Constitutional Court

KI222/19, Applicant: Nexhdet Hoti, Constitutional review of Judgment [Ac. No. 2720/16] of the Court of Appeals of Kosovo of 8 October 2019

KI222/19, Resolution on Inadmissibility, of 12 March 2020, published on 16 April 2020

Keywords: individual referral, right to fair and impartial trial, manifestly ill-founded referral   

The Applicant before the Constitutional Court challenged the Judgment [Ac. No. 2720/16] of the Court of Appeals, of 8 October 2019, which rejected as ungrounded the Applicant’s appeal against the Judgment [C. No. 447/13] of the Basic Court in Gjakova, of 31 May 2016.

By Judgment [C. No. 447/13] of the Basic Court in Gjakova, the statement of claim of the Kosovo Energy Corporation against the Applicant was approved, where it was stated that the Applicant for a long period of time until 30 December 2008, in order to bring unlawful benefit to himself, used the electrical energy in an authorized manner and obliged the Applicant to pay the amount of 2,791.93, to the Kosovo Energy Corporation, in the name of compensation of damage, with the relevant legal interest.

Among other things in the Judgment [C. No. 447/13] of the Basic Court in Gjakova regarding the Applicant’s allegation that the request was statute-barred, the Basic Court reasoned that the statute of limitations of the claim is related to the criminal offense, which was committed by the Applicant himself, and the deadline for filing such a claim had not expired.

The Applicant alleged that the challenged decision was rendered in violation of his fundamental rights and freedoms established in Article 31 [Right to Fair and Impartial Trial] of the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo.

The Applicant alleged that the regular courts in his case did not apply the Law No. 05/L-043 on Public Debt Forgiveness, namely Article 4 thereof. The Applicant further alleged that this provision clearly specifies the time which includes the forgiveness of debts and penalties and which includes the period up to 31 December 2008, while the Applicant is obliged to pay for the damage caused from an unidentified date until 30 December 2008.

The Court found that the Applicant did not substantiate the allegations that the relevant proceedings were in any way unfair or arbitrary and that the challenged decision violated the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution.

The Court, in accordance with Rule 39 (2) of the Rules of Procedure, declared the Applicant’s Referral inadmissible as manifestly ill-founded on constitutional basis.