Two Decades in Search of Justice

His substance for two decades is dragging through the courts.

The Earth we're talking about was my property with possessive sheets and copies of the plan. I bought it from a Serb, just like many others have. And I have informed the person who took this land and he hasn't heard me, and he's started building. September was, 1999 when he started building, I immediately announced it first and told him I had the possessive sheet and the copy of the plan. He said he gave it to the municipality, but I told the municipality to give it to you, but this isn't the property of the municipality, but mine”, Fazlija says.

Last year the Constitutional Court in Pec has approved the plaintiff's request, Ibrahim Fazlija. At this trial, this court forces indictees in the Pec municipality and Rrustem Berisha, to whom the municipality had given the property, to recognise ownership rights Ibrahim Fazliu, and at the same time, this estate is handed over to ownership.

But this isn't all about this stuff. The subject has returned to the Court of Appeals.

Commission “This court, through a written answer, has said the subject is in the Court of Appeals, according to a complaint against the Act of Basic Court in Pec.

Because, the whole subject is in the Court of Appeals, in the absence of material paperwork, we are unable to answer your questions”, the Constitutional Court in Pec says.

The show “

Meanwhile, contacted by the display “Listia”, Rrustem Berisha did not want to talk about the matter. According to him, any proposal for this subject is intervention in the court. But, Berisha has said that any decision taken by justice will respect him.

table tennis game

With this subject, courts have played the table tennis game, procrastinating its solution.

Research conducted by the show “ulstia” reveals that over 40 percent of subjects have been sent to retrial by the Court of Appeals, although the laws in power determine that Apelli has the right to judge these subjects himself, not to procrastinate justice.

Cases that return to the retrial must start from the beginning, which means it takes at least two to three years until decision-making in the first degree.

Hasan Shala, chairman of the Court of Appeals, says it is very wrong and dare not return a subject two-three times to the administrative body.

He says they have remarks that many judges do not work professionally. But, the institution he heads, Shala adds, is working to reduce the number of subjects that turn to retrial.

“The number of subjects that are canceled at the Court of Appeals is standard. Criminalally, some 15-16 percent turn into retrial that is at the standard level of the region. Up to 30 percent the maximum is that classes can become retrials. We have it at least 15 to 16 percent, we have 20, but when it always comes around 17-18 percent of the subjects become retrial, which is a very normal standard. However, the subjects I say the most have to be changed, not needed to return if possible, but there are times when we are forced to break because the actual state has not been proven. To prove the situation literally and completely, to produce specific evidence, then we have to turn the subject back to the first degree”, Shala says.

Reconversion to Retrial, Unacceptable

Redirecting the subjects to retrial, President of the Supreme Court of Kosovo Enver Peci considers it unacceptable. According to him, even laws in power clearly regulate this matter.

Civil subjects, Peci adds, cannot return to retrial more than twice.

I don't want to interfere in the disrepute of college judges about why they're turning the courses, but this is a phenomenon that we're constantly saying from the international factor. With us are legal regulations, I know the law writes about what a case might be. In the civil field, the law has specified that it can be destroyed twice too must provide clear reason, but in the third time it must decide on its own by law. If he has twice missed the first step, the third time he comes is not to return, but he has to decide the matter eventually. I can't connect as a phenomenon what's going on, but in this direction you have to strengthen either those first degree judges or those of the Court of Appeals”, he says.

According to the findings of the monitoring of the Kosovo Institute for Justice, the Court of Appeals, as the first-instance court, is a fair court.

Under the law, it has the authority to decide independently from the first-degree court.

According to the IKD, for this reason, the Court of Appeals must ban the practice of restoring subjects to restoration, unless this action is necessary.

Former head of the Supreme Court of Kosovo, Fejzullah Hasani, says that with the return of civil matter, the deadlines for law enforcement are also extended.

“Even this is a major problem in Kosovo's judiciary because it creates a vicious circle in the first instance, to the second degree, again to the first degree. Even here it would take in future amendments to create such mechanisms so as not to allow this kind of table tennis from the highest-level court to a lower-level court. I see this as a problem, and I regret to say that very often in courts at second level, separately at the Court of Appeals, without any reason being broken, the subjects return to the first-degree court, then they don't know what to do with that subject and decide again the same and return”, Hasani says.

Even after 22 years, Ibrahim Fazlijaj's property issue has not been finally resolved. On the land on which he claims it is his continues to live the people whom the Pec Community divided.

This is illegal for me. You shouldn't have. This was to be determined that the earth is mine, and even the copy of the plan is in my name, and there is no claim to this land. He's been complaining about how long it takes to the Court of Appeals. This lasts, from 1999 until now, 22 years for a land of”, he says.