Search

On Compliance of the Fifth Part of Section 629 of the Criminal Procedure Law with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia

The Constitutional Court held:

The contested norm, insofar a court may not re-examine the legality and validity of a decision by the person directing proceedings on a person’s right to get acquainted with case materials in proceedings regarding criminally acquired property, is incompatible with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme.

With respect to the limited liability company “Cell Finance”, insofar a court may not re-examine the legality and validity of a decision by the person directing proceedings on a person’s right to get acquainted with case materials in proceedings regarding criminally acquired property, the contested norm is incompatible with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Satversme as of the moment when the violation of fundamental right occurred.

The Judgement of the Constitutional Court is final and not subject to appeal, it has entered into force on the day of its publication.