CCPR/C/114/D/2143/2012 adoption of the Strategy” was applied to their case, it would be likely that they would have to wait another 15 to 20 years before they had access to their right to truth and justice. Meanwhile, witnesses were dying and the available evidence was therefore disappearing. 5.2 The authors express their interest in learning that the Prosecutor’s Office has taken steps to determine the circumstances of Mr. Dovadžija’s case. However, Sakiba Dovadžija has never been called to provide her testimony and the authors have never been informed about developments in the investigations. On 26 June 2012, Ms. Dovadžija sent a letter to the Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina to reiterate her availability and willingness to contribute to the investigation of her husband’s case, and her desire to be kept informed. She has not received a reply. 5.3 The authors welcome the information provided by the Missing Persons Institute that it has carried out a number of exhumations in Žuč. However, they consider that they should be involved in the whole process of location, exhumation and identification of the remains. 5.4 The authors confirm that 20 years after the enforced disappearance of their husband and father, they have not received any form of redress or compensation. They express their concern regarding the reply of the Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, according to which they will be able to exercise their right to reparation only when the law on victims of torture has been adopted, as it refers to a piece of legislation that does not exist and is unlikely to be adopted soon. The authors recall that Bosnia and Herzegovina does not have a general law addressing the rights of people who were victims of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment during the conflict. 5.5 As regards their complaint previously referred to as pending (see para. 4.6 above), the Cantonal Court of Sarajevo adopted a decision on 25 May 2012 in which it upheld the claim presented by Sakiba Dovadžija for a monthly disability pension and ordered that new proceedings be conducted.14 The authors reiterate the importance for Ms. Dovadžija of having her husband’s status as a veteran recognized. State party’s additional submissions 6.1 On 6 August 2012, 25 September 2012 and 5 March 2013, the State party submitted letters from various institutions,15 mostly reiterating the information provided in the State party’s previous submission. In addition, the Constitutional Court indicated that it had issued decision No. AP-36/06 dated 16 July 2007 closing the case of Mr. Dovadžija, but that it was unable to provide any additional observations or clarifications in that regard. As regards the authors’ allegation that they have not been called on to provide their testimony and that they have not received a reply to their letter dated 26 June 2012, the Prosecutor’s Office states that they will be called to testify. 6.2 The Missing Persons Institute indicated that it continued to take “all necessary actions that will enable finding missing persons faster”, and that “it expects to solve, assisted by appropriate authorities and people having witnessed war crimes, the case of Mr. Salih Dovadžija”. The Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Policy reiterated that the law on victims of torture was in the drafting phase and should be adopted soon, and that the law would regulate reparation and compensation for violations of human rights for the categories of victims to which the authors belonged. 14 15 No further details are provided on this issue. The letters were from the following: Prosecutor’s Office; Missing Persons Institute; Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Policy; Constitutional Court; Sarajevo Canton, Municipality of Novo Sarajevo; Ministry of Security; Ministry of Justice; Office of the Prime Minister; and Federal Ministry for Veterans and Disabled Veterans of the War of Defence and Liberation. 11