A judgment in the case on differences in provisions on calculating pensions for citizens and non-citizens has been adopted
The Constitutional court has adopted a judgment in the Case No. 2010-20-0106 “On Compliance of Para 1 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law “On State Pensions” (the Part Regulating Making Equivalent of the Accrued Work and the Equivalent Period thereof for Non-citizens of Latvia to Length of Period of Insurance) with Article 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in Conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol Nr. 1 thereof and Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia”.
Article 91 of the Satversme provides that all human beings in Latvia shall be equal before the law and the courts, and human rights shall be realised without discrimination of any kind. Article 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms establishes that exercising of the above mentioned rights and freedoms is ensured without any discrimination, whilst Article 1 of the Protocol Nr. 1 ensures property rights.
Para 1 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law “On State Pensions” provides a list of work and equivalent periods accrued in the former territory of the USSR that shall be made equivalent to the length of period of insurance and therefore influence pension calculations. For Latvian non-citizens, if compared to Latvian citizens, the list of these periods is considerably shorter, namely, education and retaliation periods are provided as equivalents to the length of period of insurance. The applicants Jurijs Savickis, Asija Sivicka, Marzija Vagapova, Genādijs Ņesterovs, and Vladimirs Podoļako indicated that the different regulatory frameworks regarding calculation of period of insurance for citizens and non-citizens are discriminating.
The Constitutional Court indicated that, pursuant to the State continuity doctrine, Latvia is not a heir of rights and duties of the USSR; therefore Latvia does not have to undertake the duty of another state, namely, the duty to ensure persons old-age pension for length of service accumulated outside the territory of Latvia.
Latvia has concluded agreements that envisage ensuring mutual recognition of length of service on respect to several states, including Lithuania, Estonia, the Russian Federation, Belorussia, Ukraine etc. Consequently, the issue regarding inclusion of length of service accumulated outside the territory of Latvia into the period of insurance is solved by concluding bilateral agreements regarding co-operation in the social field or it is dealt with in accordance with legal acts of the European Union.
Consequently, the Constitutional Court recognized the contested norm as non-compliant with Article 91 of the Satversme and Article 14 of the European Convention of Human rights and Fundamental Freedoms in conjunction with Article 1 of the Protocol No. 1 thereof.
The judgment of the Constitutional Court is final and not subject to appeal. The judgment shall come into force on the date of publishing it in the newspaper “Latvijas Vēstnesis”.
Linked case: 2010-20-0106