Alimony in Bosnia and Herzegovina is a legal obligation, but in practice, thousands of children wait for years for the funds they are legally entitled to, while the parent obliged to pay fails to fulfill that obligation.
The Ombudsman Institution has recorded an increase in complaints, lawyers warn of weaknesses in enforcement, and mothers like Kata Šitum-Soldo fight alone every day.
When a court ruled ten years ago that her ex-husband was obliged to allocate 150 BAM per month for the support of her daughter Antonela, Kata Šitum-Soldo thought that at least one issue in the series of challenges facing her as a mother of a child with special needs was solved. Ten years later, she says, she hasn’t seen any of that money.
“My ex-husband never paid a single mark to his child. Although the court issued a verdict of 150 BAM, ten years since then, he has never paid or asked about his child,” says Kata.
Her story is not an exception, but an illustration of a systemic problem that, according to data from the Institution of the Ombudsman for Human Rights of Bosnia and Herzegovina, is growing year by year.
Complaints Increase By 35 Percent
According to the response provided by the Human Rights Ombudsman Institution of Bosnia and Herzegovina to a journalist’s inquiry, in 2025, the Department for Monitoring the Implementation of Children’s Rights received 404 complaints, which represents an increase of as much as 35.12 percent compared to the previous year. A significant portion of these complaints pertain to so-called high-conflict divorces, in which, in addition to numerous contentious issues, failures to fulfill the legal obligation of alimony often arise.
However, the Ombudsmen point out that there is no precise data on how many parents in Bosnia and Herzegovina do not pay alimony at all, or how many complaints relate exclusively to this problem, since in conflict divorces, children’s rights are often violated in several ways at the same time.
“The Ombudsmen express their suspicion that this data is not publicly available,” the institution’s response states, indicating that first-instance courts have statistics on the number of cases of forced enforcement of court decisions on alimony. They emphasize that prosecutors’ offices have data on investigations into the criminal offense of evading alimony, and social work centers record reports from parents.
According to the Human Rights Ombudsman of BiH, the problem is that this data is not consolidated or systematically monitored at the state level, which obscures the full picture of the scale of the problem.
“There are a certain number of parents who do not initiate proceedings at all so that the other parent is sanctioned criminally or civilly, which means that the actual number of cases of non-payment of alimony is probably significantly higher than the number of registered complaints and proceedings,” the Ombudsman’s response states.
The Ombudsman Institution previously addressed the issue in the Special Report “Children in Conflict Divorces,” which also contains specific recommendations to institutions, and the topic is also discussed in more detail in the chapter on children’s rights in the Ombudsman’s Annual Report for 2025.
While institutions speak the language of statistics, behind every number stands a family like Kata Šitum-Soldo’s from Mostar, who takes care of her daughter Antonela alone, a girl with special needs who needs lifelong therapy.
“My Antonela has medicine she will take for the rest of her life, and she gets prescription drugs. Also, since last year, she has been introduced to a new therapy after a major operation. I buy that therapy in Croatia because it isn’t available anywhere in Bosnia and Herzegovina,” says Kata, adding that it is an additional significant expense for a family that lives without any financial support from the other parent.
In addition to medical therapy, her daughter also needs physical therapy, a speech therapist, and a psychologist, services that, according to Kata, many parents of children with developmental disabilities simply cannot afford.
As an example, she cites a ten-day rehabilitation in Fojnica that costs at least two thousand marks. When asked if she receives support of the center for social work, Kata replied that she hasn’t even contacted these institutions because the process of collecting documentation for one-time assistance is in itself demanding and expensive. Once, she says, she asked for one-time help from the city and was refused, with the explanation that the city did not have the funds.
“There’s no money for our children, but that’s why they have luxury dinners,” she says bitterly.
When asked if she feels protected by the institutions, her answer is short and clear: “Honestly, that’s a big ‘no.’”
Kata also describes the prejudices she faces every day as a mother of a disabled child.
Her assessment of the system is particularly striking. According to her experience, administrative obstacles and lengthy procedures fall harder on the parent who conscientiously takes care of a child than on one who shirks their obligation.
