Suspension of sentencing of revised decisions, legal provision and enforcement in practice

Kllapi Sotir and Shehaj Enerjeta
Additional contact information
Kllapi Sotir: Prosecution against Organized Crime and Corruption
Shehaj Enerjeta: Administrative Appeal Court of Tirana, Albania

European Journal of Economics, Law and Social Sciences, 2025, vol. 9, issue 1, 97-104

Abstract: The review of a final criminal decision is an extraordinary appeal instrument, because it does not follow the usual rules of appeal. This is related to subjects, deadlines and cases. The review, at first glance, seems to be a violation of the principle of legal certainty, because it is intended to review, retry a final decision, but in fact it is the opposite. The purpose of the review is essentially that of effective justice, that justice which must be done at all times, irrespective of the fact that the sentence imposed by the final decision may be fully served or extinguished. The review institute has undergone legal reforms in order to increase efficiency and respond to the needs of time. The legal reform of this institute aimed to expand the ratifications, adding in addition to the issues of fact and issues of law, but also issues of the right to a fair legal process. The legal reform was also in line with the evolving jurisdiction of the ECHR, but also of Albania’s Constitutional Court. Along with the reform for review, changes were also made to the institute of suspension of the execution of the final sentence, when the request for review of the decision is accepted. Suspension as an institute seems an effective means when it comes to suspending a final decision, which should not be executed because it is being reviewed. The lawmaker has left the implementation of this institute in the hands of the court, which on a case-by-case basis can assess whether it can impose the suspension or not? This increased discretion of the court and the lack of a clear legal regulation has brought problems in practice, with different interpretations of this institute. From practice we have noticed that often the criteria for deciding whether to suspend or not when the request for review is accepted is objective, but there have been no subjective criteria. In these conditions, arises the need to make a clear legal adjustment as to when the suspension should be imposed and when not, or to have a unification of practice by Albania’s High Court, in relation to legal cases as to when it should be accepted or not and what legal criteria should be considered in approving or rejecting this request.

Keywords: review of the verdict; suspension of execution; conviction (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.2478/ejels-2025-0009 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:vrs:ejelss:v:9:y:2025:i:1:p:97-104:n:1009

DOI: 10.2478/ejels-2025-0009

Access Statistics for this article

European Journal of Economics, Law and Social Sciences is currently edited by Lena Hoffman

More articles in European Journal of Economics, Law and Social Sciences from Sciendo
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Peter Golla ().