Case initiated about the rights to appeal decisions on termination of administrative offence proceedings due to the insignificant nature of the offence
On Wednesday, 29 January, the Constitutional Court initiated the case on conformity of Section 183, Paragraph one of the Law on Administrative Liability with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia.
The contested norm stipulates that a complaint regarding a decision in an administrative offence case may be submitted by a person to whom an administrative penalty has been applied and a victim but in the part regarding the action with the property – also an infringed owner of property. However, according to Section 11, Paragraph one of the Law on Administrative Liability, the administrative offence proceedings shall not be initiated if an administrative offence committed by a person is deemed to be insignificant. If, however, the proceedings have been initiated, they may be terminated at any stage without applying a penalty. In this case an admonition can be expressed to the person if this has been found useful. The admonition shall not produce legal effects.
The case was initiated based on a constitutional complaint from a private individual. The applicant notes that the decision on termination of administrative offence proceedings due to the insignificant nature of the offence means that the administrative offence was indeed committed by the person to be held liable, but due to considerations of expediency the institution chooses not to prosecute the person for the committed administrative offence and to relieve the person from liability. Even though such decision concerns the rights and lawful interests of the person to be held liable, the contested norm, however, prevents the possibility to submit a complaint to the court, as it happened in the present case of the applicant. Therefore, the right of the applicant to a fair court provided for in the first sentence of Article 92 of the Constitution has been infringed.
The Constitutional Court requested the Saeima to submit by 31 March 2025 a letter of response detailing the factual circumstances of the case along with the legal justification thereof. The deadline for the preparation of the case is 29 June 2025. The Court shall decide on the procedure and date for hearing the case once the case is prepared.
Linked case: 2025-08-01