A judgment in the case regarding minimum labour wage for convicted persons has been adopted
The Constitutional Court has adopted a judgment in the case No. 2010-67-01 “On Compliance of Section 51 Paragraph 13 Indent 1 of the Latvian Penalty Execution Code with Article 107 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia”.
Article 107 of the Satversme provides: “Every employed person has the right to receive, for work done, commensurate remuneration which shall not be less than the minimum wage established by the State, and has the right to weekly holidays and a paid annual vacation.”
Section 51 of the Latvian Sentence Execution Code regulates employment of persons convicted to deprivation of liberty. On 6 July 2010, Amendments to the Latvian Sentence Execution Code came into effect, in which Section 51 was supplemented by Indent 13. Section 51 (1) thereof determines that the minimum salary per hour and the minimum monthly wage for convicts that serve their sentence in a closed or partially closed type of prison shall be 50 percent of the minimum salary per hour and the minimum monthly age of the State.
The applicant Mr. Mārtiņš Ēcis indicated that the contested norm fails to comply with the fundamental rights established in Article 107 of the Satversme, namely, the right to receive commensurate remuneration for the work done, which is not less than the minimum wage established by the State.
When adjudicating the particular case, the Constitutional Court indicated that Article 107 of the Satversme does not commit the legislator to establishing equal minimum wage to all employed persons.
Wage of a person living in liberty and having a paid labour is regarded as reimbursement for the work done and a source of subsistence which ensures that the person is able to maintain his or her family for a particular period of time. However, imprisonment establishments are maintained using State resources, and prisoners do not undergo certain expenses to maintain themselves. Consequently, wage of employed prisoners may differ from that of persons living outside of imprisonment establishments and having similar work.
Moreover, it should be taken into account that the main aim of employment of convicted persons is their socialisation rather than earning income.
Consequently, the Constitutional Court recognized that the contested norm does comply with Article 107 of the Satversme.
The Judgment of the Constitutional Court is final and not subject to appeal. It shall come into force on the date of publishing it in the newspaper “Latvijas Vēstnesis”.
Linked case: 2010-67-01