Constitutional Court

KI08/19, Applicant: Gafurr Haziri, Constitutional review of Judgment PML.No.258/2018 of the Supreme Court of Kosovo of 6 November 2018

KI08/19, Resolution on inadmissibility, of 10 November 2020, published on 5 January 2021

Keywords: individual referral, right to fair and impartial trial, manifestly ill-founded referral

The Basic Court in Gjilan-Branch in Viti by Judgment P. No. 353/2015, found the Applicant guilty of committing the criminal offense “endangering public traffic” under Article 378, paragraph 6 in conjunction with paragraph 1 of the CCRK and sentenced him to a fine in the amount of 200 (two hundred) euro. The Basic Court, in its Judgment, stated that it based its decision, among other things, on two traffic expertise (one private expertise and the other at the request of the Basic Court) conducted in relation to this issue and on the basis of super-expertise. Following the Applicant’s appeal to the Court of Appeals, the Court of Appeals rejected the Applicant’s appeal as ungrounded.

The Applicant addressed the Office of the Chief State Prosecutor with a request for protection of legality, against the Judgment of the Court of Appeals, and the latter by the notification rejected the request of the Applicant for filing a request for protection of legality.

The Applicant alleged that the challenged decision violated his rights guaranteed by Article 31 [Right to Fair and Impartial Trial] of the Constitution.

In essence, the Applicant before the Constitutional Court alleged that the Basic Court found the Applicant guilty, although according to him, by material evidence it has been established that he is not guilty of this criminal offense.

The Constitutional Court considered that the Applicant did not substantiate the allegations that the respective proceedings were in any way unfair or arbitrary and that the challenged decision violated his rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. The Constitutional Court concluded that in accordance with Article 113.7 of the Constitution, Article 20 of the Law, and based on Rule 39 (2) of the Rules of Procedure, the Applicant’s Referral is manifestly ill-founded.