Constitutional Court

KI105/20, Applicant: Shani Rexhepi, Constitutional review of Judgment Pml. nr. 115/2020 of the Supreme Court of Kosovo, of 20 May 2020

KI 105/20, Resolution on Inadmissibility of 25 March 2021, published on 6 April 2021

Key words: individual referral, criminal procedure, manifestly ill-founded referral

The Referral was submitted by Shani Rexhepi, represented by Ramiz Krasniqi, a lawyer from Prishtina.

The Applicant challenged Judgment PML.nr.115/2020 of the Supreme Court, of 20 May 2020, alleging that it was rendered in violation of his fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by Article 31 [Right to Fair and Impartial Trial] of the Constitution, in conjunction with Article 6 (Right to a fair trial) of the ECHR. The Applicant in essence states that the principle of equality of arms has been violated and that the decision of the Supreme Court has not been sufficiently reasoned. In this regard, the Applicant alleges that “the Supreme Court in its decision did not take into account at all his request to review and verify correctly and accurately all the evidence contained in the case file”.

With regard to these allegations, the Court first noted that as a general rule , the allegations of erroneous determination of factual situation and erroneous interpretation of the law, allegedly made by the regular courts, are related to the field of legality and, as such, do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court. Therefore, in principle, their assessment is not a task of the Constitutional Court but of the regular courts (See, accordingly, the Court Cases No. KI06/17, Applicant L.G. and five others, Resolution on Inadmissibility, 25 October 2016, paragraph 36 Case KI122/16, Applicant Riza Dembogaj, Judgment of 30 May 2018, paragraph 56; and KI49/19 Applicant Limak Kosovo International Airport SH.A., “Adem Jashari” , Resolution on Inadmissibility of 10 October 2019, paragraph 47). 

The Court has consistently held this view, and has clearly stated states that it is not the role of this Court to review the findings of the regular courts as to the factual situation and the application of substantive or procedural law (see decisions of the Constitutional Court: KI06/17, cited above, paragraph 38; KI122/16, cited above, paragraph 58; and KI49/19, cited above, paragraph 49).

In the light of these explanations and taking into account the allegation raised by the Applicant and the facts submitted by him, the Court considered that the Applicant has not sufficiently proved and substantiated his claim of violation of the fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by Article 31 of the Constitution in conjunction with Article 6 of the ECHR. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 39 (2) of the Rules of Procedure, the Referral was declared manifestly ill-founded on constitutional basis, and consequently inadmissible.