Constitutional Court

The Applicant claims that Judgments of the regular courts have violated Article 31 [Right to Fair and Impartial Trial] of the Constitution, as well as Article 6 and Article 13 of the ECHR, In this case, the Court noted that the Judgment of the District Court in Peja, P, no, 278/2008, of 2 May 2012 was reasoned, and that this Court has not observed that during the trial there was any procedural violation that would result in violation of fundamental rights of the Applicant, guaranteed by the Constitution and European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, The Applicant’s request for witness hearing was approved, his authorized representative was heard, and he was given all the opportunities for defense throughout the case trial, Therefore, the Court concludes that the Applicant has neither built nor shown a prima facie case either on the merits or on the admissibility of the Referral, In all, the Court concludes that the Referral is inadmissible as manifestly ill-founded, The Court further concludes that, the referral being inadmissible, the request for interim measure is moot and thus it is rejected