Constitutional Court

KI68/17 Applicant: Hysni Bytyqi, Constitutional review of Decision Rev. no. 39/2017 of the Supreme Court of 20 April 2017

KI 68/17, Resolution on inadmissibility of 19 April 2018, published on 11 June 2018

Key words: individual referral, constitutional review of the challenged decision of the Supreme Court, manifestly ill-founded

The Referral is based on Article 113 of the Constitution, Article 47 of Law no. 03/L-121 on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kosovo, and Rule 29 of the Rules of Procedure of the Constitutional Court.

On 25 October 2013, the Applicant filed a lawsuit with the Basic Court in Prizren- Branch in Suhareka against S.S. to seek compensation of non-material damage due to insult and defamation.

Afterwards, the court proceedings went through all the stages of regular procedure.

This judicial dispute was finally decided on by the decision of the Supreme Court which rejected the Applicant’s request for revision as ungrounded.

The Applicant alleges that the Supreme Court denied his right to a fair and impartial trial guaranteed by Articles 31 and 32 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo, and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Court notes that the Applicant has merely expressed his dissatisfaction with the outcome of the proceedings in which the challenged decision was rendered, and provided no relevant reasons to justify his allegation that the constitutional rights which he invokes were, in any way, violated during these proceedings.

The Court notes that the Applicant did not demonstrate that the relevant proceedings had been, in any way, unfair or arbitrary. In fact, the Applicant did not substantiate with evidence his allegation that his rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and ECHR were violated by the challenged decisions.

Therefore, the Court considers that the Applicant’s Referral did not meet the admissibility requirements established in the Constitution, further foreseen by the Law, and determined by the Rules of Procedure.

The Court, therefore, considers that the Referral is manifestly ill-founded on a constitutional basis and is to be declared inadmissible.