Procedure

Proceedings before the Constitutional Court commence at the moment when a application regarding initiation of a case is received by the Court.

The receipt of the Application is registered by the Constitutional Court’s Chancery and the application is forwarded to the Court’s President. The President examines the submitted documents and appoints a Constitutional Court’s Panel for examination of the application.

The Panel, consisting of three Judges of the Constitutional Court, must adopt a decision regarding the application within a month from the date when the application was submitted. This term may be extended by one month, on the basis of a reasoned decision.

The Panel has the right to refuse to initiate a case if: 1) the case does not fall within the Constitutional Court’s jurisdiction; 2) the applicant has no right to submit an application; 3) the application does not meet the requirements set out in the Constitutional Court Law; 4) the application concerns a claim which has already been adjudicated; 5) the deficiencies previously specified by the Panel have not been substantially corrected in the re-submitted application; 6) the legal reasoning included in the application is evidently insufficient for satisfying the claim.

The Panel’s decisions are not subject to appeal. However, in the case of a refusal, a person may eliminate the identified deficiencies and re-submit the application.

The application must be examined and the decision on its admissibility taken at an assignments sitting in full composition of the Court if the Panel decides on refusal to in initiate a case and a member of the Panel votes against such a ruling or for the purpose of ensuring uniform case law.

If a case has been initiated then a true copy of the respective decision is sent to the participants in the case – the applicant and the institution (official), which issued the contested act. Likewise, the institution (official), which issued the contested act, is requested to submit a written submission regarding the statement of the facts of the case and legal reasoning. Information on the initiation of a case is published in the official publication Latvijas Vēstnesis, as well as on the Constitutional Court’s homepage.

When the case has been initiated the Court’s President, undertakes to prepare it for adjudication, in the order of arrival, or appoints another Judge to do this.

The Judge prepares the case for adjudication within five months; however, in particularly complex cases, the Constitutional Court may decide on extending this term but not more than for two additional months.

While preparing the case for adjudication the Judge has the right to request additional explanations and information from participants in the case, State and local government institutions and authorities, private persons, invite summoned persons to provide their opinion, request expert examination in the case, decide on the requests by participants in the case, join or separate cases, as well as take other actions needed for comprehensive preparation of the case.

The Judge concludes preparation of the case by drawing up an opinion, reflecting the most important information about the case and the procedural actions taken, as well as expresses a proposal regarding the type of proceedings for adjudicating the case.

After receiving the Judge’s opinion, the Constitutional Court’s President decides on transferring the case for adjudication in a specific composition of Judges and determines the time and place of the assignments sitting.

After the decision on transferring the case for adjudication has been made, the participants in the case, i.e., the applicant and the institution (official), which issued the contested act, have the right to familiarise themselves with materials in the case.

At the assignments sitting, the Court decides on the type of proceedings for adjudicating the case, i.e., proceedings with the participants in the case present or written proceedings, as well as on the time and place of the court hearing. The court hearing, during which the case will be heard, must be scheduled no sooner than 15 days after and no later than five months after the date of the assignments sitting.

To determine the type of proceedings for adjudicating the case, the Constitutional Court takes into account the materials in the case, as well as the possible impact of the case upon the legal system, relationships between the constitutional bodies, the Constitutional Court’s previous case law, and the State budget.

The Constitutional Court may decide to refer a question to the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding the validity or interpretation of a provision of the European Union law or may request an advisory opinion of an international court and suspend legal proceedings in the case.

Information about the time and place of the hearing is made known to the participants in the case and published on the Constitutional Court’s homepage but in cases, where the adjudication of the case is scheduled for a sitting with the participants in the case present, also in the official publication Latvijas Vēstnesis.

The Constitutional Court may decide on convening a preparatory sitting to decide on matters related to the course of the court hearing.

At the Constitutional Court, cases are mostly heard in full composition of Judges, except for some categories of cases, which are reviewed by the composition of three Judges. Full composition must comprise no less than five Judges.

The Constitutional Court’s hearings are held in Riga but, due to objective reasons, they may be scheduled elsewhere.

In written proceedings, the case is heard and the judgement is made in the deliberations room. Namely, no minutes are taken of the respective hearing and the participants in the case are not invited to it.

Whereas the court hearings with the participants in the case participating are open, except for the cases where the Constitutional Court has decided to hear the case in camera. Hearing the case on its merits commences by hearing the Judge’s report, after which the participants in the case present the facts in the case and legal reasoning. After that, if necessary, the summoned persons and experts are heard and witnesses are interviewed. Then discussions and retorts follow. If the Court deems it necessary it can announce adjournment of the court hearing. The court hearing ends by the chairperson of the sitting announcing the date when the judgement would be pronounced.

Any person has the right to attend an open hearing, previously announcing it to the secretary of the court hearing. The maximum number of persons attending is determined by the secretary of the court hearing, taking into account the number of participants in the case and other involved persons, as well as the capacity of the courtroom.

During the hearing, the Court adopts decisions by the majority vote of the Judges in the composition, deliberating on site or in the deliberations room.

The course of the Constitutional Court’s hearing is recorded in minutes and by technical equipment, on the basis of which a transcript is prepared.

Following the court hearing, deliberation of Judges takes places, during which a judgement on behalf of the Republic of Latvia is adopted.

Legal proceedings in the case may be also terminated by the Constitutional Court’s decision: 1) upon the applicant’s written request; 2) if the contested legal provision (act) has become void; 3) if the Constitutional Court establishes that the decision on initiating a case does not meet the requirements of the Constitutional Court Law ; 4) if a legal provision (act), the compliance of which was contested, has become void; 5) if a judgement has been pronounced in another case regarding the same subject of claim; 6) in other instances when it is impossible to continue legal proceedings in the case.

The Court adopts a judgement by majority vote. The Judges may vote only “for” or “against”. In the case of a tied vote the contested provision is recognised as being compatible with the superior legal provision. A Judge is obliged to keep the secret of the deliberations room.

The judgement must be adopted no later than within 30 days after the Constitutional Court’s hearing and is signed by the chairperson of the hearing. The Constitutional Court may extend the said term for 30 days. If during the deliberations of Judges the Court finds it necessary to establish important facts of the case it renews hearing the case on its merits.

A Judge who has voted against the opinion, expressed in the judgement or the decision on terminating legal proceedings, may express their separate opinion in writing within a month. The Judge’s separate opinion is annexed to the case but is not pronounced during the court hearing and is published in the official publication Latvijas Vēstnesis within two months after adoption of the judgement.

At the court hearing with the participation of the participants in the case, the judgement is pronounced by stating the most important facts of the case and findings made in the judgement, and by reading the resolutive part of the judgement. If the case has been heard in written proceedings, the ruling is made known to the participants in the case, by sending its true copy. After adoption or pronouncement of the ruling, it is published in the official publication Latvijas Vēstnesis and on the Constitutional Court’s homepage.

The Constitutional Court’s judgement is final and not subject to appeal.

The Constitutional Court’s judgement and the interpretation of legal provision set out in it are binding upon all State and local government institutions, courts, officials, as well as private persons.

The legal provision, which has been recognised by the Constitutional Court as being incompatible with a superior legal provision, becomes void from the date when the Constitutional Court’s judgement has been published, unless the Constitutional Court has ruled otherwise in its judgement.

In deciding on the date from which the contested provision becomes void, the Constitutional Court must take into account that the Court’s task is to prevent, to the extent possible, infringements on persons’ fundamental rights. At the same time, the Court must ensure that the situation, which might develop after the contested provision has become void, would not cause new infringements on fundamental rights, defined in the Constitution, and would not inflict significant harm upon the interests of the State and society.