Published on 28 November 2022
FOURTH SECTION
Application no. 20641/20
Abdurahim SELIMI against Serbia
and 16 other applications
(see list appended)
communicated on 10 November 2022
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
These applications concern the suspension of pensions paid by the Serbian Pension Fund to applicants whose entitlements had been granted/paid by this fund’s branch office in Kosovo[1] before Kosovo’s placement under international administration in 1999.
Under Article 6 of the Convention the applicants complain about the length of the related and still ongoing administrative and judicial review proceedings.
Under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 they also complain about not being paid or fully paid their pensions since 1999, as well as the continuing absence of effective redress domestically.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Can the applicants respectively, in connection with their complaints about the length of proceedings raised under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, still claim to be victims of a violation of the Convention within the meaning of Article 34 given the decisions adopted by the Constitutional Court in this respect (see Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-107, ECHR 2006-V)?
2. Have the applicants respectively, regarding their complaints under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, exhausted all effective domestic remedies as required under Article 35 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, could a separate civil claim for damages, administrative and judicial review proceedings or a constitutional appeal be considered effective within the meaning of Article 35 § 1 of the Convention and in the specific circumstances of the present cases (see, mutatis mutandis, Vučković and Others v. Serbia (preliminary objection) [GC], nos. 17153/11 and 29 others, § 61, 25 March 2014; Grudić v. Serbia, no. 31925/08, § 48, 17 April 2012; Skenderi and Others v. Serbia (dec.), no. 15090/08, §§ 7-22, 68-70, 100 and 109, 4 July 2017; Aquilina v. Malta [GC], no. 25642/94, § 39, ECHR 1999-III; Jasinskis v. Latvia, no. 45744/08, §§ 50, 53 and 54, 21 December 2010; and Story and Others v. Malta, nos. 56854/13 and 2 others, § 80, 29 October 2015)?
3. Was the length of the respective pensions-related administrative and judicial review proceedings in the present cases in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement contained in Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Živaljević v. Montenegro, no. 17229/04, §§ 72-78, 8 March 2011)?
4. Has there been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention? In particular, was there a breach of this provision in that the respondent State had first suspended the payment of the applicants’ pensions, respectively, and then did not afford them “a reasonable opportunity of putting” their claims “to the responsible authorities for the purpose of effectively challenging” this interference (see Grudić and Others, §§ 77-83, cited above; Skenderi and Others, §§ 92-101, cited above; and Jokela v. Finland, no. 28856/95, § 45, ECHR 2002-IV, with further references)? Lastly, in this context, have the domestic authorities taken into account the relevant pensions-related regulations adopted in Kosovo?
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Case name
Lodged on
Applicant
Year of Birth
Place of Residence
Nationality
Represented by
1.
20641/20
Selimi v. Serbia
22/04/2020
Abdurahim SELIMI
1939
Gnjilane
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
2.
20645/20
Drešaj v. Serbia
16/04/2020
Smajl DREŠAJ
1943
Pristina
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
3.
28335/20
Šalja v. Serbia
05/06/2020
Avdi ŠALJA
1938
Pec
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
4.
28645/20
Gaši v. Serbia
30/06/2020
Ramadan GAŠI
1940
Prizren
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
5.
31135/20
Imeri v. Serbia
02/07/2020
Hasan IMERI
1933
Prizren
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
6.
31194/20
Baša v. Serbia
08/07/2020
Špresa BAŠA
1941
Peć
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
7.
31718/20
Kicaj v. Serbia
15/06/2020
Murselj KICAJ
1941
Prizren
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
8.
36062/20
Mulabazi v. Serbia
10/08/2020
Haki MULABAZI
1944
Orahovac
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
9.
42874/20
Kačaniku v. Serbia
14/08/2020
Đulizar KAČANIKU
1944
Prizren
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
10.
44401/20
Foki v. Serbia
22/09/2020
Refki FOKI
1934
Prizren
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
11.
45205/20
Rama v. Serbia
18/09/2020
Aćif RAMA
1938
Prizren
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
12.
45259/20
Šukri v. Serbia
29/09/2020
Ismet ŠUKRI
1941
Prizren
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
13.
48685/20
Ljaljoši v. Serbia
29/10/2020
Šemsidin LJALJOŠI
1943
Prizren
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
14.
55149/20
Šalja v. Serbia
04/12/2020
Maljuš ŠALJA
1934
Orahovac
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
15.
17287/21
Karjagdiu v. Serbia
25/03/2021
Nazlji KARJAGDIU
1943
Prizren
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
16.
22489/21
Baša v. Serbia
21/04/2021
Ramadan BAŠA
1935
Peć
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
17.
37387/21
Gaši v. Serbia
30/06/2021
Đimšit GAŠI
1945
Prizren
Serbian
Refija GARIBOVIĆ
[1] All reference to Kosovo, whether to the territory, institutions or population, in this text shall be understood in full compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo.