Constitutional Court

KI101/20, Applicant: Shqipërim Ademaj, Constitutional review of Decision no. 15/2020 of the Ministry of Justice, of 21 February 2020

KI101/20, resolution on inadmissibility, of 12 April 2021, published on 30 April 2021

Keywords: individual referral, values, right to a fair trial, equality before the law, right to work and exercise profession, premature referral, inadmissible referral

The Applicant challenged before the Constitutional Court, the Decision no. 15/2020 of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kosovo (hereinafter: the MoJ) of 21 February 2020, concerning the annulment of the Notary examination, by alleging violation of the rights guaranteed by Articles: 7 [Values], 10 [Economy], 24 [Equality before the Law], 31 [Right to Trial Fair and Impartial], 49 [Right to Work and Exercise the Profession], 53 [Interpretation of Human Rights Provisions], 99 [Procedures], 119 [General Principles] of the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo (hereinafter: the Constitution), as well as Article 14 [Prohibition of discrimination] and Article 1 of Protocol no. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter: the ECHR).

In the present case, the Court reiterated that before addressing a Referral to the Court, the Applicants must exhaust all procedural opportunities, in regular administrative or judicial proceedings, to prevent violations of human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, or if any, to remedy such a violation of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Therefore, the prevention of violations of the Constitution and the ECHR and the correction of possible violations in accordance with Articles 101.3 and 53 of the Constitution, must be done beforehand by the regular courts and not directly by the Constitutional Court. The Court further assessed that the Applicant has not provided any argument and evidence that the used legal remedy at his disposal is inadequate and ineffective, in terms of the above provisions of the Constitution, the Law and the Rules of Procedure (see, inter alia, the case of Constitutional Court no. KI116/14, Applicant Fadil Selmanaj, Resolution on Inadmissibility, of 26 January 2015, paragraphs 45-46 and the references cited therein).

Therefore, the Court finds that the Applicant’s Referral is premature and does not meet the admissibility criteria since the Applicant has not exhausted the legal remedies pursuant to Article 113.7 of the Constitution, Article 47 of the Law and Rule 36 (1) (b) of the Rules of Procedure, and as such, the Referral must be declared inadmissible (see, inter alia, the case of Constitutional Court no. KI07/15, Applicant Shefki Zogiani, Resolution on Inadmissibility, of 8 December 2016, paragraph 62, and Case No. KI30 /17, Applicant Muharrem Nuredini, Resolution on Inadmissibility, of 7 August 2017, paragraph 38).