A case on the right to submit evidence to a court of appeal in proceedings on criminally acquired property has been initiated before the Constitutional Court
A case has been initiated before the Constitutional Court on “Compliance of the Words “District (City) Court” in Section 629(4) of the Criminal Procedure Law with Article 1 and with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia”.
The applicant is a legal person. According to the applicant, Section 629(4) of the Criminal Procedure Law does not ensure it the right to a fair trial, which is consistent with the first sentence of Article 92 of the Constitution, and also restricts the protection of legitimate expectations included in Article 1 of the Constitution.
Section 629 of the Criminal Procedure Law regulates court proceedings on criminal property. The law “Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Law”, adopted on 6 October 2022, inter alia, establishes the right of the parties to be acquainted with the case file and provides that the parties to the proceedings may submit evidence to the district court, but not to the regional court.
The application shows that the proceedings for criminal assets relating to the applicant’s financial assets have been concluded. The decision of the court of first instance, rendered before the amendments entered into force, declared the funds belonging to the applicant to be the proceeds of crime. During the proceedings before the court of appeal, the aforementioned amendments came into force, which, inter alia, allowed the applicant to have access to the case-file. This right was granted to the applicant. However, when the applicant asked the court of appeal to append evidence to the case file, the court rejected the request on the basis of Section 629(4) of the Criminal Procedure Law. The court of appeal upheld the ruling of the first instance court.
The applicant submits that the amendments in their entirety introduce changes in the procedural rules which, on the one hand, allow a person to be acquainted with the entirety of the case-file, but, on the other hand, do not allow the submission of requests for the appending of evidence before the appellate court. The legislator should have provided for a lenient transitional period for proceedings concerning criminal property that had been initiated before the amendments entered into force but concluded later. The possibility to effectively defend one’s rights in a fair court includes the possibility to examine and rebut the arguments and evidence of the other party and to submit one’s evidence.
The constitutional court invited the institution that issued the contested regulation (the Saeima) to, by 2 January 2024, submit a letter of response detailing the factual circumstances of the case along with a legal justification.
The deadline for the preparation of the case is 01 April 2024. The court will decide on the procedure and date for hearing the case once the case is prepared.
Linked case: 2023-40-01