CCPR/C/112/D/1970/2010 missing during the war, … urgently and without further delay and no later than 30 days from the date of the receipt of the decision”. The Court also ordered “the parties referred to in article 15 of the Law on Missing Persons” to provide for operational functioning of the institutions established in accordance with the Law on Missing Persons, namely the Missing Persons Institute, the Fund for Support to the Families of Missing Persons in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Central Records of Missing Persons in Bosnia and Herzegovina immediately and without further delay, and no later than 30 days from the court order. The competent authorities were requested to submit information within six months to the Constitutional Court about the measures taken to implement the decision of the latter. The decision of the Constitutional Court was notified to the parties on 16 March 2006. 2.11 The Constitutional Court did not adopt a decision on the issue of compensation, considering that it was covered by the provisions of the Law on Missing Persons concerning “financial support” and by the establishment of the Fund for Support to the Families of Missing Persons. The authors argue that the dispositions on financial support have not been implemented and that the fund has still not been established. 2.12 The time limits set forth by the Constitutional Court in its decision expired and the relevant institutions did not provide any information on the fate and whereabouts of the victims, nor did they submit to the Court any information on the measures taken to implement its decision. On 18 November 2006, the Constitutional Court adopted a ruling, in which it declared that the Council of Ministers of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Government of Republika Srpska, the Government of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Government of Brčko District had failed to enforce its decision of 23 February 2006. Furthermore, the Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina had failed to take any measure to criminally prosecute those who had not enforced the decision of the Constitutional Court. 2.13 The ruling adopted by the Constitutional Court on 18 November 2006, on the failure of the Bosnian authorities to enforce the decision of 23 February 2006, is final and binding. The authors therefore have no other effective remedy to exhaust. Sinan Kožljak actively supported all the search activities and the submission of complaints by his mother. In order not to create confusion or submit overlapping complaints, the authors decided that Emina Kožljak would be the only person to represent the family and formally submit complaints to the relevant authorities. 2.14 Since 1992, Emina Kožljak and Sinan Kožljak have undergone deep and severe psychological stress, trying to cope with the uncertainty over the fate and whereabouts of Ramiz Kožljak. They have indefatigably applied over the last 18 years to various official authorities with enquiries, but they have never received any plausible information. The authors have continuous feelings of frustration, suffering, distress and anguish. The complaint 3.1 The authors base their complaint on the multi-offensive nature of enforced disappearance. In particular, they consider that the disappearance of their husband and father amounts to a violation of articles 6, 7, 9 and 16, read in conjunction with article 2, paragraph 3, of the Covenant. In that regard, they refer to (a) the lack of information about the causes and circumstances of the disappearance of their relative; (b) the failure of the national authorities to conduct an ex officio, prompt, impartial, thorough and independent investigation into his arbitrary arrest, and subsequent enforced disappearance; (c) the failure to identify, prosecute and sanction those responsible; and (d) the failure to provide an effective remedy to his family. 5