Constitutional Court

The Applicants had filed a referral pursuant to the Article 113.7 of the Constitution, alleging that all judicial instances with their decisions have violated their constitutional rights, and the applicants had not specified the constitutional provision by which they alleged their rights have been violated, The Court in this case referred to in Article 48 of the Law and Rule 36.2 items b) and d) of the Rules of Procedure. In this respect, the Court finds that the Applicant did not show why and how the Supreme Court violated their rights, guaranteed by the Constitution and the European Convention nor have they provided evidence for the alleged violations of the constitutional rights, The Constitutional Court cannot find why and how the relevant proceedings in the Supreme Court were in any way unfair or arbitrary and regarding this mentions the case Shub against Lithuania, ECHR Decision on Admissibility of Application No. 17064/06 of 30 June 2009, Court finaly finds that the Referral does not meet the criteria of Article 48 of the Law and the Rule 36.2 (b) and (d) of the Rules of Procedure, therefore, as such is manifestly ill-founded