Strasbourg, 7 October 1999

Restricted
CDL (99) 61
Engl. only

Wording of the Law in Effect

The draft of the Amendments

To introduce the following Amendments to the Constitutional Court Law (the bulletin of the Saeima and the Cabinet of Ministers No.14, 1996; No.20, 1997):

1. To substitute throughout the whole text of the Law the words "institution or official who issued the act which is disputed" with words " institution or official who issued the disputable act"

(2) The Constitutional Court shall hear cases pursuant to the Constitution and this Law only.

2. To express the second Part of Article 1 in the following wording:

"(2) The Constitutional Court shall hear cases pursuant to the Constitution, this Law and the Procedural Law of the Constitutional Court".

3. One and the same person may not be a judge of the Constitutional Court for more than 10 years concurrently.

Article 8. Resignation or retirement of a judge of the Constitutional Court before expiry of his/her term of office

1. A judge of the Constitutional Court shall retire from office of a judge upon reaching the age of 70.

3.To supplement the third Part of Article 7 and the first Part of

Article 8 with words "with an exception of cases provided for in the third and fourth Parts of Article 11".

Upon termination of authority of office of a judge of the Constitutional Court, the Saeima shall confirm another judge upon recommendation of the institution, which recommended the confirmation of the judge, whose authority of office has terminated.

4. in Article 11:

to consider the existing text of the Article as its first Part;

to supplement it with the second, the third and the fourth Parts in the following wording:

"(2) In cases when authority of office of a judge has terminated because of expiry of his/her term or upon reaching the age established in the first Part of Article 8, the Saeima, not later than a month before termination of authority of office, shall confirm another judge, who takes up his/her duties when the authority of the previous judge has terminated.

"(3) If upon termination of authority of office of the Constitutional Court judge- or upon reaching the age established in the first Part of Article 8 of the Law - the Saeima has not confirmed another judge, the authority of the Constitutional Court judge shall be regarded as prolonged to the moment of confirmation by the Saeima of a new judge and he/she has sworn the oath.

"(4) The Constitutional Court judge, whose authority has terminated or who has reached the age established in the first Part of Article 8, continues carrying out the duties of the Constitutional Court judge in reviewing the cases, proceedings of which have been commenced in his presence.

1. The following shall have the right to submit an application to initiate a case regarding compliance of laws with the Constitution (Clause 1 of Article 16), compliance with the Constitution of international agreements signed or entered into by Latvia (Clause 2, Article 16), and compliance of resolutions of the Saeima with the Constitution and other laws (Clause 3, Article 16):

1. the President of State;
2. not less than 20 members of the Saeima;
3. the Cabinet of Ministers;
4. the Plenum of the Supreme Court;
5. the Prosecutor General;
6. The Council of the State Control.

1. The following shall have the right to submit an application to initiate a case regarding compliance of acts of the Cabinet of Ministers with the Constitution and other laws, and compliance with the constitution, other laws and regulations of the Cabinet of Ministers, of normative acts issued by institutions or officials subordinated to the Cabinet of Ministers (Clause 4 of Article 16):

2. 2) the Saeima;

3) not less than 20 members of the Saeima;

4) the Plenum of the Supreme Court;

3. 5) the Prosecutor General;

6) the Dome (Council) of a municipality;

4. 7) the Council of the State Control;
5. 8) the State Human Rights Bureau.
7. (3) The following shall have the right to submit an application to initiate a case regarding compliance of acts of the President of State, the Chairperson of the Saeima and the Prime Minister with the Constitution and other laws (Clause 5 of Article 16):
9. 1) the President of State;
10. 2) the Saeima;
11. 3) not less than twenty members of the Saeima;
12. 4) the Cabinet of Ministers;
13. 5) the Plenum of the Supreme Court ;
14. 6) the Prosecutor General;
15. 7) the Council of the State Control.

