Communicated on 16 February 2015

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 32132/12 Ilija KRSTANOVIĆ against Croatia lodged on 7 May 2012

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Ilija Krstanović , is a Croatian national, who was born in 1972 and lives in Osijek.

The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

The Act on the Rights of Croatian Homeland War Veterans and their Family Members ( Zakon o pravima hrvatskih branitelja iz Domovinskog rata i č lanova njihovih obitelji ; Official Gazette no. 174/2004; hereinafter: the “Veterans Act”), which entered into force on 1 January 2005, provided that a request for recognition of the status of a disabled war veteran allowing for, inter alia , personal disability benefit, must be lodged within twelve months of the date of entry into force of the Act.

Following his participation in the war in the period between 1991 and 1995, the applicant developed certain behaviour and psychological problems for which he sought psychological help. Eventually, in 2007 the applicant was hospitalised and on 15 November 2007 the competent Health Insurance authority recognised that he had developed posttraumatic stress disorder (hereinafter: the “PTSD”) related to his participation in the war.

On 2 January 2008 the applicant lodged a request for recognition of the status of disabled war veteran and the related personal disability benefit, on the grounds of his mental disorder, before the Osijek State Administration Office ( Ured državne uprave u Osje č ko-baranjskoj ž upaniji , Slu ž ba za dru š tvene djelatnost i ; hereinafter: the “Osijek Office”).

On 3 January 2008 the Osijek Office declared the applicant ’ s request inadmissible as being lodged out of the twelve-month time-limit under the Veterans Act.

The applicant appealed against this decision before the Ministry in charge of the Homeland War Veterans affairs ( Ministarstvo obitelji , branitelja i međugeneracijske solidarnosti ; hereinafter: the “Ministry”) arguing that he had learned of his disorder only later and that he could not have submitted such a request within the noted time-limit. He thus requested the Ministry to examine his request taking into account the particular circumstances of his case.

On 15 July 2008 the Ministry dismissed the applicant ’ s appeal as ill-founded upholding the decision of the Osijek Office.

The applicant then lodged an administrative action before the Administrative Court ( Upravni sud Republike Hrvatske ) contending that following his participation in the war as a very young person, he had developed various psychological problems but at first he could not have realised that he had actually developed a mental disorder. Only later, after a long period of treatment, he had been diagnosed the PTSD. Thus, unlike others who had already been aware of their physical or mental disorders in the relevant time for lodging a request for personal disability benefit, he had not been able to lodge such a request as that had been impossible for him due to the very nature of his disorder.

On 25 May 2011 the Administrative Court dismissed the applicant ’ s administrative action as ill-founded endorsing the reasoning of the lower bodies.

On 15 September 2011 the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint before the Constitutional Court ( Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske ) arguing that in his recognition of the status of a disabled war veteran and obtaining the related personal disability benefit he had been discriminated against other disabled war veterans whose disorders had manifested earlier and thus allowed them to regulate their status in due time.

On 11 January 2012 the Constitutional Court declared the applicant ’ s constitutional complaint inadmissible as manifestly ill-founded.

The decision of the Constitutional Court was served on the applicant in 8 February 2012.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains that in securing his personal disability benefit of a disabled war veteran, on account of his mental condition, he was discriminated against other disabled war veterans whose disorders allowed for a more timely diagnosis.

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Has the applicant suffered discrimination in obtaining the personal disability benefit of a disabled war veteran on the grounds of the nature of his disorder, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1?

The Government are requested to submit copies of all relevant documents relevant for the applicant ’ s case.