 4 46334

(combined) 40km Rogatica o o +

Vlasenica 8 3.9 5 34838 51km Sokolac o - +

District of Trebinje

Current number of basic courts: 3 Proposed no. of basic courts/branches: 2/1 Current number of basic court judges: 18 Proposed number of basic court judges: 11


Court current

adjusted caseload

index proposed


Distances C P G


Foča/Srbinje 5 3.0 4 35045

98km Srpkso Sarajevo 112km Nevesinje 143km Trebinje

o o +

Trebinje BC � with Nevesinje Branch

8 5

4.6 1.6 7 79432

(combined) 119km Nevesinje 143km Foča/Srbinje + + +

Una Sana Canton (Bihać)

Current number of municipal courts: 7 Proposed number of municipal courts: 5 Current number of municipal judges: 45 Proposed number of municipal judges: 45

Number of Judges Criteria Court current

adjusted caseload

index proposed


Distances C P G

Cantonal Court 15 11.5 12 305049

Bihać MC 15 18.4 20 68385 25km Cazin 35km Bosanska Krupa

+ + +

Bosanska Krupa � with Bu�im

5 3 5.8 7 47002

(combined)

25km Cazin 35km Bihać 34km Bu�im

+ o o

Cazin 7 6.0 7 60122

25km Bihać 25km Bosanska Krupa 40km Velika Kladu�a

+ + o

Sanski Most � with Ključ

6 4 5.2 6 80388

(combined) 35km Ključ 125km Bihać + + +

Velika Kladu�a 5 4.3 5 49162 40km Cazin o o o

Posavina Canton (Ora�je)



Court current

adjusted caseload

index proposed


Distances C P G

Cantonal Court 5 1.7 4* 43666 Ora�je MC � with Od�ak

6 5 5.2 6 43666

(combined) 52km Od�ak o o +

*Regardless of caseload burdens, a minimum of 4 judges is required for a cantonal court so it can seat panels of three, even when one judge is sick, traveling, or otherwise unavailable.

Tuzla Canton

Current number of municipal courts: 9 Proposed no. of municipal courts/branches: 5/1 Current number of municipal judges: 94 Proposed number of municipal judges: 59


Court current

adjusted caseload

index proposed


Distances C P G


Gračanica 10 4.0 5 63308

25km Srebrenik 35km Lukavac 48km Gradačac 51km Tuzla

o + +

Gradačac � with Srebrenik

9 7 5.9 7 88690

(combined) 26km Srebrenik 48km Gračanica + + +

Kalesija 6 3.8 5 55707 25km Tuzla 30km �ivinice o + o

Tuzla MC � with Lukavac

33 9 27.6 29 202337

(combined)

15km Lukavac 15km �ivinice 25km Kalesija

+ + +

�ivinice � with Banovići & Kladanj Branch

8 7 5

9.4 2.8

13 96244 (combined)

13km Banovići 15km Tuzla 30km Kalesija 34km Kladanj

+ + -

Zenica-Doboj Canton

Current number of municipal courts: 10 Proposed no. of municipal courts/branches: 6/1

Current number of municipal judges: 76 Proposed number of municipal judges: 52


Court current

adjusted caseload

index proposed


Distances C P G


Kakanj 8 4.3 5 43800 22km Visoko 29km Zenica o o o

Te�anj 8 3.8 4 58690 34km Maglaj 44km Zavidovići o + o

Visoko � with Breza & Vare� & Olovo Branch

8 5 4 4

10.2 1.2

12 76871 (combined)

12km Breza 22km Kakanj 36km Vare� 51km Zenica 58km Olovo

+ + +

Zavidovići � with Maglaj

8 5

6.3 7 61553 (combined)

12km �epče 25km Maglaj 53km Zenica

+ + +

Zenica MC 22 19.9 21 127972 29km Kakanj + + + �epče 4 2.1 3 26521 12km Zavidovići - - -

Bosanski-Podrinje Canton (Gora�de)



Court current

adjusted caseload

index proposed


Distances C P G

Cantonal Court 4 1.8 4* 35235 Gora�de MC 5 4.9 6 35235 N/A + o + *Regardless of caseload burdens, a minimum of 4 judges is required for a cantonal court. See note at Posavina Canton above.

