Constitutional Court

KI65/20 and KI 66/20, Applicants: Jovica Stanisavljević and Stojmirka Stanisavljević, Constitutional review of Judgment AC-I-16-0101-A22 of the Appellate Panel of the Special Chamber of the Supreme Court of Kosovo on the Privatization Agency of Kosovo Related Matters of 14 February 2020  

KI65/20 and KI 66/20, resolution on inadmissibility of 10 December  2020, published on 15 januar 2021 

Keywords: individual referral, right to a fair trial, resolution on inadmissibility

Based on the case file, it follows that both applicants worked in the socially-owned enterprise 14 Nentori, which was privatized by the Kosovo Privatization Agency.

According to the allegations, the Applicants did not know that the privatization procedure of the enterprise 17 Nëntori was initiated, and therefore, they were not included in the list of employees who exercised the right to a share of 20% of the privatization.

The Applicants filed a complaint stating to the Specialized Panel of the SCSC that they missed the deadline to file a complaint against the final list because they were not notified that the privatization process had begun.

The Specialized Panel of the SCSC rejected the request stating that the complaints were filed after 3 years, which is contrary to the UNMIK regulation.

The Applicants filed appeals with the SCSC Appellate Panel, alleging the same appealing allegations.

The Appellate Panel of the SCSC rejected the appeals of both applicants, stating that the appeals were filed out of the time limit.

Therefore, the Applicants submitted the Referral to the Constitutional Court stating that  the decisions of the Specialized Panel and of the Appellate Panel violated their rights and freedoms guaranteed by Article 24 [Equality Before the Law], Article 31 [Right to Fair and Impartial Trial], and Article 49 [Right to Work and Exercise Profession], of the Constitution as well as Article 6 (Right to a fair trial), Article 14 (Prohibition of discrimination) and Article 1 of Protocol 12 (General prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention of Human Rights.

Based on the case file and the Applicant’s allegations, the Court concluded that the Referrals are manifestly ill-founded on constitutional basis, and are to be declared inadmissible in accordance with Rule 39 (2) of the Rules of Procedure.