Constitutional Court

KI156/18 Applicant: Verica (Aleksić) Vasić and Vojislav Čađenović, constitutional review of Judgment AC-I-16-0207-A0001- A0006 of the Appellate Panel of the Special Chamber of the Supreme Court on Privatization Agency of Kosovo Related Matters of 31 May 2018

 KI156/18, resolution on inadmissibility of 20 June 2019, published on 17 July 2019.

Keywords: individual referral, constitutional review of the challenged judgment of the Special Chamber of the Supreme Court, manifestly ill-founded

The Referral is based on Article 113.7 of the Constitution, Articles 22 [Processing Referrals] and 47 [Individual Requests] of Law No. 03/L-121 on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kosovo, (hereinafter: the Law), and Rule 32 [Filing of Referrals and Replies] of the Rules of Procedure of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kosovo (hereinafter: the Rules of Procedure)..

On 10 March 2012, the Privatization Agency of Kosovo published the provisional list of employees who acquired the right to a share of 20% from the privatization of the SOE “Metohija remont“.

The Applicants were not on that list. Considering that they were damaged, the Applicants filed an appeal with the Specialized Panel of the Special Chamber of the Supreme Court, by this appeal the Applicants requested the PAK to include them in the list of employees who acquired the right to a 20% share.

The Specialized Panel rejected the Applicants’ appeal as ungrounded because of the lack of material evidence, specifically the labor booklet or the register of employees.

The Applicants filed an appeal with the Appellate Panel against the judgment of the Specialized Panel.

The Appellate Panel rejected the Applicants’ appeal and upheld the decision of the Specialized Panel.

The Applicants claim that the regular courts have erroneously interpreted the facts and have erroneously interpreted the law, which caused the violation of Articles 24, 31 and 46 of the Constitution as well as Article 14 and Article 6 of the ECHR.

The Court notes that the Applicants did not substantiate that the challenged decisions violated their rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and the ECHR.

The Court considers that the Applicants have not presented evidence indicating that the decisions of the regular courts have in any way caused a constitutional violation of their rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Therefore, the Court considers, on constitutional basis, that the Referral is manifestly ill-founded and is to be declared inadmissible.