Constitutional Court

KI31/21, Applicant: Albert Krasniqi, Constitutional review of Judgment PML.no.224/2020 of the Supreme Court of Kosovo, of 17 September 2020 

KI31/21, Resolution on inadmissibility, of 5 May 2021, published on 24 May 2021

Keywords: Individual referral, criminal charge, guilty plea, falsified document, veteran’s status

The Basic Prosecution in Peja had filed the Indictment [PP/II. no. 946/2019] against the Applicant, in relation to the criminal offence from paragraph 2 of Article 403 [Legalization of false content] .The Applicant was suspected that on 9 February 2017, in the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare – Department of Families of Martyrs, War Invalids and Civilian Victims – Office in Peja (hereinafter: the MLSW), in order to benefit the salary of the veteran’s status, had presented the falsified document (Certificate no.31982/2016, of 15 June 2016), that he was allegedly a KLA veteran, on which occasion he had caused material damage of 3740.00 euros to the MLSW. The Basic Court in Peja, after the Applicant had pleaded guilty to the criminal offence which he was charged with by Judgment [P.no.467/2019], pronounced him guilty, and sentenced him to 6 (six) months of imprisonment, a sentence that was  converted to a fine of 1200.00 euros, by pronouncing on him also an accessory punishment for compensating the MLSW in the amount of 3740.00 euros due to the damage caused as a result of the commission of the criminal offence. The judgment of the Basic Court was confirmed by the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court. The Applicant alleged before the Court that the Judgment [PML.no.224/2020] of the Supreme Court, which had rejected the Applicant’s request for protection of legality, as ungrounded, violates his rights guaranteed by 31 [Right to  Fair and Impartial Trial] of the Constitution, in conjunction with Article 6 (Right to a fair trial) of the ECHR.

In this context, the Court notes that the Applicant’s allegations for violation of his constitutional rights, namely a violation of the right to a fair trial, concern the way the regular courts have interpreted the CCRK and CPCRK, and the way they assessed the evidence during the examination of his case, specifically in relation to the allegations that: a) the regular courts should have not imposed an accessory punishment on the Applicant – the restitution of the amount of 3740.00 euros to the injured party MLSW, instead they should have  instructed the MLSW to a civil litigation; b) The challenged decision is incomprehensible, self-contradictory  and contrary to the procedural provisions of the CPCRK. In this context, the Court assessed that the reasoning of the regular courts, referring to the Applicant’s allegations for violation of the criminal legislation, is clear and, after having reviewed all the proceedings, the Court also found that the proceedings before the regular courts have not been unfair or arbitrary.  Therefore, the Court considers that the Applicant has failed to prove that the challenged decision has violated his right to fair and impartial trial, guaranteed by Article 31 of the Constitution and Article 6 of the ECHR. Consequently, the Court finds that the Applicant’s Referral as regards the allegation for violation of Article 31 of the Constitution and Article 6 of the ECHR is manifestly ill-founded on constitutional basis.

The Court also rejected the Applicant’s request for a hearing session.