The Supreme's final decisions, Qeyla: Failure to comply with judicial decisions is a criminal offence

That statement, he did when he was asked about the last three rulings of the Supreme Court- regarding the Independent Media Commission rule, about the order of the Civil Aviation Authority and at that time.W yFor Administrative Guide to Exploitation of Fiscal Electronic Devices, Fiscal Systems, and Fiscall Electronic software.

The Supreme has recently declared illegal and abolished changing KPM's Labour Rule. The third scale, with another decision, did the same with the Order for Change and Fulfillment of the Order on Internal Organising and Systemisation of Labour Countries in the Kosovo Republic Civil Aviation Authority, consisting that Every judicial act issued by a leader in the quality of the task delivery after a year's deadline is invalid.

Meanwhile, the third decision has to do with sEmpowering the Administrative Guide for Exploitation of Fiscal Electronic Equipment, Fiscal Systems and Fiscallic software, consisting that The exercise of deputy and ministerial functions at the same time is prohibited. As a result, even UA's extraction is illegal, I swear to justice.

I see more of it as the work of the judiciary that belongs to my decision making and professional courage to decide on issues that may have effects, or they may even have anti-probative voices and critical voices. In recent years, we have been following a constant threat language in relation to independent institutions and separate systems of power and in relation to the State Prosecutor, in relation to the judiciary and the Constitutional Court, even with other independent institutions, hand in hand even with the Independent Media Commission. We know the tendency of calling in daily reporting of the chairman of the Commission, which is ultimately a constitutional authority, so it was the country's independent constitutional commission”, said Celaj.

According to Celayt, we need to get used to pro and counter thinking, but decisions need to be implemented.

“in democracy must be used to deal with pro and counter reactions, as decisions apply. I consider that here the level of democracy is measured not in the language used, even though it may not be acceptable, and it can cause extreme polarisation between attitudes, public opinion, can also cause confusion in citizens, often even reactions that may be inappropriate”, Celay said.

As long as they remain at the level of public opinion-making statements, Celaj said such dekarats could be considered a threat, but not an intervention, because there are mechanisms that protect authorities in their work.

For example, judges have immunity, they are inconsistent in decision-making, unless it is found that a decision is illegal”, Celaj said.

According to him, failure to comply with judicial decisions constitutes arbitrary action and brings serious consequences to the rule of law.

If the court ruling does not apply, we enter another dimension, in violation that do not comply with democratic values. Failure to comply with decisions is a criminal offence, it's incriminating”, Celay said.

He also reacted to statements by some ministers who have said they would continue the post as MPs, naming this behaviour as overstepping competencies and violating the mandate. The ombudsman said democracy is violated when the implementation of those decisions is disputed.

If the Supreme Court ruling is not implemented, then we have a clear situation of violating rule of law. Execution is mandatory”, ombudsman concluded. /Periscope/