Constitutional Court

KI137/20, Applicant: Ali Latifi as the alleged representative of M.S., Constitutional Review of the Judgment of the Supreme Court of Kosovo [….], of […] September 2020.

KI137/20, Decision to Reject the Referral of 11 November 2020, published 24 December 2020

Keywords: individual referral, incomplete referral, decision to reject

 The alleged representative challenged before the Constitutional Court the Judgment of the Supreme Court of Kosovo […], of […] September 2020, stating that through this Judgment the rights of person M.S., guaranteed by Articles 29 [Right to Liberty and Security], 36 [Right to Privacy], 37 [Right to Marriage and Family], 38 [Freedom of Belief, Conscience and Religion], 55 [Limitations on Fundamental Rights and Freedoms], 57 [General Principles], and 59 [Rights of Communities and their Members], of the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo (hereinafter: the Constitution), in conjunction with Article 6 (Right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter: ECHR) as well as the rights guaranteed by “International Labour Convention”, have been violated.

 Considering the fact that the Applicant’s Referral was incomplete, the Court requested the Applicant to complete his Referral by submitting to the Court a) the power of attorney signed by the person M.S.; b) complete again the Referral form; and c) to clarify accurately the acts of the public authorities challenged before the Court and the alleged violations according to the Constitution.

However, despite the specific request of the Court, the alleged representative has not submitted a valid power of attorney signed by M.S. authorizing him to represent the person M.S. before the Court as expressly required by Article 21 of the Law and Rule 32 (2) (c) of the Rules of Procedure. Furthermore, despite the Court’s request, he did not complete the Referral form and did not clarify his Referral as required by Articles 22.4 and 48 of the Law and Rule 32 (2) (e) and (h) of the Rules of Procedure.

Therefore, the Court considered that the Applicant’s Referral does not meet the procedural requirements for further review, due to its non-completion with supporting documentation, as required by Articles 48 and 22.4 of the Law on the Constitutional Court and Rules 32 (2) (c) and (h) and 35 (5) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court, therefore it decided to summarily reject the Referral.