Towards Harmonized Protection: An Analysis of Domestic Violence Laws in Bosnia and Herzegovina in Light of EU Directive 2024/1385 with a Focus on Emergency Protection Measures

Domestic violence represents a pervasive and critical issue both regionally and globally, affecting individuals regardless of their socioeconomic, cultural, ethnic, racial, or other background. In the context of Bosnia and Herzegovina, domestic violence (and violence against women) has become a major concern, requiring urgent attention and effective mechanisms for victim protection and perpetrator accountability and sanctioning. The complexity of domestic violence cases, along with their sensitive nature, demands robust emergency protection measures that not only provide immediate assistance to victims but also deter potential offenders. The legal systems of the Republic of Srpska, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the

Brčko District of Bosnia and Herzegovina — as political entities and federal-administrative units within the country — have developed various frameworks to address domestic violence, each aiming to comply with international standards and obligations1. This paper focuses on analyzing these legal frameworks in terms of their alignment with Directive (EU) 2024/1385 on the protection against violence against women and domestic violence1, evaluating their effectiveness and efficiency, as well as areas that require improvement.

Directive (EU) 2024/1385 represents a major step forward in the European Union’s efforts to combat gender-based violence, including domestic violence. The Directive establishes comprehensive measures aimed at preventing violence, protecting victims, and ensuring effective and efficient criminal prosecution of perpetrators. It emphasizes the importance of a coordinated approach, incorporating both preventive and responsive mechanisms to address domestic violence. Among its provisions, the Directive advocates (and mandates) emergency protection measures, such as restraining orders and protective measures, designed to provide victims with immediate assistance and personal safety. These measures are crucial for ensuring the safety of victims while restricting the actions of perpetrators.

Despite these laws, certain challenges related to their implementation, consistency, and compliance with EU standards are evident. A comparative analysis of these laws with Directive (EU) 2024/1385 is essential to identify shortcomings and areas for reform. One of the key aims of this paper is to assess the extent to which the current legal framework in Bosnia and Herzegovina aligns with the provisions and requirements set forth in the Directive, particularly with regard to emergency protection measures. The Directive mandates a standardized and coordinated response to domestic violence, including immediate and effective protective measures for victims. Assessing the alignment of legal provisions in Bosnia and Herzegovina with these requirements will not only highlight the strengths and weaknesses of existing laws but will also provide a basis for recommending necessary legal reforms2. By analyzing the current legal and institutional frameworks in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the context of Directive (EU) 2024/1385, this paper aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse on strengthening protection for victims of domestic violence and ensuring compliance with international human rights standards.

The Issue of Domestic Violence in Bosnia and Herzegovina

The family is generally considered the fundamental unit of society, playing a crucial role in the physical, emotional, and psychological development of individuals [1]. It serves as the primary environment in which basic human needs are met, including those that can only be fulfilled through intimate family relationships. As a unique biosocial community, the family has significant importance not only for individual development but also for the broader social structure and functioning. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, societal tolerance for violence — particularly domestic violence — has become alarmingly prevalent. Domestic violence has become deeply entrenched within the structure of society, with abuse cases often dominating media headlines [2]. These often tragic cases, sometimes resulting in fatalities, underscore the persistent nature of the problem. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) regularly publish reports and conduct research highlighting the pervasive nature of domestic violence, offering both statistical insights and much-needed support for victims.

Domestic violence is a global phenomenon that transcends cultural, economic, and social boundaries. It encompasses various forms of abuse — physical, sexual, psychological, and economic — that occur within the family or household unit [3; 4]. Indeed, domestic violence is not an isolated incident but is better understood as a pattern of repeated behavior aimed at controlling or dominating a family member. The literature overwhelmingly recognizes domestic violence as a systemic form of coercion, fundamentally intended to assert power over another individual [5; 6; 7].

