Proceedings in the case regarding legal validity of personal identification documents in case of change of legal status of a person has been terminated
The Constitutional Court has adopted a decision to terminate proceedings in the case No. 2010-64-01 “On Compliance of Section 16 (1) (4) of the Personal Identification Documents Law with the First and the Second Sentence of Article 98 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia”.
The first sentence of Article 98 of the Satversme provides that everyone has the right to freely depart from Latvia. The second sentence of the same Article establishes that everyone having a Latvian passport shall be protected by the State when abroad and has the right to freely return to Latvia. The contested norm provides that a personal identification document shall be invalid for use if the legal status of a person has changed.
The applicant, the Administrative Regional Court addressed the Constitutional Court when adjudicating an administrative case. An applicant of the particular administrative case was prohibited to leave the country because his legal status was changed to a citizen of Latvia and his passport of a non-citizen of Latvia was no more valid.
The Constitutional Court concluded that the contested norm does not concern the right to freely depart from the State and to return to it. Namely, it does not establish the moment when legal status of a person shall be regarded as changed. Likewise, the contested norm does not regulate procedures and terms regarding notifying a person on the change of his or her legal status and regarding receipt of a new personal identification document. Consequently, the contested norm does not restrict the fundamental rights established in the first and the second sentence of Article 98 of the Satversme, which determines that it is not possible to continue proceedings in the present case.
Likewise, the Constitutional Court recognized that establishment of a deferring term, which is 14 days from the coming into force of a Cabinet of Ministers resolution, in a Cabinet of Ministers resolution regarding granting citizenship according to naturalisation procedure is advantageous for persons. However, this practice has not been regulated and does not guarantee persons who are granted Latvian citizenship according to naturalization procedure the possibility to freely exercise their fundamental rights guaranteed in the first and the second sentence of Article 98 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia. The Constitutional Court concluded that terms have not been properly regulated for the change of legal status of a person and that of personal identification documents.
The judgment of the Constitutional Court is final and not subject to appeal.
Linked case: 2010-64-01