Constitutional Court

KI 71/19, Applicant Avni Vula, Constitutional review of the non-enactment of the Law on Property Restitution and the Law on Treatment with Property (Official Journal of the DFY No. 36/45) as well as Amendments and Supplementation to this Law (Official Journal of FPRY No. 64/46)

KI 71/19, Resolution on Inadmissibility of 15 January 2020, published on 7. februara 2020.

Keywords: individual referral, actio popularis, restitution return of property, unauthorized party, inadmissible referral 

The Applicant requested the Court (i) the obligation of Kosovar institutions to enact a law on return-restitution of property and (ii) to declare null and void all laws, regulations, decrees and court decisions regarding the property rights of the former Yugoslavia from 1945 to the present day.

The Court reiterated that the Constitution of Kosovo does not provide for an actio popularis, meaning that individuals cannot complain in abstract or challenge directly actions or failure to act by public authorities. The Constitution of Kosovo provides recourse to individuals regarding actions or failure to act by public authorities only within the scope provided by Articles 113.1 and 113.7 of the Constitution.

The Court noted that there is no special law in the Republic of Kosovo on the property restitution and, consequently, the claims for restitution of property cannot be based on the guarantees provided by Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the ECHR or, mutatis mutandis, in the safeguards of Article 46 [Protection of Property] of the Constitution. The Court further reiterated that the property restitution claims cannot be considered to constitute a “legitimate expectation” as long as there is no law on property restitution.

The Court concluded that the Referral on constitutional basis is inadmissible, because it has not been lawfully submitted by an authorized party, as established in Article 113.1 of the Constitution and further specified by Rule 39 (1) (a) of the Rules of Procedure.