Salih Mustafa declared complaints unacceptable

In the accord, the Constitutional Court Chamber declared a number of its complaints unacceptable, while others dropped them.

In the DPS report, Mustafa reportedly complained of violations of his right to justice as a result of the lack of reasoning by the Judicial Chamber and the Appeals Panel over his guilty verdict on unlawful murder.

In this regard, the Constitutional Court Chamber did not state actual or legal errors in the reasoning of criminal rooms that would question their findings. It was also stressed that the confrontational process had been good for Mr. Mustafa in this regard. Consequently, the complaint was declared unacceptable”.

“Z. Mustafa also complained that the Supreme Court panel had not accurately identified the softer legal provision for his sentence when it ruled out that the law that had been in force at the time of the commission of criminal acts. In this regard, the Constitutional Court Chamber recalled that on the basis of Article 162ʹ1 of the Constitution of Kosovo, the Specialised Chambers function in accordance with their legal framework within Kosovo's judicial system. Consequently, fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed in Chapter II of the Constitution apply in the context of this autonomous framework. It was also found that the only binding law in force regarding the sentence in Specialised Chambers is Law No. 05L-053 for Specialised Chambers and the Specialised Prosecutor's Office, which does not require juries to implement Kosovo's other laws in granting sentences for international crimes, but only to take into account those laws. That's why it was found that Mr. Mustafa for violations of the Constitution of Kosovo or of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Foundation Freedoms, did not stand”, says the report, deankosova broadcast Periscopi.

Among other things, Mustafa reportedly also complained that the Supreme Court panel's decision to allow the Victims Protector to present written answers to his request for protection of legitimacy had violated his right judgment rights.

The Constitutional Court Chamber found that nothing in Mustaf's complaint created the perception of violating a constitutional right. The room also stressed that Mr. Mustafa had not raised this problem before the Supreme Court panel and subsequently had not exploited all effective means under the law in this regard. As a result, the complaint was declared unacceptable”, said in the DSF report.