3. The following shall have the right to submit an application to initiate a case regarding compliance with the Constitution and other laws of normative acts issued by other institutions or officials confirmed, appointed or elected by the Saeima (Clause 6, Article 16):

1. the Saeima;
2. not less than 20 members of the Saeima;
3. the Plenum of the Supreme Court;
4. the Prosecutor General;
5. the Dome (Council) of a municipality;
6. the Council of the State Control;
7. the State Human Rights Bureau.

1. ministers duly authorized by law;
2. the Plenum of the Supreme Court;
3. the Prosecutor General;
4. the Council of the State Control.

7. The following shall have the right to submit an application to initiate a case regarding compliance of the national legal norms of Latvia to those international agreements entered into by Latvia, which are not contrary to the Constitution (Clause 9, Article 16):

1. the President of State;
2. not less than twenty members of the Saeima;
3. the Cabinet of Ministers;
4. the Plenum of the Supreme Court;
5. the Prosecutor General.

Article 18. Submission of application

1. An application to the Constitutional Court to initiate a case (hereinafter – the application) shall be made in writing. The application must indicate:

1. the applicant’s name;
2. the institution or official who issued the act which is disputed;
3. an account of the true circumstances of the case;
4. the legal justification of the application;
5. the claim presented to the Constitutional Court.

(2) Disputing several acts in one application shall be permissible only if: n 1) normative act or a part thereof and legal norms of lesser legal

force issued pursuant to same are disputed;

1. if the application is submitted by a collegial institution- by a decision of the institution;
2. by explanations and documents necessary to determine circumstances of the case.

1. the case comes under the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court (Article 16);
2. the applicant is entitled to submit an application (Article 17);
3. the application complies with the general (Article 18) and specific (Article 19) requirements for accepting an application.

(3) If the case does not come under the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court, or the applicant is not entitled to submit the application, or the application does not comply with the general and specific requirements for accepting an application, the judge shall adopt a decision to refuse to initiate the case. The judge may adopt a decision to refuse to initiate a case if the legal norm (act) which is disputed is no longer in effect.

1. a copy of the application shall be forwarded to participants in the case;
2. a copy of the application shall be forwarded to the institution or official who issued the act which is disputed;
3. the institution or official who issued the act which is disputed shall be requested to submit a written reply describing the true circumstances and legal justification of the case by the date set by the judge of the Constitutional Court;
4. a copy of the decision shall be forwarded for publication in the newspaper ”Latvijas Vēstnesis”.

(6) If a decision is adopted to refuse to initiate a case, a copy of the decision shall be forwarded to the applicant within three days of its adoption, but in a case when the application is submitted by not less than twenty members of the Saeima – to their authorized representative.

1. A decision to refuse to initiate a case may be appealed to the Constitutional Court by the applicant within two weeks of receiving a copy of the decision.
2. The Constitutional Court consisting of three judges shall review at the organizational session the appeal within a month of receiving the appeal and adopt a decision to satisfy it and initiate the case or dismiss the appeal.
3. If a decision is adopted to satisfy the appeal and initiate the case, within three days of its adoption:

1. a copy of the decision shall be forwarded to participants in the case;
2. a copy of the application shall be forwarded to the institution or official who issued the act which is disputed;
3. the institution or official who issued the act which is disputed is requested to submit a written reply describing the true circumstances and legal justification of the case by the date set by the Constitutional Court;
4. a copy of the decision shall be forwarded for publication in the newspaper ”Latvijas Vēstnesis”.

3. If a decision is adopted to dismiss the appeal, a copy of the decision shall be forwarded to the applicant within three days of adopting it, but in case when the application is submitted by not

less than twenty members of the Saeima – to their authorized

reprezentative.

1. The entire Constitutional Court shall review cases concerning:

1. compliance of laws with the Constitution;
2. compliance with the Constitution of international agreements signed or entered into by Latvia;
3. compliance of resolutions of the Saeima with the Constitution and other laws;
4. compliance with the Constitution and other laws of regulations and other normative acts of the Cabinet of Ministers;
5. compliance of acts of the President of State, Chairperson of the Saeima and the Prime Minister with the Constitution and other laws.

