Constitutional Court

The applicant has filed a referral, claiming that his rights to a fair and impartial trial and to effective legal remedies were violated, because he was tried in absence, and that evidence did not support the pronounced sentence, At the same time, the applicant alleged that he was criminally prosecuted only because of his different political convictions from the political party in power, The Constitutional Court decided to reject applicant’s referral as inadmissible, thereby reasoning that allegations of the applicant were unfounded, Following a comprehensive assessment of procedures, the Court found that there was no evidence to suggest that previous proceedings were in any way unfair or affected by arbitrariness, Further, the Court maintained that the applicant had not filed any evidence which would prima facie demonstrate the violation of his right to a fair and impartial trial and to effective legal remedy