INSTITUTION OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS OMBUDSMAN OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA 01288 17 Gž dated 09 March 2018 had quashed the first-instance decision dated 12 July 2017 and returned the case to the Court for re-trial. Until the moment of lodging the complaint to the Ombudsman the complainant had no information about the developments in his case. In processing the case, the cooperation with the Municipal court in Cazin could not been established so that the Ombudsman issued its recommendation. 128 The recommendation was not implemented. Example: Ombudspersons processed a case 129 in which it claimed that on 26 December 2017 through the legal representative he initiated a lawsuit before the Basic Court in Banja Luka under number: 71 0 P 275425 17 P. Until the moment of filing the complaint to the Ombudsman no hearing was scheduled in this legal matter. After the investigation procedure the Ombudsman issued its recommendation 130 to the Basic Court in Banja Luka. In its reply 131 the Basic court said the following: „...Since on 11 July 2019 the conditions for scheduling the preliminary hearing have been met, on 26 July 2019 the case judge ordered the preliminary proceedings to be scheduled for 28 November 2019....“. 5.1.1. Enforcement from public budgets For years now Ombudspersons have pointed out to the complaints related to the impossibility or difficulty of enforcing the final judgments. The problem is particularly big in the situation when the respondent party is a municipality, canton or entity, in which cases the execution can be carried out only over the funds provided for that purpose, and in the amount provided by the budget line of a certain public body earmarked for that purpose, for a specific budget year. Example: Ombudspersons processed a case 132 in which the respondent party was the Ministry of Finance of the Government of Sarajevo Canton. In the complaint is is explained: by the judgment rendered by the Municipal Court in Sarajevo 133 and the Cantonal Court in Sarajevo 134 it was ordered to Sarajevo Canton to pay an amount of 4,038.00 BAM 135 to the complainant (plaintiff in the lawsuit), an employee of the Cantonal Prosecutor's Office in addition to the default interest to be calculated starting from 17 October 2011 till the date of payment. Under a decision of the Municipal Court in Sarajevo 136 the Canton Sarajevo is ordered to enforce this decision and pay the mentioned amount to the complainant. For non-enforcement of this decision the complainant addressed the Ministry of Finance of the Sarajevo Canton, which replied in a letter no.: 08-05SI/18 dated 22 February 2018. On 02 March 2018 the complainant addressed the Union banka d.d. Sarajevo for the enforcement under the Court Decision 137 and was replied 138 that the bank could not act on her request because as of the date 13 March 2018 the Bank did not receive a 128 Recommendation no. P-130/19 dated 07 May 2019 Ž-BL-08-313/19 130 Recommendation no. P-158/19 dated 07 August 2019 131 A document issued by the Primary Court in Banja Luka no. 071-0-Su-19-001287 dated 05 September 2019 132 Ž-SA-05-1367/18 133 A judgment of the Municipal Court in Sarajevo no.: 65 0 Rs 212980 11 Rs dated 26 June 2012 134 A judgment of the Municipal Court in Sarajevo no.: 65 0 Rs 212980 12 Rsž dated 16 July 2013 135 As follows: difference for holiday allowance for 2010 an amount of 404.00 BAM, the difference in holiday allowance for 2011 an amount of 419.00 BAM, and an amount of 1,836. 27 BAM, food allowance for 2010 an amount of 1,358.33 BAM, the difference in food allowance from January 2011 till 01 October 2011 136 A judgment of the Municipal Court in Sarajevo no.: 65 0 I 376286 13 I dated 27 September 2013 137 A judgment of the Municipal Court in Sarajevo no.: 65 0 I 376286 13 I dated 27 September 2013 138 A document issued by the Union Bank no.: 10/4-2-3759-1/18 od 13.03.2018 129 40