Albanians win first legal case in international court

TIRANA, Aug. 22 – In a first case noted till now Albanian citizens Njazi Beshiri, Liri Kaba, Xhilda Koka and Sair Preza won a case against their country’s government for a villa and two adjacent plots of land that were taken by the authorities. The applicants were awarded, jointly, 120,000euros in respect of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and 6,000 euros for costs and expenses. The villa fell into disrepair and the state granted the applicants’ father a compulsory loan for its renovation. As he failed to repay the debt, the villa was nationalized. In 1996, under the Property Restitution and Compensation Act, the applicants lodged a claim with the Tirana Commission on Property Restitution and Compensation. The Commission held that the nationalization of the applicants’ father’s villa had been illegal and awarded the applicants the villa and one of the plots of land.
On 11 April 2001 Tirana Court of Appeal declared the Commission’s decision null and void. It held that the nationalization of the applicants’ father’s villa had not been unlawful and, consequently, the applicants could not benefit from the process of restitution of property. It upheld the applicants’ property rights over the two adjacent plots of land, however, and decided that they had a right to receive compensation. The applicants maintained that they did not receive any compensation. The Court considered that the problem raised by the applicants had to be considered in the context of the process of transition in Albania from a communist regime to one compatible with the rule of law and a market economy.
Such a process was naturally fraught with difficulties. The Court noted that the judgment in question was not enforced for over five years, a situation for which the Albanian Government had not provided any plausible justification. Citing a lack of state funds, as the Government had done, did not justify the situation. The European Court of Human Rights therefore held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article6 Ǡ1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.