Case No 2018-22-01

Applicant: Davids Džibuti; Dana Džibuti; Timurs Jareško; Mila Šteina; Edvards Šmits; Aleksandrs Fominovs; Vladislavs Kuļikovs; Vlada Elīza Ševšeļova; Jeļizaveta Kotova; Anna Lisa Čmihova; Agnija Busila; Marija Busila; Mihails Zaslavskis; Aleksandrs Zaslavskis, kā arī 12. Saeimas deputāti: Boriss Cilevičs; Igors Pimenovs; Ivans Ribakovs; Jānis Tutins; Artūrs Rubiks; Sergejs Potapkins; Ivars Zariņš; Romans Miloslavskis; Jeļena Lazareva; Jūlija Stepaņenko; Andris Morozovs; Jānis Urbanovičs; Raimonds Rubiks; Vladimirs Nikonovs; Jānis Ādamsons; Vitālijs Orlovs; Mihails Zemļinskis; Igors Zujevs; Sergejs Mirskis; Sergejs Dolgopolovs
Date of the judgment: 13.11.2019.
Official publication: 15.11.2019.

On Compliance of the Part 1 of Section 1 of the Amendments to the Education Law of 22 March 2018 with Article 1, the Second Sentence of Article 91, the First Sentence of Article 112 and Article 114 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Case short name: Language of education III

The Constitutional Court held:
to recognise Section 9 (11) of the Education Law as being compatible with Article 1, the second sentence of Article 91, the first sentence of Article 112 and Article 114 of the Satversme.

---

Press-releases

• The norm that determines the language of instruction in private institutions of education complies with the Satversme
• A case initiated with regard to the norm that defines the language of acquisition of education

---