Article 29. Closing of proceedings

1. Proceedings in the case may be closed before the verdict is announced by a decision of the Constitutional Court:

1. upon a written request of the applicant;
2. if the disputed legal norm (act) is no longer in effect;
3. if the Constitutional Court finds that the decision to initiate the case does not comply with the provisions of Paragraph 1, Article 21 of this Law.

2. (5) The verdict shall be signed by all the judges participating in the session of the Constitutional Court.

Article 31. Contents of the verdict of the Constitutional Court

The verdict of the Constitutional Court shall indicate:

1. time and place of reaching the verdict;
2. membership of the Constitutional Court and secretary of the Court session;
3. participants in the case (indicating the applicant);
4. provision of this law pursuant to which the Constitutional Court has reviewed the case;
5. the disputed legal norm (act);
6. circumstances established by the Constitutional Court;
7. arguments and proof justifying the conclusions of the Constitutional Court;
8. arguments and proof by which the Constitutional Court rejects this or other proof;
9. provision of the Constitution or other law pursuant to which the Constitutional Court considered whether the disputed legal norm (act) complies with the legal norm of higher force;
10. ruling of the Constitutional Court whether or not the disputed legal norm (act) complies with the legal norm of higher force;
11. the time from which the disputed legal norm (act) is no longer in effect, if the Constitutional Court has declared that the norm (act) does not comply with the legal norm of higher force;
12. a statement that the verdict of the constitutional Court is final and may not be appealed.

Article 32. Force of a verdict of the Constitutional Court

1. The verdict of the Constitutional Court is final. It shall come into legal effect at the time of announcement.
2. A verdict of the Constitutional Court shall be binding on all state and municipal institutions, offices and officials, including the courts, also natural and juridical persons.
3. Any legal norm (act) which the Constitutional Court has determined as incompatible with the legal norm of higher force shall be considered invalid as of the date of announcing the verdict of the Constitutional Court, unless the Constitutional Court has ruled otherwise.
4. If the Constitutional Court has recognized any international agreement signed or entered into by Latvia as incompatible with the Constitution, the Cabinet of Ministers is immediately obliged to see that the agreement is amended, denounced, suspended or the accession to that agreement is recalled.

5. in Article 17 :

To supplement the first Part with Clauses 7 – 11 in the following wording:

" 7) the Dome (Council) of a municipality;

8) the State Human Rights Bureau;

9) a court, when reviewing an administrative, civil or criminal case;

10) a judge of the Land Registry, when registering real estate- and thus confirming property rights on it- in the Land Book;

11) a person, whose fundamental constitutional rights have been violated."

To supplement the second Part with Clauses 9 – 11 in the following wording:

" 9) a court when reviewing an administrative, civil or criminal case;

10) a judge of the Land Registry when registering real estate- or thus confirming property rights on it – in the Land Book;

11) a person, whose fundamental constitutional rights have been violated."

To supplement the third Part with Clauses 8 – 11 in the following wording:

" 8) the State Human Rights Bureau;

9)a court, when reviewing an administrative, civil or criminal case;

10) a judge of the Land Registry when registering real estate – or thus confirming property rights on it – in the Land Book;

11) a person, whose fundamental constitutional rights have been violated."

To supplement the fourth Part with Clauses 8 – 10 in the following wording:

" 8) a court, when reviewing an administrative, civil or criminal case;

9) a judge of the Land Registry when registering real estate – or thus confirming the property rights on it – in the Land Book;

10) a person, whose fundamental constitutional rights have been violated.

To supplement the fifth Part with Clauses 5 –8 in the following wording:

"5) the State Human Rights Bureau;

6) a court when reviewing an administrative, civil or criminal case;

7) a judge of the Land Registry when registering real estate – or thus confirming property rights on it- in the Land Book;

8) a person, whose fundamental constitutional rights have been violated."

