The Constitutional Court starts to examine a case on a norm which denies a person the right to hold the position of insolvency administrator
The Constitutional Court starts to examine a case on the conformity of Section 13(2)(3) of the Insolvency Law, insofar as it imposes a prohibition on a person against whom criminal proceedings for committing an intentional criminal offence have been terminated for reasons other than exoneration of the person, from working as an insolvency administrator, with Section 101(1) and the first sentence of Section 106 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia.
The contested norm provides that a person against whom criminal proceedings for committing an intentional criminal offence have been terminated for reasons other than exoneration of the person may not be an administrator.
The Constitutional Court initiated the case based on an application submitted by the Senate. The applicant is reviewing an administrative case in cassation proceedings that have been initiated upon a person’s application to revoke an administrative deed. By the decision of the Insolvency Control Service, the person was removed from the position of an insolvency administrator based on the contested norm. The applicant considers that the contested norm contradicts Section 101(1) and the first sentence of Section 106 of the Constitution because the restriction of fundamental rights under this provision is not proportionate. The Senate considers that the objective of the restriction of fundamental rights could be reached by less restrictive means of the person’s fundamental rights, for example by allowing evaluation of each individual case.
The Constitutional Court examines the case in written proceedings. The decision must be adopted within 30 days, at the latest, after the Constitutional Court’s session.
Related Case: 2023-44-01