Constitutional Court

The applicant filed the referral pursuant to Article 113.7 of the Constitution of Kosovo, thereby claiming that his constitutional rights were violated by the judgment of the Supreme Court of Kosovo, which approved the KEK complaint, thereby annulling the judgment of the District Court, and thereby supporting the dismissal of the applicant from working relations with KEK. The applicant claimed that the Supreme Court had violated his right to work, and constitutional rights guaranteed by Articles 49 and 54 of the Constitution of Kosovo.

The Court found that the referral of applicant was inadmissible, pursuant to Rule 56.2 of the Rules of Procedure, since the applicant had failed in submitting any prima facie evidence demonstrating such violation of constitutional rights. The Court argued its decision thereby reminding that it is not its role, according to the Constitution, to act as a Court of Appeal, or a fourth instance court on the decisions rendered by regular courts. By quoting the ECtHR decision in the case of Shub v. Lithuania, the Court further reasoned that after the review of general proceedings before regular courts, it did not find any indication that the general proceedings have been unfair or flawed with arbitrarity, and that the Supreme Court had provided sufficient reasons in finding the complaints of applicants ungrounded. Due to the reasons provided above, the Court decided to find the referral of Applicants as inadmissible