To supplement the seventh Part with Clauses 6 – 10 in the following wording:

1. the Dome (Council) of a municipality;
2. the State Human Rights Bureau;
3. a court, when reviewing an administrative, civil or criminal case;
4. a judge of the Land Registry when registering real estate-or thus confirming property rights on it- in the Land Book;
5. a person, whose fundamental constitutional rights have been violated."

5. To supplement Article 18 with the fifth Part in the following wording:

"(5) Application on a claim already reviewed at the Constitutional Court shall not be submitted."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6. To change the title of Article 19 and its first Part to read as follows:

1. The application by the Dome (Council) of a municipality in accordance with Clause 1, Paragraph 2 ; Clause 2, Paragraph 6, Clause 4, Paragraph 5 and Clause 7, Paragraph 6 may be submitted only if the debatable act violates the rights of the respective municipality.

To supplement Article 19 with 19¹ and 19² in the following wording:

" Article 19¹. Application by a court (a judge of the Land Registry)

1. a court, which - when reviewing a civil, criminal or administrative case in the first instance, under the procedure of cassation or appeal- holds that the norm to be applied to the case does not comply with the legal

norm of higher force;

 

 

2. a judge of the Land Registry, when registering the real estate and confirming the right to the property in the Land Book, is of the opinion that the norm to be applied does not comply with the legal norm (act) of higher force."

(1) Any person who holds that his/her fundamental constitutional rights have been violated by applying a normative act, which is not in compliance with the legal norm of higher force, may submit a claim (application) to the Constitutional Court.

(2) The constitutional claim shall be submitted only after exhausting all the possibilities of protecting the above rights with other legal means (a claim to a higher institution or official, a claim or application to a general court etc.).

(3) A constitutional claim may be submitted to the Constitutional Court within 6 months from the date of the decision of the last institution becoming effective.

(4) Submitting of the constitutional claim does not suspend the execution of the court decision.

(5) In addition to contents of the constitutional claim (application), mentioned in the first Part of Article 18 of this law, it must substantiate that:

1. the fundamental constitutional rights of the applicant have been violated;
2. all the other legal means of protection have been exhausted or there are no other means.

(6) One shall add to the constitutional claim:

1. explanations and documents necessary to size up the conditions of the case;
2. documents confirming the fact that all the other legal means of protection have been exhausted.

8. To express Articles 20 and 21 in the following wording:

1. the President of State;
2. the Saeima;
3. not less than twenty members of the Saeima;
4. the Plenum of the Supreme Court;
5. the Prosecutor General;
6. the Council of the State Control;
7. the State Human Rights Bureau;
8. the Dome (Council) of a municipality;
9. a minister authorized by the Cabinet of Ministers.

1. the case is not within the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court;
2. the applicant is not entitled to submit the application;
3. the application does not comply with the requirements of Articles 18 or 19 of this Law.

(3) The Constitutional Court consisting of three judges shall review the application and adopt a decision to initiate a case or refuse to initiate a case if the application has been submitted by:

1. a court ( a judge of the Land Registry);
2. a person whose fundamental constitutional rights have been violated.

1. the case is not within jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court;
2. the applicant is not entitled to submit the application;
3. the application does not comply with the requirements of Articles 18 and 19 of this Law.

1. the case is not within jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court;
2. the applicant is not entitled to submit the application;

1. the legal justification of the claim is evidently insufficient to satisfy the appeal.

(7) The judge or the Panel adopts a decision to initiate a case or to refuse to initiate a case within a month of receiving the submitted application. In complicated cases the Constitutional Court may adopt a decision to extend this term to two months.

(8) The decision of the Panel on initiating a case or refusing to initiate a case is allowing of no appeal.

