Constitutional Court

In this case there is no evidence that the Applicant has made any attempt to appeal the challenged decision and therefore the court considered that the applicant has not exhausted all legal remedies provided by law, As the court indicated in Case No. KI-41/11, AAB-RIINVEST University against the Government of the Republic of Kosovo and in this case has reteraited that the reasoning for the exhaustion rule as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights pursuant to the Article 53 of the Constitution is to afford authorities concerned, including the Courts, the opportunity to prevent or put right the alleged violation of the Constitution, The rule is based on the assumption that the Kosovo legal order will provide an effective remedy for the violation of constitutional rights, and mentioned the case ECHR, Selmouni against France, no. 25803/94, Decision of 28 July 1999, The Referral is rejected as inadmissible on the basis that the Applicant has failed to exhaust all legal remedies available to him, as it is required by Article 113.7 of the Constitution, Article 47.2 of law and Rule 36.1 (a) of the Rules of Procedure