INSTITUTION OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS OMBUDSMAN OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA Ombudsmen in their work so far have consistently pointed to discrimination on the basis of disability in relation to the cause of disability. Example: During 2019, a discrimination procedure was monitored in the Sarajevo Municipal Court following a lawsuit filed by citizens alleging discrimination on the basis of disability, because by adopting the above-mentioned Amendments to the Law on Basics of Social Protection, Protection of Civilian Victims of War and Families with Children of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, derived from the right to personal disability allowance, since their disability percentage is less than 90%. The Sarajevo Municipal Court rendered Judgment No. 65 0 P 699974 18 P dated 9 July 2019, which upheld the claim and established discrimination. The verdict is not final because the Federation Attorney's Office appealed, but the monitoring of the proceedings before the Sarajevo Cantonal Court continues. 429 The said judgment stated the following: “Appreciating all the evidence adduced and presented by the Prosecutor, and in particular the Special Report and Recommendations of the BiH Human Rights Ombudsman Institution, pursuant to the aforementioned Anti-Discrimination Act, Article 7, for protection against discrimination, the court held that the plaintiffs were able to prove the merits of their claim, that is, by enacting an amendment to the disputed Article 18b where instead of the previous 6 groups there were ranges from 60% - 100% and invalidity for disabled persons, and in relation to civilian victims of war, whose rights are also regulated by the said Law and the procedure for determining, these persons were discriminated against, that is, there was a different treatment on the part of the respondent, primarily on the basis of the occurrence of disability, i.e. treatment of social protection, social benefits in comparison with the same, because it is indisputable that these are persons with disabilities and that the defendant on which the burden of proof was in this legal matter, it did not prove public and interest in interfering with the acquired and exercised rights - the property of the plaintiff. The amount of the claim was determined on the basis of the Decision of the Centers for Social Work which established monthly disability benefits for the plaintiffs." In 2019, the Ombudsmen received complaints alleging the inability to exercise the right to an orthopedic device - diapers for adults. Example: Citizens of Herzegovina-Neretva Canton and their families with Alzheimer's submitted a complaint to the Institution stating that since 2019 they were denied the right to diapers that they had been exercising properly until 2019, and that the elderly were mostly suffering from the disease. The Ministry of Health, Labor and Social Policy of the Herzegovina-Neretva Canton submitted a reply confirming the allegations from the complaint and emphasizing that in 2019 a Decision was adopted to amend the Decision on the scope of use of orthopedic and other aids that may be prescribed under compulsory health insurance. 430 The same answer stated the following: “However, following the above decision, it is evident that the category of insured persons who had previously been entitled to diapers on the basis of diagnosis - incontinence regardless of the cause, was denied the previously acquired right to diapers, and it cannot be justified by the reduced inflow of money. It is understandable that the Health Insurance Institute of Mostar should take care of rational spending of money, but it should not be a diminution of the rights for the most 429 430 Ž-SA-06-478/19 Ž-MO-02-14/19 104