Search

On Compliance of Para 2.1 of the Cabinet of Ministers Regulation of 27 February 2001 No. 92 "On Establishing the Volume of Sugar-beet Deliveries to Growers of Sugar-beets" in the Part on Establishing the Volume of Sugar-beet Deliveries on the Basis of the Volume of Sugar-beet Deliveries Established in 2000 with Article 91 of the Satversme

Constitutional Court decided to declare Item 2, Sub-item 1 of the Cabinet of Ministers February 27, 2001 Regulations No.92 ”The Procedure of Stating the Amount of Sugar-beet Supply for the Sugar-beet Growers” in the part of determining the amount of sugar-beet supply on the basis of the amount of sugar-beet supply determined for the sugar-beet growers in 2000 as unconformable with Article 1 of the Satversme and the third part of Article 3 of the Law ”On Sugar” and null and void from the moment of the publication of the Judgment.

On Compliance of Section 348 (7) of Civil Proceedings Law with Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

Constitutional Court decided to declare the seventh part of Article 348 of the Civil Proceedings Law as conformable with Article 92 of the Republic of Latvia Satversme.

On the Conformity of Article 2 of the Law ”On Compensation for Damages, Suffered as a Result of the Unlawful or Groundless Action of Investigator, Prosecutor or Judge” and Item 3, Subitem 1 of the Cabinet of Ministers August 31, 1998 Regulations No. 327 ”On the Procedure for Submitting and Considering Applications, Passing Decisions, Reinstating Employment and Social Guarantees and Payment of Compensation for Damages” with Articles 91 and 92 of the Satversme

Constitutional Court decided to declare Article 2, Item 1 of the Law ” On Compensation for Damages Suffered as a Result of the Unlawful or Groundless Action of Investigator, Prosecutor or Judge” and Item 3, Subitem 1 of the Cabinet of Ministers August 31, 1998 Regulations No. 327 ” On the Procedure for Submitting and Considering Applications, Passing Decisions, Reinstating Employment and Social Guarantees and Payment of Compensation for Damages” as being in compliance with Articles 91 and 92 of the Satversme (Constitution) and not violating the fundamental rights of a person, established by the Constitution.

On Compliance of Para 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and the First Sentence of Para 9 of the Saeima Presidium Regulations of February 28, 2000 "On the Procedure of Compensating Expenses Incurred by the Deputies while Exercising their Authority" with Article 91 of the Republic of Latvia Satversme

Constitutional Court decided To declare February 28, 2000 Presidium of the Republic of Latvia Regulation ”On the Procedure of Granting and Paying Compensations to the Saeima Deputies” and confirmed by it ”Regulations on the Procedure of Compensating the Expenses, which have Occurred to the Deputies while Fulfilling their Duties” as unconformable with Articles 1 and 91 of the Satversme and null and void from the day of publishing of the Judgment.

On Compliance of the Ministry of Justice May 9, 2001 Instruction No.1-1/187 "Transitional Provisions on the Procedure of Holding the Suspected, Accused, Detained and Sentenced Persons in Investigation Prisons" with Articles 95 and 111 of the Satversme

Constitutional Court decided to declare the Regulations of the Internal Order in Investigation Prisons, confirmed by the Department of Imprisonment Places May 9, 2001 Instruction No.63 in the Part on Prohibition of Receiving Food Parcels as unconformable with Article 64 of the Republic of Latvia Satversme.

On Compliance of Section 19 of the Official Language Law and the Cabinet of Ministers RegultionAugust 22, 2000 Regulations No.295 "Regulations on Spelling and Identification of Names and Surnames" with Articles 96 and 116 of the Satversme

Constitutional Court decided:
1. To declare that Article 19 of the State Language Law complies with the Articles 96 and 116 of the Republic of Latvia Satversme (Constitution).
2. To declare that the Cabinet of Ministers August 22, 2000 Regulations No. 295 in the section on approximation of the reproduced and entered into the Republic of Latvia passports personal names, if the person does not require it as unconformable with Article 96 and 116 of the Republic of Latvia Satversme (Constitution).
3. To declare Item 6 of the Cabinet of Ministers October 24, 1995 Regulations No.310 and Item 3.8 of the November 10, 1994 ”Instruction on the Republic of Latvia Citizen Passports” confirmed in the Ruling by the Director of the Citizenship and Immigration Department of the Ministry of the Interior as unconformable with Articles 96 and 116 of the Republic of Latvia Satversme (Constitution) and null and void from July 1, 2002.