1. a copy of the decision shall be forwarded to the participants in the case;
2. a copy of the application is forwarded to the institution or official who issued the disputable act;
3. the institution or official who issued the disputable act is requested to submit a written reply describing the true circumstances and legal justification of the case by the date set by the judge of the Constitutional Court;
4. a copy of the substantive provisions of the decision is forwarded for publication in the newspaper ”Latvijas Vēstnesis”.

(10) If a decision is adopted to refuse to initiate a case, a copy of the decision shall be forwarded to the applicant within three days of its adoption, but in case when the application is submitted by not less than one third of the Saeima deputies – to their authorized representative.

1. A decision of the Constitutional Court judge to refuse to initiate a case may be appealed to the Constitutional Court by the applicant within two weeks of receiving a copy of the decision.
2. The institution or official who issued the disputable act may appeal to the Constitutional Court within two weeks of receiving the decision of the Constitutional Court judge to initiate a case.
3. The Panel reviews a complaint on the decision of the Constitutional Court judge to initiate a case or to refuse to initiate a case.
4. The complaint shall be reviewed within a month of receiving it.
5. If a decision is adopted to satisfy the complaint and initiate a case, within three days of its adoption:

1. a copy of the decision shall be forwarded to the participants in the case;
2. a copy of the decision shall be forwarded to the institution or official who issued the disputable act;
3. the institution or official who issued the disputable act is requested to submit a written reply describing the true circumstances and legal justification of the case by the date set by the Constitutional Court;

(6) If a decision is adopted to satisfy the complaint and repeal the decision to initiate a case, within three days of its adoption a copy of the decision shall be forwarded to the submitter of the complaint, but in the case when the application is submitted by not less than twenty deputies of the Saeima - to its authorized representative. A copy of the decision shall be forwarded for publication in the newspaper ”Latvijas Vēstnesis".

(7) If a decision is adopted to dismiss the complaint, within three days of adopting it, a copy of the decision shall be forwarded to the submitter of the complaint , but in the case when the application is submitted by not less than twenty deputies of the Saeima – to their authorized representative.

10. To supplement the first Part of Article 25 with Clause 6 in the following wording:

"6) Compliance of the legal norms of national rights of Latvia with those international agreements entered into by Latvia , which are not at variance with the Satversme (Constitution).

11. To supplement Article 28 with Article 28¹ in the following wording:

" Article 28¹. Court proceedings in writing

1. In cases when the documents submitted together with the application suffice, it is possible to hold court proceedings in writing, without the participants in case attending the court session. The Chairperson of the Court shall make the decision to prepare the case for review in writing.

.

2. Proceedings, initiated after receiving applications by persons named in the first part of Article 20 and if the applicant or the institution or official who issued the disputable act requests reviewing the case in the presence of the participants, shall not be held in writing.
3. Court proceedings in writing shall be held and the decision shall be reached in the conference chamber.

12. In Article 29:

1. the Constitutional Court establishes that the decision to initiate a case does not comply with the requirements of Article 20;
2. a decision on the same issue has been declared in another case."

To regard the existing second Part as the third one.

12. To express the fifth Part of Article 30 in the following wording:

" (5) The decision shall be signed by the Chairperson and the secretary of the Court session.

 

 

 

 

 

 

14.To supplement Article 31 with Clause 12 in a new wording:

" 12) other rulings, if necessary;"

To consider Clause 12 of the Article as Clause 13.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

13. In Article 32:

To supplement the second Part with the second sentence in the following wording:

" (2) If the proceedings have been held in writing , the legal norm (act), which the Constitutional Court has determined as incompatible with the legal norm of higher force, shall be considered invalid as of the date of publishing the decision in the newspaper ”Latvijas Vēstnesis”, unless the Constitutional Court has ruled otherwise;"

To supplement the Article with the fifth Part in the following wording:

"(5) In cases when the constitutional claim has been reviewed and the Court has ruled that the disputable legal norm (act), as regards the applicant of the case on which the constitutional complaint was submitted, was incompatible with the legal norm of higher force, the disputable legal norm shall be considered invalid as of the date of it taking effect."