Although there is no universally accepted definition of domestic violence, the concept is broadly understood within legal and sociological frameworks. The absence of a unified global definition is not uncommon for complex social phenomena. However, most definitions converge on the idea of violence as behavior that threatens the physical integrity, mental health, or emotional well-being of a family or household member. Domestic violence is thus typically characterized as any act whereby one member of a family or household causes harm to or endangers the safety and stability of another member [2]. The multifaceted nature of domestic violence requires a nuanced understanding of its various forms, each bearing different consequences for victims. Whether physical, emotional, or psychological, the impact of domestic violence resonates beyond the immediate victim, affecting the family unit and society as a whole [1]. Broader societal tolerance of violence exacerbates the problem, making it more difficult to address through legal and social mechanisms.

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)1, and the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (Istanbul Convention)2, impose legal obligations on states to ensure, within their jurisdiction, that all individuals, particularly women and girls, can live lives free from violence [9]. These international instruments not only mandate the adoption of preventive measures but also require the establishment of appropriate legal mechanisms enabling victims to seek protection from perpetrators of violence. These legal frameworks place strong emphasis on the responsibility of states to adopt and implement laws and other legal instruments that protect individuals from all forms of violence, particularly gender-based violence [10].

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, however, the reality on the ground stands in stark contrast to the legal obligations imposed by these conventions. A 2018 study conducted by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) revealed alarming statistics on the prevalence of violence against women. The study showed that nearly 48 % of women in Bosnia and Herzegovina had experienced some form of psychological, physical, or sexual violence since the age of 15. This includes various forms of abuse such as sexual harassment, stalking, and violence by an intimate partner. Despite the widespread nature of the violence, the study also revealed a worrying lack of awareness among women regarding the steps they can take if they experience violence. Only 7 % of women stated that they were „very well informed“ about their options, while 16 % considered themselves „well informed“, and a total of 43 % felt „somewhat informed“ or „not very well informed“. A concerning 13 % of women reported that they did not know what to do if faced with violence [11].

The consequences of violence are severe, with a significant proportion of women experiencing lasting psychological and physical harm. According to the OSCE study, 66 % of women who experienced violence reported one or more psychological consequences. These effects were particularly pronounced among victims of intimate partner violence, stalking, and sexual harassment. More precisely, 69% of women reported violence by a former partner, 48% reported violence by an intimate partner or another person, and 38% experienced sexual harassment [9]. The study further emphasized that these figures represent only the most severe cases of violence that women reported during their adult lives. Specifically, 76,500 women were directly affected by violence, two-thirds of whom had already been impacted by the broader conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Perhaps most concerning is the extremely low rate of reporting violence to the authorities, with figures ranging from 3% to 20% [11]. This points to a significant gap between the incidence of violence and the use of available legal mechanisms.

In terms of domestic legislation, Bosnia and Herzegovina has to some extent aligned its legal framework with its international obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Istanbul Convention, as well as other legal instruments. Legislative mechanisms are aimed at combating violence against women, ensuring the prosecution of perpetrators, and protecting victims. The Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina explicitly guarantees the highest level of internation- ally recognized human rights and fundamental freedoms1. Specifically, the Constitution mandates the direct application of the rights and freedoms contained in the ECHR and its protocols, granting them primacy over all other domestic laws2. Furthermore, the preamble to the Istanbul Convention acknowledges the importance of the ECHR in protecting human rights and emphasizes its connection with other international instruments such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)3, and numerous other international protocols and mechanisms [6; 7]. Together, these conventions and instruments form a comprehensive framework for the protection of women’s rights and the prevention of violence. However, the effectiveness of these legal mechanisms ultimately depends on their consistent and unreserved implementation at the national level.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, domestic violence is increasingly understood as a form of gender-based violence, a specific manifestation of inequality deeply rooted in traditional gender norms and the imbalance of power between men and women. Gender-based violence, particularly domestic violence, is a direct consequence of “patriarchal” structures that sustain discrimination and unequal power relations, placing women in vulnerable positions within the family and society [12]4. This context is crucial for understanding the widespread nature of domestic violence in Bosnia and Herzegovina, where violence against women, especially within the domestic sphere, remains a deeply troubling issue.