On Compliance of Decree by the Cabinet of Ministers of 18 March 1999 No. 128 "On the State Joint Stock Company " Diplomatic Service Agency"" (in the Part on Incorporation of Property Investment - the Real Estate at No. 6 Mārstaļu Street in Riga - into the Equity Capital of the Diplomatic Service Agency and its Registration into the Land Register) with Section 19 of Law "On Protection of Cultural Monuments" and Section 9 of Law "On Objects of Education, Culture and Science of State Significance and National Sports Centres".

Constitutional Court decided to declare that March 18, 1999 Cabinet of Ministers Regulations No. 128 ”On the State Stock Company ”Diplomatic Service Agency”” (in the part on incorporation of the property investment – the real estate at No.6 Mārstaļu street in Riga – into fixed assets of the Diplomatic Service Agency and its registration with the Land Book) as being in compliance with Article 19 of the Law ”On the Protection of Cultural Monuments” and Article 9 of the Law ”On the Objects of Education, Culture and Science of State Significance and National Sport centres”.

On Compliance of Para 1 of Transitional Provisions (in the Part on Length of Insurance of Foreign Citizens and Stateless Persons whose Permanent Place of Residence till January 1, 1991 has Been the Republic of Latvia) of Law On State Pensions with Articles 89, 91 and 109 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia as well as with Article 14 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of the November 4, 195om and Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention

Constitutional Court decided to declare Paragraph 1 (in the part on length of insurance of foreign citizens and stateless persons whose permanent place of residence till January 1, 1991 has been the Republic of Latvia) of Transitional Provisions of the Law ”On State Pensions” as being in compliance with Articles 89, 91 and 109 of the Satversme (Constitution) as well as with Article 14 of the November 4, 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 1 of the First Protocol of the Convention.

On Compliance of Law On Regulators of Public Utilities with Article 1, Article 2 and Article 58 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

On Compliance of Para 1 of Transitional Provisions of Law On Social Insurance with Articles 1 and 109 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and Articles 9 and 11 (the first Part) of International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of the November 4, 195

Constitutional Court decided to declare Item 1 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law ” On the State Social Insurance” as unconformable with Article 109 of the Satversme and from the day of publishing the Judgement as null and void with regard to those persons who shall be obligatory covered by social insurance and who pay the social insurance premiums by other person’s mediation or for whom other persons pay the premiums.

On Compliance of Para1.1 of the July 6, 1999 Cabinet of Ministers Regulations No.249 "Amendments to 6 October 1998 Regulations No.388 on the Procedure of Trade in Markets, Fairs, Street Markets and Travelling Shops" with Section 4(2) and Para 1 of Section 32(1) of Law "On Entrepreneur Activity", as well as with Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia, Paragraph 4 of "General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade" (GATT, 1947), Section 14 of the Law "The Structure of the Cabinet of Ministers" and the Section 3(2) of the Law "On the Free Trade Agreement among the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Estonia and the Republic of Lithuania on Trade with Agricultural Products"

On Compliance of the Cabinet of Ministers March 18, 1999 RegulationsNo.128 "On the State Stock Company "The Agency of the Diplomatic Service""– Namely, its Part on Incorporation of the State- Owned Apartment House at No.57 Elizabetes Street in the Equity Capital of the Stock Company "The Agency of the Diplomatic Service" – with the First Sentence of Para 2, Para 3 and Para 13 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law "On the Privatization of State and Local Governments Apartment Houses"

Constitutional Court decided:
1. To declare the Cabinet of Ministers March 18, 1999 Regulations No.128 ”On the State Stock Company ”The Agency of the Diplomatic Service”” concerning confirmation of the state property investment- i.e. concerning the real estate at No.57 Elizabetes Street, Riga- as the equity capital of the State Stock Company ”The Agency of the Diplomatic Service” as unconformable both with Article 74 of the Law ”On the Privatisation of State and Local Governments Apartment Houses ” and Item 2 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law and null and void from the moment of its adoption.
2. To declare the Cabinet of Ministers November 23, 1995 Regulations No.717 ” On the Share Capital of the State Stock Company ”Rosme”” concerning incorporation of the state property investment-i.e. concerning the real estate at No.57 Elizabetes Street, Riga- in the equity capital of the State Stock Company ”Rosme” as not being in compliance both with Article 74 of the Law ”On the Privatisation of State and Local Government Apartment Houses” and Item 2 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law and null and void from the moment of its adoption.
3. To declare the Cabinet of Ministers August 14, 1996 Regulations No. 334 ”On the State Stock Company ”Rosme”” concerning confirmation of the state property investment – i.e. concerning the real estate at No.57 Elizabetes Street, Riga – as the equity capital of the State Stock Company ”Rosme” and its registration in the Land Book on the name of the State Stock Company ”Rosme” as unconformable with both- Article 74 of the Law ”On the Privatisation of State and Local Governments Apartment Houses” and Item 2 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law and null and void from the moment of its adoption.