Central Bosnia Canton (Travnik)

Current number of municipal courts: 7 Proposed no. of municipal courts/branches: 3/1 Current number of municipal judges: 47 Proposed number of municipal judges: 31 Court Number of Judges Population in Distances Criteria

current

adjusted caseload

index proposed

area that court covers

C P G

Cantonal Court 12 8.9 10 239122 Bugojno � with Jajce Branch

12 5

8.0 2.1 11 92893

(combined) 48km Jajce 45km Travnik + + +

Travnik MC � with Novi Travnik & Vitez

11 5 7

15.3 16 146229 (combined)

14km Novi Travnik 19km Vitez 51km Kiseljak 72km Fojnica

+ + +

Kiseljak � with Fojnica

4 3 3.2 4 38219

(combined)

21km Fojnica 51km Travnik 60km Novi Travnik

o o +

Herzegovina-Neretva Canton (Mostar)



Court current

adjusted caseload

index proposed


Distances C P G


Čapljina � with Stolac & Neum

5 4 3

5.9 7 34917 (combined)

25km Čitluk 25km Stolac 45km Neum 34km Mostar

+ - o

Konjic � with Jablanica & Prozor-Rama

6 3 3

6.4 7 62901 (combined)

23km Jablanica 60km Mostar 54km Prozor-Rama

+ + +

Mostar MC � with Mostar II & Central Zone & Čitluk

13 14 5 4

15.7 17 120295 (combined)

20km Čitluk 40km Stolac 48km Jablanica

+ + +

West Herzegovina Canton (�iroki Brijeg)



Court current


proposed


Distances C P G

Cantonal Court 5 3.1 4 81299 Ljubu�ki � with 4 7.9 9 81299 34km �iroki Brijeg + + +

Siroki Brijeg MC 8 (combined)

Sarajevo Canton



Court current


proposed


Distances C P G

Cantonal Court 37 27.8 29 400219 Sarajevo MC � with Sarajevo II

34 41 91.1 92 400219

(combined) N/A + + +

Canton 10 (Livno)

Current number of municipal courts: 3 Proposed no. of municipal courts/branches: 1/1 Current number of municipal judges: 9 Proposed number of municipal judges: 7


Court current

adjusted caseload

index proposed


Distances C P G

Cantonal Court 5 3.1 4 83949 Livno MC � with Tomislavgrad & with Drvar Branch

4 3 2

6.0 0.8

7 83949 (combined)

40km Tomislavgrad 110km Drvar + + +

Annex E – Caseload Spreadsheets Federation

• Banovici • Bihac CC • Bihac MC • Bosanska Krupa • Breza • Bugojno • Buzim • Capljina • Cazin • Citluk • Drvar • Fojnica MC • Gorazde CC • Gorazde MC • Gracanica • Gradacac • Jablanica • Jajce • Kakanj • Kalesija • Kiseljak • Kladanj • Kljuc • Konjic • Livno CC • Livno MC • Lukavac • Ljubuski • Maglaj • Mostar CC • Mostar I • Mostar II • Neum • Novi Travnik • Odzak CC • Odzak MC • Olovo • Orasje MC • Prozor-Rama • Sanski Most • Sarajevo CC • Sarajevo I • Sarajevo II • Siroki Brijeg CC • Siroki Brijeg MC • Srebrenik • Stolac • Tesanj

Republika Srpska • Banja Luka Basic Court • Banja Luka District Court • Bijeljina BC • Bijeljina DC • Derventa BC • Doboj BC • Doboj DC • Gradiska BC • Kotor Varos BC • Kozarska Dubica BC • Lopare BC • Modrica BC • Mrkonjic Grad BC • Nevesinje BC • Novi Grad BC • Prijedor BC • Prnjavor BC • Rogatica BC • Sokolac BC • Srbac BC • Srbinje BC • Srebrenica BC • Srpsko Sarajevo BC • Srpsko Sarajevo DC • Teslic BC • Trebinje BC • Trebinje DC • Visegrad BC • Vlasenica BC • Zvornik BC

• Tomislavgrad • Travnik CC • Travnik MC • Tuzla CC • Tuzla MC • Vares • Velika Kladusa • Visoko • Vitez • Zavidovici • Zenica CC • Zenica MC • Zepce • Zivinice

Documents

Restructuring the Court System: Report and Proposal fileRestructuring the Court System: Report and Proposal Annex A - Summary of Changes Republika Srpska No. of District Judges No