The socio-political context of Bosnia and Herzegovina, shaped by ethnic and religious conflicts and post-war recovery, has exacerbated many challenges related to gender-based violence. The war of the 1990s not only disrupted social structures but also intensified gender-based violence, particularly through the systematic use of sexual violence as a weapon of war [13]. These legacies continue to influence the prevalence of violence against women today, as many women who experienced trauma during the conflict are now survivors of domestic violence, often at the hands of partners or family members who themselves may have been affected by the war [14; 15].

Cultural norms and social expectations in Bosnia and Herzegovina have placed women in subordinate roles within the family, reinforcing the idea that men hold dominant positions. This traditional gender hierarchy has, in many cases, normalized violence as a means of controlling women’s behavior and reinforcing male authority [12]. In the Bosnian context, domestic violence is often viewed as a private matter, something that happens within the confines of the home, and therefore less visible to the public. This perception significantly contributes to the underreporting of domestic violence and hinders efforts to address it effectively [16].

The 2018 OSCE survey, which revealed that nearly half of women in Bosnia and Herzegovina have experienced some form of psychological, physical, or sexual violence, highlights the severity of this issue. What is particularly concerning about domestic violence in Bosnia and Herzegovina is the low rate of reporting such incidents [17]. Many women, especially in rural areas, lack access to information or support networks that would enable them to seek help. The stigma surrounding domestic violence, combined with fear of social and familial repercussions, often discourages victims from reporting abuse to the authorities.

Despite international and domestic legal frameworks aimed at protecting women from violence, implementation remains inconsistent. Bosnia and Herzegovina is a signatory to several international instruments, including the ECHR, CEDAW, and the Istanbul Convention, which obligate the state to protect women (and girls) from violence [18]. These conventions emphasize the need for comprehensive legal, social, and institutional responses to gender-based violence. In accordance with these obligations, Bosnia and Herzegovina has undertaken (some) legislative reforms aimed at combating domestic violence.

In addition, the country’s complex political structure — comprising two entities and one district with special administrative powers — creates challenges for the uniform enforcement of laws and the development and implementation of public policies. Each entity has its own laws and mechanisms for addressing domestic violence, resulting in discrepancies in the protection and support available to victims. Although some progress has been made in aligning legislation with international standards, practical gaps remain, particularly in ensuring that all victims have access to justice and support services regardless of their location within the country. The broader context of gender-based violence in Bosnia and Herzegovina thus reflects a combination of historical, cultural, and structural factors that perpetuate the cycle of violence against women [19; 20]. Addressing domestic violence as a form of gender-based violence requires not only legislative reform but also a shift in societal attitudes. Without tackling the gendered power dynamics that underpin the violence, efforts to reduce its prevalence will remain inadequate.

Therefore, domestic violence in Bosnia and Herzegovina cannot be separated from its broader context as gender-based violence. It reflects the unequal status of women in society and the enduring influence of „patriarchal“ norms that tolerate or even justify violence as a means of control [21; 22]. Only through a holistic, intersectional approach that includes legal, social, and cultural interventions — as required by Directive (EU) 2024/1385 — can Bosnia and Herzegovina effectively address domestic violence and ensure that women and girls can live free from the fear of harm.

Individual Assessment for Determining the Protection Needs of Victims

Effective and efficient protection of victims of domestic violence requires a legal framework that comprehensively addresses the risks posed by perpetrators. Both the domestic violence protection laws in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Directive (EU) 2024/1385 recognize the importance of risk assessment as a tool for preventing further harm to victims. However, only the RS Domestic Violence Law contains provisions specifying the risk factors that authorized officials must consider during risk assessment. While both RS Domestic Violence Law and the Directive aim to protect victims, they differ in their approach, scope, and implementation. They are aligned in several key areas, particularly in recognizing the need to assess the risk posed by the perpetrator. Both legal instruments establish a framework for identifying and evaluating factors contributing to the danger the perpetrator may pose to the victim. However, the extent of alignment varies when examining specific elements of the risk assessment process.

