Our project facilitated a two-day workshop with legal advisors of the Constitutional Court of Kosovo*[1], focusing on key aspects of the right to a fair trial and the right to peaceful enjoyment of property. It was the concluding thematic workshop in the project aimed at further enhancing the Constitutional Court’s capacity to align its jurisprudence with the standards and evolving case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). An engaging and interactive discussions were facilitated by two international experts, who brought academic experience and judicial practice of the ECtHR and Constitutional Court of Latvia.

During the first day, participants examined the structure and scope of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), including both its civil and criminal limbs, and discussed essential elements such as access to court, fairness of proceedings, public hearings, reasonable time of proceedings, and the execution of judgments. Special emphasis was placed on the concepts of a tribunal established by law, and the requirements of independence and impartiality, in light of recent ECtHR jurisprudence. Participants also discussed specific elements of the criminal limb of Article 6 ECHR including presumption of innocence and rights of defence.

The second day focused on the complex framework of the Article 1 Protocol 1 (A1P1) ECHR, beginning with the definition of “possessions” and the different categories protected under the Convention. Participants analysed interferences with property rights through the ECtHR’s three-rules approach, covering issues of lawfulness, public interest, proportionality, and the role of adequate compensation. The workshop also addressed positive obligations of states, enforcement proceedings, and the interaction between property rights and other rights protected by Convention, including right to fair trial, right to private and family life, and prohibition of discrimination.  

Drawing on case-studies and comparative examples, the workshop provided an opportunity for legal advisors to strengthen practical skills in applying ECHR standards to constitutional review of individual referrals. The discussions highlighted recurring challenges in domestic cases, including social-welfare entitlements, regulatory measures affecting commercial activity, and the core topics of expropriation for public purpose and de facto expropriation. Special attention was given to urban and regional planning policies, where interferences do not always amount to deprivation but may still impose substantial restrictions requiring a balanced justification.

The final session focused on the overview of the most recent developments in ECtHR caselaw under A1P1, focusing on trends in cases concerning business regulation, environmental restrictions, and State liability for excessive delays in enforcement. These updates were especially well received, as several participants identified clear parallels with matters currently pending before the Constitutional Court of Kosovo*. The seminar concluded with a synthesis of the central principles and an open discussion of how the Constitutional Court might further integrate ECtHR reasoning into its practice.