A case has been initiated with regard to the procedure for examining applications regarding renewal of criminal proceedings in connection with newly disclosed circumstances
On 6 August 2015 the 2nd Panel of the Constitutional Court initiated the case “On the Compliance of the First, Third and Fifth Part of Section 657 of the Criminal Procedure Law with the First Sentence in Article 92 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia”.
The Contested Norm
Section 657 of the Criminal Procedure Law. Renewal of Criminal Proceedings in connection with Newly Disclosed Circumstances
“(1) A public prosecutor has the right to renew criminal proceedings in connection with newly disclosed circumstances.[..]
(3) An application regarding newly disclosed circumstances shall be examined by a public prosecutor according to the location of the adjudication of the initial criminal proceedings. [..]
(5) If a public prosecutor refuses to renew criminal proceedings in connection newly disclosed circumstances, he or she shall take a reasoned decision on such refusal, and notify the applicant thereof, by sending a copy of the decision to such applicant and explaining his or her rights to appeal such decision within 10 days from the day of the receipt to a higher-ranking public prosecutor , the decision of which shall not be subject to appeal.”
The Norm of Higher Legal Force
The first sentence in Article 92 of the Satversme: “Everyone has the right to defend his or her rights and lawful interests in a fair court.”
The Facts
The case has been initiated on the basis of an application submitted by Ringolds Meļķis and Ivars Straume. The applicants had submitted an application regarding renewal of criminal proceedings in connection with newly disclosed circumstances. The deputy chief prosecutor of the Riga City Latgale Suburb Prosecutor’s Office adopted a decision to reject the application. Whereas the chief prosecutor of Riga City Latgale Suburb Prosecutor’s Office refused to renew the criminal proceedings by noting that there were no grounds for renewing the criminal proceedings in connection with newly disclosed circumstances.
The applicants hold that the procedure that has been established by the contested norms for examining applications regarding renewal of criminal proceedings in connection with newly disclosed circumstances restricts their right to a fair court established in the Satversme without basis.
The Legal Proceedings
The Constitutional Court has invited the institution, which adopted the contested act, – the Saeima – to submit by 6 October 2015 a written answer regarding the facts of the case and legal substantiation.
The term for preparing the case is 6 January 2016. The Court shall decide on the type of procedure and the date for hearing the case after the case has been prepared.
Linked case: 2015-19-01