Article 12a of RS Domestic Violence Law lists a set of risk factors that must be assessed by the competent police officer1. These include:

• a)    whether the perpetrator has previously committed or recently committed domestic violence or any other form of violence, and whether they are likely to repeat it;

• b)    whether the perpetrator has made threats of murder or suicide;

• c)    whether the perpetrator possesses weapons;

• d)    whether the perpetrator has a mental illness or abuses psychoactive substances;

• e)    whether there is a custody dispute or issues related to visitation rights with the child;

• f)    whether the perpetrator has been issued an emergency or protective measure;

• g)    whether the victim experiences fear and how they assess the risk of repeated violence; and

• h)    other facts and circumstances relevant to the risk assessment.

Article 16 of the Directive similarly mandates individual assessment, including many similar risk factors, such as:

• a)    risk of repeated violence;

• b)    risk of physical injury or psychological harm;

• c)    possibility of the use or access to weapons;

• d)    whether the perpetrator or suspect lives with the victim;

• e)    drug or alcohol abuse by the perpetrator or suspect;

• f)    child abuse;

• g)    mental health issues; and

• h)    stalking.

The overlap in risk factors between RS Domestic Violence Law and the Directive reflects a shared understanding between the European and Republika Srpska lawmakers of the key elements contributing to the danger posed by domestic violence perpetrators. Both instruments emphasize the need to assess the likelihood of repeated violence, the presence of weapons, and the perpetrator’s mental state.

However, the Directive’s inclusion of stalking as a specific risk factor highlights a broader consideration of how perpetrators may continue to harm or intimidate victims, even outside the context of immediate physical violence. RS Domestic Violence Law explicitly mandates that the victim’s fear and self-assessment be considered during the risk assessment process. This acknowledges the importance of the victim’s subjective experience in understanding the full scope of the threat they face. The Directive adopts a more comprehensive approach, not only considering the victim’s fear but also requiring the assessment to account for the victim’s individual circumstances, including experiences of intersectional discrimination that may increase vulnerability to violence. The Directive further emphasizes the need to avoid secondary or repeated victimization, stressing the importance of conducting the assessment in a way that prioritizes the victim’s well-being1.

While both RS Domestic Violence Law and the Directive recognize the importance of the victim’s perspective, the Directive’s approach is more holistic. By taking into account the victim’s broader circumstances, including potential discrimination, the Directive ensures that the risk assessment is tailored to the specific needs and vulnerabilities of each victim. This is especially important in cases where the victim’s risk may be exacerbated by factors such as gender, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status. RS Domestic Violence Law requires a risk assessment to be carried out for every report of domestic violence, with the sole responsibility placed on the competent police officer. This approach ensures that the assessment is conducted promptly but may limit its scope and depth if only one body is involved. In contrast, the Directive requires that the individual assessment be conducted at the earliest possible stage — such as when the victim first comes into contact with authorities (exempli gratia, child protection services or healthcare providers). Furthermore, the Directive highlights the importance of cooperation between all relevant competent authorities, ensuring that the assessment benefits from a multidisciplinary perspective. Thus, the Directive’s requirement for early intervention and inter-agency cooperation represents a stronger approach to risk assessment. By involving multiple actors — such as child protection agencies, civil society organizations, healthcare providers, and legal aid services — the Directive ensures that the assessment is comprehensive and accounts for all aspects of the victim’s situation. Conversely, reliance in RS Domestic Violence Law on a single body (the police) may result in a narrower assessment, potentially overlooking key factors that a collaborative approach might reveal.

