In September 2026, the Constitutional Court passed judgments in two cases:
- By judgment of 28 September 2026 in case No 2025-33-01, the prohibition of a person convicted of violence or the threat thereof from working as a psychologist was recognised as being incompatible with the first sentence of Article 106 of the Constitution. The case was initiated based on an application by the Administrative District Court. It considered that the contested provision disproportionately restricted the right of a person to freely choose an occupation, since it prevented a person convicted of a violent criminal offence from working as a psychologist for life. The Constitutional Court has already recognised on several occasions that restrictions imposed for life exclude the presumption that a person is able to change their behaviour, attitude and value system during their lifetime. This judgment also states that there is no reason to believe that every person who has committed a violent offence in their youth will also be prone to violence later in life. Therefore, an individual assessment may be one of the means by which the fundamental rights of the person would be less restricted. Moreover, such an assessment per se does not guarantee the right to pursue the profession of psychologist, nor does it require significant resources from the State.
- By judgment of 30 September 2026 in case No 2025-23-01, the regulation on the remission of a natural person from debt obligations without an assessment of the financial situation was recognised as being incompatible with the first three sentences of Article 105 of the Constitution. The case was initiated based on an application by a licensed debt recovery service provider. The applicant considered that the contested provisions significantly broadened the range of persons and cases in which remission from debt was possible, thus disproportionately restricting the creditors’ right to property. The Constitutional Court recognised that such a restriction was established to promote general economic activity, as well as to provide support to persons whom the State has undertaken to protect in particular. However, remission from debt is only justified if the person is objectively unable to pay. The inability of a person to meet their debts can be properly assessed by examining their income, expenditure and assets. The Court concluded that the regulation does not provide for such a full assessment of a person’s financial situation. Moreover, creditors do not have any legal remedies to object to the remission from debts of persons who are actually able to pay. Thus, there is no balance between the right to property of creditors and the protection of public welfare and the rights of debtors.
On 8 September 2026, the Constitutional Court resumed proceedings in case No 2024-01-01 on publishing shareholders’ personal data. The proceedings were resumed following the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-798/24 Jautiva following a request for a preliminary ruling from the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court will re-examine Case No 2024-01-01 anew in the full composition of the Court in written proceedings on 13 October 2026.
The Constitutional Court was working on preparation of ten cases, and the preparation of three cases for examination was completed. In addition to five cases, the type and date of the proceedings of which had already been determined, the Constitutional Court determined it for three more cases.
The Constitutional Court commenced the examination of three cases in written procedure:
- No 2025-23-01 on the remission of a natural person from debt obligations;
- No 2025-33-01 on the prohibition of the professional activity of a psychologist for a convicted person;
- No 2025-22-03 on restrictions on the organisation of gambling in the administrative territory of Daugavpils State City Municipality.
24 applications have been submitted to the Constitutional Court. One application was submitted by twenty Members of the Parliament, two applications were made by a court in the course of an administrative case, and 21 applications were submitted by individuals.
The Constitutional Court initiated case No 2026-16-0103 on the determination of the price for the redemption of land in the process of termination of forced divided ownership based on an application by a natural person.
Also, 16 decisions were taken to refuse to initiate proceedings in response to the following applications:
- Applications Nos 146/2026, 147/2026 and 162/2026 on the provisions of the Criminal Law that do not allow for early release from punishment for an adult who has committed a certain type of particularly serious crime. Decision on application No 146/2026. Decision on application No 147/2026. Decision on application No 162/2026.
- Application No 151/2026 on the norms of the Criminal Procedure Law regulating the postponement of the execution of a custodial sentence in the event of a serious illness. Decision on the application.
- Application No 152/2026 on the norms of the Administrative Procedure Law according to which court decisions taken within the execution of an administrative act or a court decision are not subject to appeal. Decision on the application.
- Application No 153/2026 on the norms of the Civil Procedure Law providing for the right of a judicial panel to refuse to accept an ancillary complaint. Decision on the application.
- Application No 154/2026 on the norms of the Citizenship Law that provide for cases of deprivation of Latvian citizenship. Decision on the application.
- Application No 155/2026 on the regulation of the Criminal Law, the Sentence Execution Code of Latvia and the Criminal Procedure Law for the execution of punishment and the release of a convict from further serving of the sentence. Decision on the application.
- Application No 157/2026 on the regulation of the Criminal Procedure Law insofar as it does not provide for effective control of the quality of state-provided defence. Decision on the application.
- Application No 158/2026 on the provision of the Civil Procedure Law that provides for the procedure for appealing against the activities of a bailiff in the enforcement of a judgment. Decision on the application.
- Application No 160/2026 on the provisions of the Law on Scientific Activity and the Law on Higher Education Institutions that regulated the status of academic positions in scientific institutions and the procedure for election to these positions. Decision on the application.
- Application No 161/2026 on the provision of the Civil Procedure Law that determines one of the types of newly discovered circumstances. Decision on the application.
- Application No 164/2026 on the regulation of the Civil Procedure Law regarding the examination of ancillary complaints in cases concerning the residence of a child and the procedure for the exercise of rights of access. Decision on the application.
- Application No 165/2026 on the provisions of the Law on Administrative Liability that determine the persons entitled to file a complaint. Decision on the application.
- Applications Nos 166/2026 and 167/2026 on the provisions of the Civil Law that determine the form and validity of the assignment contract. Decision on the applications.
- Application No 178/2026 on the norms of the Insolvency Law providing for the obligation of the insolvency administrator to provide law enforcement institutions with materials on the facts revealed in the insolvency proceedings of a natural person that may be the basis for the initiation of criminal proceedings. Decision on the application.
The information is provided to promote understanding of the work of the Constitutional Court. It shall not be considered as part of the ruling and shall not be binding on the Constitutional Court.