Constitutional Court

KI105 / 17, Applicant: Pashk Mirashi, Constitutional Review of the Decision of the Court of Appeals, Ac, no. 3238/2016 dated 24 April 2017, Judgment of the Supreme Court of Kosovo, Pml. no. 228/2016, dated 20 October 2016 and the Judgment of the Court of Appeals, PAKR no. 231/2015, of 6 August 2015

Key words: individual referral, manifestly ill-founded referral, refusal by summary procedure

The Applicant filed a referral to the Court requesting the Constitutional Review of the decision of the Court of Appeals Ac, No. 3238/2016 dated 24 April 2017 issued in the Enforcement Procedure, and two (2) other judgments issued in criminal proceedings, respectively , of the Judgment of the Supreme Court of Kosovo, Pml. no. 228/2016, dated 20 October 2016 and the Judgment of the Court of Appeals, PAKR no. 231/2015 dated 6 August 2015, which were the subject of the review of the  Court in Case KI07/ 17.

The Applicant was found guilty of a number of criminal offences, and consequently, in addition to the punishment of imprisonment, he was also obliged to provide compensation in an amount of 204,920.98 Euros, to Banka Kreditore in Prishtina/BKP (Credit Bank of Prishtina) as the injured party. Further, the BKP, based on the Judgment of the basic Court in Prishtina, which had become final, submitted a proposal to the private enforcement agent for the enforcement of the debt against the applicant. As such, the enforcement procedure had originated from the court decisions in criminal proceedings.

Following the conduct and completion of the proceedings before the regular courts regarding the enforcement case, the Applicant in his referral filed with the Constitutional Court, claims that his rights guaranteed by the Constitution, namely the right to a fair and impartial trial, the right to legal remedies and the right to judicial protection of rights, have been violated , by referring to: (i) the same allegations which the Applicant had filed in his earlier Referral in Case KI07 / 17; and (ii) the allegation that the enforcement procedure must be treated as an integral part of the trial for the purposes of Article 6 of the ECHR, inter alia by stating that the regular courts have allowed the execution of a final decision which has been issued contrary to the legal and constitutional provisions and international instruments.

Having referred to the Applicant’s allegations, the Court summarily  rejected the allegations relating to Judgment of the Supreme Court[Pml.nr.228 / 2016]  dated 20 October 2016 and Judgment of the Court of Appeals [PAKR no. 231/2015] dated 6 August 2015 , issued in criminal proceedings, as a repetition of the Applicant’s Referral in case KI07 / 17.

Finally, as regards the enforcement procedure, in relation to the Decision of the Court of Appeals [Ac. Nr. 3238/2016] dated 24 April 2017, the Court found that it is inadmissible because the Applicant did not support the allegations that the relevant proceedings conducted by the regular courts in the enforcement procedure have in any way been unfair or arbitrary, and that the challenged decision has violated the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and the ECHR.