Despite the considerable alignment of RS Domestic Violence Law with the Directive, there remains room for improvement. Most notably, the inclusion of stalking behavior as a risk factor, which the Directive recognizes as a significant predictor of future violence. Stalking — such as persistent following, unwanted communication, or surveillance — is often a precursor to more serious forms of violence [23; 24; 25]. The absence of this factor from RS Domestic Violence Law risk assessment criteria presents a gap that may leave victims vulnerable to escalating threats.

Although RS Domestic Violence Law requires consideration of the victim’s fear, it does not mandate a broader evaluation of the victim’s individual circumstances, such as experiences of intersectional discrimination. This omission suggests that the law may not adequately protect victims facing heightened risks due to factors such as gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or disability. The Directive’s emphasis on these factors underscores the importance of a nuanced approach to victim protection — one that recognizes the complex ways in which multiple forms of discrimination can intersect to increase vulnerability. Assigning the risk assessment responsibility solely to the police may lead to a limited understanding of the risks the victim faces. Without the involvement of other relevant authorities — such as social services, health, and psychological support providers — the assessment may lack the depth and breadth needed to fully capture the victim’s situation. The Directive’s focus on cross-sectoral cooperation ensures a more holistic approach, relying on expertise from various sectors to produce a thorough assessment that better informs protective measures.

Table 1 — Comparative Analysis of Legislation

Criteria	EU Directive 2024/1385	RS Domestic Violence Law	FB&H Domestic Violence Law	BDB&H Domestic Violence Law
Risk Assessment Factors	Risk of repeated violence, risk of physical or psychological harm, weapon access, etc.	Risk of repeated violence, weapon possession, mental health issues, substance abuse, etc.	Similar factors to RS Domestic Violence Law, but no formalized process for risk assessment	Same as FB&H Domestic Violence Law, no explicit risk assessment provisions
Involvement of Authorities	Authorities: police, social services, healthcare, other relevant bodies involved in the assessment	Authorities: predominantly police officers (limited involvement of other services)	Authorities: unclear division of responsibilities; lack of integration with social services	Authorities: police-based; lack of clear cooperation with other sectors
Victim’s Perspective	Victim’s fear, specific needs, intersectional discrimination taken into account, preventing secondary victimization	Victim’s self-assessment considered, but limited focus on intersectional discrimination	Lack of emphasis on victim’s self-assessment and personal circumstances	No clear framework for incorporating victim’s personal fears or self-assessment
Assessment Timing	Assessment conducted as early as possible, when victim first contacts authorities (e. g., social services, health institutions)	Risk assessment carried out immediately, but police alone responsible for assessment	No formalized timing; risk assessment irregular and not systematic	Risk assessment sporadic, dependent on individual police officer’s discretion
Protection Measures	Emergency protection orders, long-term protection measures, victim-centered approach	Emergency orders, limited flexibility in duration of protection orders	Limited legal protection measures, inconsistent enforcement	Protection orders in place, but gaps in ensuring continuous protection
Key Gaps	Strong emphasis on cooperation between multiple sectors, but possible gaps in immediate victim support in some jurisdictions	Narrow focus on police-only assessments, lack of consideration for stalking behavior	Absence of standardized risk assessments, failure to integrate healthcare and social services	Lack of standardized procedure for risk assessment, no consideration of stalking or other forms of control

safety and improve the overall effectiveness of the domestic violence protection system in both jurisdictions.

Emergency Protection Measures

In order to mitigate the immediate risk to the physical and psychological well-being of victims, prevent further acts of violence, and ensure the general safety of affected individuals, emergency protection measures may be imposed on perpetrators of domestic violence1. Such measures may be ordered either before the initiation of formal legal proceedings or during the course of such proceedings. Under the legal framework of the Republic of Srpska, the competent court is authorized to impose these emergency protection measures within misdemeanor proceedings2. A request for the imposition of such measures may be submitted by a range of authorized entities, including police officers, social work centers, or the victims themselves, whether they belong to the immediate family or a wider family communi-ty3. Crucially, these measures must be imposed strictly within 24 hours of the submission of a request or the deprivation of liberty (arrest) of the perpetrator. This expedited timeframe underscores the importance of prompt judicial intervention to address the urgency of the threat posed by domestic violence.

