46 ĐORĐEVIĆ v. CROATIA JUDGMENT represents an effective domestic remedy and that proper use of that remedy could have led to an acknowledgment of the violation alleged and an award of damages. In the event that the applicants’ claim was not successful before the ordinary courts, they would have been able to lodge a constitutional complaint and have their complaints examined by the Constitutional Court as well. However, the applicants failed to make use of the remedies available to them. 163. It follows that this complaint must be rejected under Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies. III. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 13 OF THE CONVENTION 164. The applicants alleged that they had no effective remedy in respect of their complaints under the Convention. They relied on Article 13 of the Convention, which provides: “Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in [the] Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.” A. Admissibility 1. As regards the applicants’ complaints under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention 165. The Court notes that this complaint is linked to the one examined above under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention and must therefore likewise be declared admissible. 2. As regards the applicants’ complaint under Article 14 of the Convention 166. The Court has already established that in respect of their complaint under Article 14 of the Convention, the applicants had at their disposal an effective remedy – an action pursuant to the provisions of the Prevention of Discrimination Act – which they failed to use. It follows that this part of the application is manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention. B. Merits 167. The applicants argued that they had no effective remedy by which to obtain protection against acts of harassment and violence. The Court notes that the Government suggested a number of remedies allegedly at their disposal in that connection. However, the Court has established that

Select target paragraph3