ii. Standpoint of the Constitutional Court

The jurisprudence of the BiH Constitutional Court changed its course in relation to the IPTF decisions on decertification. Thus, the Court first rejected an appeal due to non-exhaustion of legal remedies since the injured party could have also addressed the ordinary domestic courts.³⁵²⁴ Afterwards, some of the injured parties who had used ordinary legal remedies managed to reach the BiH Constitutional Court, but this Court dismissed those appeals as (prima facie) ill- founded. However, at this stage it could be noticed, between the lines, that the BiH Constitutional Court – taking into account the decision of the Human Rights Commission within the Constitutional Court in the Džaferović Case – gave its support to the opinion that ordinary courts were not competent to review IPTF acts at all. However, as to the lawfulness of restrictions on the right of access to court under Article 6 of the ECHR, the Constitutional Court gave no opinion at all (Rizvanović et al.).³⁵²⁵ As to an old case of the Human Rights Chamber and the Human Rights Commission within the BiH Constitutional Court on which the Constitutional Court had to give its opinion a year after adoption of the decision in the Rizvanović Case, the Constitutional Court rejected the request again due to non-exhaustion of legal remedies without giving the reasons for such a decision.³⁵²⁶