The emergency protection measures prescribed by the RS Domestic Violence Law are:

• a)    removal of the perpetrator from the apartment, house, or other residential premises; and/or

• b)    prohibition of approaching or contacting the victim of domestic violence.

These measures are temporary, with a legal limit of no more than 30 days4. However, this timeframe highlights the urgency of the situation, allowing for swift judicial intervention to protect victims while ensuring timely review. This approach is aligned with the spirit of Directive (EU) 2024/1385, which calls for expeditious and effective criminal in- vestigation in cases of domestic violence5. In the Republika Srpska, emergency protection measures are imposed by a judge of the misdemeanor department of the competent basic court. This judicial involvement is essential to ensure that the imposition of such measures complies with legal standards and procedural safeguards. An appeal against the court’s decision is permitted, and the deadline for submitting such an appeal is three days6. Notably, the appeal does not delay the execution of the protective measure, underscoring the priority given to the safety of the victim over the procedural rights of the perpetrator during this immediate phase7. The appeal is reviewed by a judicial panel of the same court that issued the initial decision. This panel must issue a decision within 48 hours, further emphasizing the need for expeditious resolution of these matters8. The efficiency of this appellate procedure serves to protect the rights of the accused to due process while ensuring that protective measures are enforced and swiftly reviewed.

In situations where the removal of the perpetrator from the residence is ordered, the law also provides certain protections for the accused. The perpetrator has the right to take personal belongings necessary for everyday life, thus safeguarding his right to basic dignity and living needs. Additionally, the perpetrator is obliged to hand over the keys to the residence, thereby preventing unauthorized access and further endangering the victim’s safety9.

Once the court issues a decision imposing emergency protection measures, it is delivered to the competent organizational unit of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republika Srpska for further action10. Furthermore, the court is obliged to supervise the implementation and reassess the necessity of the protection measures within the prescribed timeframe, ensuring that the temporary measures remain justified throughout their duration [26].

The Directive requires Member States to authorize competent authorities to issue emergency barring orders ( exempli gratia , to leave the victim’s residence and prohibit contact) „without undue delay“ in situations of immediate danger to the health or safety of the victim or a dependent person¹. Importantly, the Directive emphasizes that such orders should have „immediate effect“ and should not depend on the victim reporting a criminal offense or act of violence, or undergoing an individual risk assessment. The focus is on prompt protective action as soon as danger is detected. While the RS Domestic Violence Law provides for relatively swift action (within 24 hours), the Directive places greater emphasis on immediacy, which may call for even faster intervention than the 24-hour timeframe prescribed by RS Domestic Violence Law. Additionally, the Directive allows authorities to issue such orders without requiring a formal complaint from the victim, whereas the RS Domestic Violence Law requires either a proposal from the victim or another authorized body. This may lead to potential delays, as it necessitates a formal request before the court can act. To fully align with the Directive, RS Domestic Violence Law could consider allowing for more urgent administrative action by the police or other authorities without waiting for the initiation of court proceedings or the submission of an official proposal.

The Directive also requires that emergency protection measures, restraining orders, and protective measures remain in force „for as long as necessary“ to ensure the safety of the victim2. The Directive emphasizes that the duration of protection should be conditioned by the “specific needs and safety requirements” of the victim, rather than arbitrary time limits. The RS Domestic Violence Law imposes a fixed 30-day limit for emergency protection orders, whereas the Directive advocates for a more flexible approach, whereby orders remain in force as long as needed. A strict 30-day limit could result in situations where the victim remains at risk but is no longer protected once the measure expires. To achieve compliance, RS Domestic Violence Law could introduce a system of continuous re-evaluation to extend protective measures based on ongoing risk assessments, ensuring that protection lasts for the duration of the threat to the victim.

