Supreme violated the Constitutional Court in the Drenica 2 case

“Constitutional Court decisions are binding for the judiciary and all persons and institutions of the Republic of Kosovo”, thus stated in chapter V. IIIth of the Constitution of the Republic of Kosovo- The Constitutional Court at Article 116 points 1, respectively.

On the “show, aired at RTK, it is said that despite this fact, the Supreme Court in the case of “Drenica 2” ignored the Constitutional Court Act. 5 months after the Constitutional Court ruling, the Supreme Court, consisting of judges Valdete Daka, Nesrin Lushta of Jelena Krivokapiq, issued a rejection act on the Drenica case 2 contrary to the Constitutional Court's act of judgment.

The founder of the Prof Constitution has also spoken of this case. Arsim Bajrami, who has said that the Constitutional Court is final and binding for the entire judicial system of the Republic of Kosovo.

The Constitutional Court's decisions under the Kosovo Constitution are final appeal and have binding effect on all state bodies of the Republic of Kosovo. In a concrete case, the Constitutional Court's decision has found that there are in the wake of violations of the right justice specified with Article 31 of the Constitutional Constitution of Kosovo and with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and this court ruling is final and binding for the entire judicial system of the Republic of Kosovo, which after this decision should completely review the case that the principle of presumption of innocence is enforced, and that the case should be done at all court levels that have dealt with this case in the first Supreme Supreme Court, then in a fundamental way that your parties are guaranteed constitutional rights, Bajramif says.

According to Professor Bajrami, the Supreme Court has only had to deal with the implementation of the Constitutional decision.

Even former Supreme Court Chairman Fyzullah Hasani says the Constitutional Court's decisions are binding, but that according to him, the case is to be returned to zero where violations have been found.

Well that's my opinion I don't want to comment, nor do I have the right to comment on the Constitutional Court's decision, that the JCK decision should be implemented, but the way it turned the case into the Supreme One I think is wrong. In the situation when the JCK considered that the first Stairway Court had violated standards from the panel formation convention, it was not in accordance with the law, and this has been in conflict with the principle or inequitable standard it had to annul the act of supreme appeals court and the first degree, and bring the case back to the court where violations have already been found, says Fyzulah.