Constitutional Court

The Applicants filed a Referral pursuant to Article 113.7 of the Constitution, asserting that their rights under Articles 24 and 32 of the Constitution were infringed when the High Court for Minor Offences issued an unfavorable decision in a deportation matter despite objections from the Applicants that administrative appeals related to the issue were still pending, The Applicants also contended that the subsequent unfavorable dispositions of the administrative appeals infringed on their Article 32 rights since they were unable to appeal the rulings because copies were never served on them, The Applicants requested postponement of the deportations on grounds that they would impose a financial hardship and risk the health of a pregnant Applicant and her fetus, Regarding the administrative proceedings, the Court held that the Referral was inadmissible pursuant to Article 113.7 of the Constitution because the Applicants failed to exhaust all legal remedies, noting that they had not substantiated their claim that they were unaware of the disposition of the administrative appeal, citing AAB-RIINVEST University L.L.C. vs. Government of Kosovo for the proposition that exhaustion of remedies is necessary because there is an assumption that the Kosovo legal system will provide an effective remedy for Constitutional violations, Concerning the criminal proceedings, the Court held that the Applicants merely disputed factual findings and applications of law by the lower courts, highlighting that the Court is limited to resolving allegations of Constitutional violations, such as whether a trial was fair. In that regard, the Court found that the proceedings were not unfair or arbitrary, citing Shub v. Lithuania. In view of the inadmissibility of the Referral, the Court denied the request for interim measures pursuant to Article 27 of the Law, and Rules 54.1 and 55.9 of the Rules of Procedure