Article 19(3) of the Directive permits EU Member States (and those aspiring to become members, such as Bosnia and Herzegovina) to require the victim to request the imposition of protective measures. However, Article 19(4) mandates that authorities must inform victims of their right to request emergency protection orders, restraining orders, or protective mea-sures3. While RS Domestic Violence Law outlines a clear procedure for issuing protection orders, it does not include an explicit obligation for authorities to inform victims of their rights. Due to this omission, some victims may remain unaware of the available legal protections (especially in cross-border situations). To enhance compliance, RS Domestic Violence Law should include a provision requiring the police and other competent bodies to inform victims of their rights to protective measures (including the availability of cross-border recognition under EU law). This would ensure that victims are fully aware of their options, both domestically and abroad.

The Directive requires that violations of emergency barring orders, restraining orders, or protective measures be subject to „effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties“4. RS Domestic Violence Law provides that a violator of imposed emergency protection measures will be punished „in accordance with the provisions of the law governing criminal offenses“5. To align with the Directive, RS Do- mestic Violence Law should introduce a dedicated legal framework that clearly defines penalties for breaches of emergency protection orders, ensuring that such penalties are deterrent and adequately enforced, rather than referring generally to provisions of substantive criminal law.

RS Domestic Violence Law does not contain provisions requiring that victims be notified of breaches of emergency protection orders. The only reference to enforcement is that the police are notified of the issuance of the order. Article 19(6) of the Directive requires that victims be notified „without undue de-lay“ in the event of a breach of an emergency barring order, restraining order, or protective measure — particularly if the breach may affect their safety. The absence of a mechanism in RS Domestic Violence Law for (mandatory) victim notification in the event of a breach is a clear shortcoming in terms of compliance. Ensuring that victims are informed in a timely manner about breaches is crucial for their personal safety and well-being. Therefore, RS Domestic Violence Law should include provisions requiring the immediate notification of victims in the event of a breach and ensure that authorities take prompt action when such a breach occurs.

According to the law governing protection against domestic violence in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, protective measures may be imposed on a perpetrator of domestic violence. These measures aim to ensure the necessary protection of the health and safety of persons exposed to violence, prevent further domestic violence, and implement effective measures of re-education and treatment of violent individuals1. Such measures include:

• a)    removal from the apartment, house, or other residential premises and prohibition of returning to the apartment, house, or other residential premises;

• b)    prohibition from approaching the victim of violence;

• c)    prohibition from harassing and stalking the person exposed to violence;

• d)    mand atory psychosocial treatment;

• e)    mandatory addiction treatment;

• f)    temporary deprivation of liberty and detention.

The protective measure of removal from the apartment, house, or other residential premises and the prohibition of returning to them may be imposed on a person who has committed violence against a family member with whom they reside, if the competent court determines that there is a risk that, without the implementation of this measure, the violent person may commit further acts of vio-lence2. The person against whom this measure is imposed is obliged to immediately leave the apartment, house, or other residential premises, if necessary, in the presence of a police officer3. This measure is imposed for a duration of not less than one month and not more than two years4.

The protective measure prohibiting the perpetrator from approaching the victim of domestic violence may be imposed on a person who has committed domestic violence5. In the decision imposing the restraining measure, the competent court shall specify the places or areas, as well as the distance within which the violent person is not allowed to approach the victim6. This measure is imposed for a duration of not less than one month and not more than two years, unless the court decides that a longer duration is in the best interest of the victim7.