“Unfortunately, I often have the feeling that the system puts more burden on the parent who conscientiously takes care of his child than the one who avoids his obligations,” says Kata.
She is not looking for handouts, only for understanding and a system that works, with greater access to therapies, less administration, greater financial security, and services that would allow families like hers at least a short break. Her biggest concern, she says, concerns the future. What will happen to Antonela when she and her husband grow old and can no longer take care of their daughter?
What The Law Says
In order to understand why these situations happen in the first place, and why court verdicts like the one in the case of Kata Šitum-Soldo remain unenforced for years, we spoke with lawyer Adnan Pobrić.
According to him, there is no single reliable average duration of alimony determination procedures for all courts in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It depends on whether paternity is disputed, whether the parents have reported income and how much the specific court is burdened with cases. The problem is that it is a procedure that concerns the child’s basic life needs, and the child cannot wait for years to realize the right that belongs to them.
This is precisely why the FBiH Family Law foresees the possibility of determining temporary and preliminary support measures, so that children are not left without resources while the regular procedure continues. When asked why alimony is often not charged, Pobrić points out that the problem rarely lies in the law itself, but in its implementation.
“When a parent does not have formal employment, reports minimal income, or keeps income beyond the reach of enforcement, collection becomes significantly more difficult,” says Pobrić.
Pobrić notes that a parent cannot simply claim that they do not have money and thus avoid the obligation, because the law requires that when determining support, the parent’s actual ability to earn more is also taken into account, not just the official salary listing.
According to Pobrić, there are no reliable publicly available statistics on how often parents report lower income than their actual income for the Federation of BiH, but the legal problem is real.
“Courts should not determine the amount of alimony solely based on the pay slip if there are indications that the parents’ real financial capabilities are different,” Pobrić added.
When it comes to long-term evasion of payment, such as the case of Kata Šitum-Soldo, Pobrić is clear:
“This should not go without consequences. The FBiH Criminal Code provides for the criminal offense of ‘evading alimony,’ which is punishable by up to three years in prison for anyone who avoids supporting a person they are obligated to support based on an executive court decision or settlement.”
He emphasizes that alimony is not an ordinary private debt, but a legal obligation that also enjoys criminal law protection.
Although the criminal sanction formally exists, Pobrić warns that the question is how much it is actually applied in practice and how effective it is as a deterrent. He believes that the system should be arranged so that a parent who consciously avoids the obligation experiences the legal consequences very quickly, instead of counting on the slowness of the process for years, as happened in the case of Kata and her daughter.
When it comes to retroactive collection, Pobrić makes an important distinction between determining the obligation for an earlier period and collecting already due installments based on an existing final decision.
“If the decision on alimony never existed, you should not promise automatic payment for the previous ten or twenty years – it depends on the legal basis, the period and the statute of limitations, so for each long-term case it is necessary to review the documentation individually,” says Pobrić.
The System Punishes Responsible Parents
The problem of non-payment of alimony in Bosnia and Herzegovina is not only a legal issue, but also a systemic one. The legal framework, including criminal liability for evading alimony, formally exists, but what is missing is the efficient, rapid, and consistent enforcement of court decisions and criminal sanctions provided for by law.
Data from the Ombudsman Institution shows an increase in the number of complaints related to children’s rights in divorces, but also the absence of centralized records that would show the real extent of the problem of non-payment of alimony at the state level. Without such records, it is difficult to measure the effectiveness of existing mechanisms, and even more difficult to propose targeted legal changes.
The story of Kata Šitum-Soldo shows the human cost of this legal and administrative gap, a mother who has been bearing the costs of her child’s medical treatment and therapy alone for ten years, while, in her experience, the system treats her more strictly than a parent who has completely neglected their legal obligation.
As the ombudsmen and lawyer Pobrić themselves have pointed out, the solution does not necessarily lie in new legal provisions, but rather in strengthening control mechanisms, accelerating enforcement procedures, and more consistent application of existing criminal sanctions so that children like Antonela do not have to wait ten or more years for what has long been her due by law.