On Compliance of the Prime Minister’s February 15, 2000 Decree No.51 "On Initiating a Disciplinary Case against the Director of the State Administrative Office (Chancellery) A.Vītols" with Section 32 of the Cabinet of Ministers Structure Law, Section 1 (Parts Three and Four) and Section 58(1) of Law On the State Civil Service

Constitutional Court decided:
1. To declare that Prime Minister’s February 15, 2000 Decree No.51 on initiating a disciplinary case against the Director of the State Administrative Office and his removal from office was a motion and is an integral part of the Cabinet of Ministers February 15, 2000 Protocol Decision (protocol No.8, section 1) ”On the Director of the State Administrative Office”.
2. To declare that the Protocol Decision ”On the Director of the State Administrative Office”(No.8, section 1) of the Cabinet of Ministers meeting complies with Article 32 of the Cabinet of Ministers Structure Law, the third and fourth parts of Article 1, Article 29 and the first part of Article 58 of the Law ”On the State Civil Service”.

On Compliance of Para 5 and Para 6 of Section 5 of The Saeima Election Law with Article 89 and Article 101 of the Satversme of the Republic o Latvia, Article 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 25 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Combined case: 2000-03-01

On Compliance of Para 5 and Para 6 of Section 5 of The Saeima Election Law and Para 5 and Para 6 of Section 9 of the Law on Electing City Council and County Council with Articles 89 and 101 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia, Article 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Constitutional Court decided to declare that Items 5 and 6 of Article 5 of the Saeima Election Law and Items 5 and 6 of Article 9 of the City Dome, Region Dome and Rural Council Election Law comply with Articles 89 and 101 of the Satversme, Article 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Article 3 of the First Protocol of this Convention as well as Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

On Compliance of Decree of 12 August 1999 by the Cabinet of Ministers No. 383 "On Liquidation of Riga Aviation University as an Institution of Higher Education Founded by the State " with Para 2 of Section 4(2) and Section 7(1) of Law on Institutions of Higher Education and Section 15.1 of Law "The Structure of the Cabinet of Ministers"

Combined case: 2000-01-04

On Compliance of the Cabinet of Ministers August 12, 1999 Decree No.384 "On Reorganization of the Latvian University and the Latvian Medicine Academy" and the Cabinet of Ministers August 12, 1999 Decree No.383 "On Liquidation of the Riga Aviation University as the Higher Educational Institution Founded by the State" with Law on Institutions of Higher Education and Section 15.1 of the Law "The Structure of the Cabinet of Ministers"

Constitutional Court decided to declare the Cabinet of Ministers August 12, 1999 Decree No.384 ”On Reorganization of the Latvian University and the Latvian Medicine Academy ” and the Cabinet of Ministers August 12, 1999 Decree No. 383 ”On Liquidation of the Riga Aviation University as the Higher Educational Institution Founded by the State” as conformable with the Higher School Law and Article 15¹ of the Cabinet of Ministers Structure Law.

On Compliance of Para 1 of the Cabinet of Ministers November 30, 1999 Resolution (Protocol 67, Paragraph 38) "On Protection of Foreign Investments Earmarked for Entrepreneurial Activity of the Limited Liability Association "WINDAU" at the Bauska Co-generation Station" with the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia, Chapter 3 of the Law "The Structure of the Cabinet of Ministers", Section 1 (1) of the Law "On Foreign Investment in the Republic of Latvia", Section 41 of the "Power Industry Law", the First and the Fourth Parts of Section 8 of the Law "On Privatisation of the State and Municipal Property" and Section 49 of the Law "On Joint Stock Companies"

Constitutional Court decided to declare Item 1 of the Cabinet of Ministers November 30, 1999 Resolution ”On Protection of Foreign Investment which Limited Liability Association ”WINDAU” Invested in the Bauska Co-generating Station” (protocol No. 67, paragraph 38) as not being in compliance with Articles 1 and 86 of the Satversme, as well as with Article 8 (Part 1, Item 17, in the wording which was
effective up to December 14, 1999) and null and void from the moment of its adoption.

On Compliance of Para 1 and Para 4 of the Saeima Resolution on Telecommunications Tariff Council of April 29, 1999 with Articles 1 and 57 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia and Other Laws

Constitutional Court decided to declare Items 1 and 4 of the Saeima April 29, 1999 Resolution on the Telecommunications Tariff Council as not being in compliance with Articles 1 and 57 of the Satversme, Article 13 of the Law ”The Structure of the Cabinet of Ministers”, Article 16 of the Law ”On the Structure of the Ministries” and Article 9 of the Law ”On Telecommunications” and null and void from the moment of their adoption.