The protective measure prohibiting harassment and stalking may be imposed on a person who harasses or stalks a family member, where there is a risk that such behavior may be repeated8. This measure is imposed for a duration of not less than one month and not more than two years, unless the court determines that a longer period is in the victim’s interest9. The protective measure of mandatory psychosocial treatment may be imposed on a violent person to eliminate the causes of their violent behavior or if there is a risk that the person will repeat the violence1. This measure is imposed for a duration of no less than six continuous months and no more than two years2. The protective measure of mandatory addiction treatment shall be imposed by the competent court on a violent person who committed the violence under the influence of alcohol, narcotics, or other psychoactive substances, if there is a risk that acts of violence may be repeated3. The duration of this measure shall not be less than one month nor longer than two years4.

The police department is obligated to respond to every reported case of domestic violence immediately upon receiving the re-port5. The police department is also required to detain any person suspected of committing domestic violence, provided the conditions set out in the criminal procedure law applicable in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina are met6.

• a)    removal of the perpetrator from the apartment, house, or other residential premises; or

• b)    prohibition of the perpetrator from approaching or contacting the victim of domestic violence.

The Basic Court of the Brcko District of

Bosnia and Herzegovina has subject-matter jurisdiction for issuing emergency measures, which are imposed in a special sui generis procedure⁴. A proposal for the imposition of an emergency protective measure is submitted by the police or an authorized authority, and the measure must be imposed no later than 24 hours after the proposal is received or the perpetrator is brought before the court. Emergency protective measures are imposed for a duration not exceeding 30 days⁵, and are issued by a single judge through a ruling that may be appealed within three days from the date of issuance⁶. Filing an appeal does not suspend the execution of the decision⁷. The Appellate Court of the Brcko District of Bosnia and Herzegovina must decide on the appeal within 72 hours of receiving it⁸.

Conclusion

It is important to emphasize the significance of aligning domestic violence protection laws in Bosnia and Herzegovina with Directive (EU) 2024/1385 in order to ensure comprehensive protection for victims of violence. The existing legal frameworks in the Republika Srpska, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the Brcko District of Bosnia and Herzegovina demonstrate notable progress in providing emergency protection measures for victims. However, comparative analysis reveals several areas in which these laws fall short of the Directive’s requirements, particularly regarding the implementation and extension of protection measures.

One of the primary challenges lies in the inconsistent application of emergency protection measures across the various legal jurisdictions in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The decentralized nature of the legal system contributes to discrepancies in the availability and enforcement of protection orders, thereby undermining the overall effectiveness of victim protection. This issue is further exacerbated by the lack of standardized risk assessments in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Brcko District, as well as by the fixed duration of protective measures, which may not always reflect the victim’s ongoing need for personal safety. The analysis further underscores the need for a more flexible, victimcentered approach to protection, as mandated by the Directive. Additionally, there is a significant gap in the current legislative frameworks regarding the requirement to inform victims in a timely manner about their legal rights and the availability of protection measures. Without adequate awareness, many victims may remain vulnerable and unable to seek the protection to which they are legally entitled. The Directive emphasizes the need for clear communication with victims and the proactive provision of legal (and accurate) information — practices that should be integrated into domestic legislation.

To address these shortcomings, legislative reforms are recommended to align domestic legal frameworks with the Directive. This includes expanding the scope of protection orders, removing fixed time limits for emergency measures, and ensuring that risk assessments are conducted uniformly across all jurisdictions — Republika Srpska, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the Brcko District. Moreover, it is necessary to introduce stricter and more effective penalties for breaches of protection measures, along with mechanisms for immediately notifying victims in case of such violations.

Implementing these reforms would not only improve compliance with Directive (EU) 2024/1385 but would also significantly enhance the protection and safety of victims of domestic violence (and victims of violence in general) in Bosnia and Herzegovina. A more harmonized and cohesive legal approach is essential to ensure that all victims, regardless of their location within the country, have equal access to immediate and effective protection from violence. Furthermore, such alignment would strengthen Bosnia and Herzegovina’s commitment to upholding international human rights standards, promoting a safer and more just society for all its citizens. In light of these considerations, it would be most effective if a single, unified law were adopted at the state level — harmonized with European Union law and practices — to ensure consistent implementation and equal protection for all victims across the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina.