Proceedings in the case on a norm of the Law on Social Protection of the Participants of the Chernobyl Nuclear Clean-up and Persons Suffered as a Result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station Accident have been terminated
On 1 March 2012, the Constitutional Court decided to terminate proceedings in the case No. 2011-12-01 “On Compliance of Para 1 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law on the Social Protection of the Participants of the Chernobyl Nuclear Clean-up and Persons Suffered as a Result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station Accident with Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia”.
Contested Norm
Para 1 of Transitional Provisions of the Law on the Social Protection of the Participants of the Chernobyl Nuclear Clean-up and Persons Suffered as a Result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station Accident (hereinafter – the Chernobyl Law) provides that disablement pension and the survivor’s pension granted to the participants of the Chernobyl nuclear clean-up and persons suffered as a result of the Chernobyl nuclear power station accident before the date of coming into force of this Law and the amount of which has been calculated at the amount of the detriment, is recalculated pursuant to the following provisions:
1) the re-calculation shall be performed based on the following formula:
P = 90 % VS x DZ, where
P is pension amount (in lats),
VS – wage – average gross monthly wage calculated by the Central Statistical Bureau in respect to employees of the public sector for the 1st quarter of 2010 (in lats),
DZ – disablement rate (in per cent);
2) all disablement pensions and survivor’s pensions granted before the date of coming into force of the concerned law and calculated at the amount of the detriment shall be recalculated as on 1 July 2010;
3) if the amount based on the situation as on 1 July 2010 is less than it was before the recalculation, then the previous amount of pension shall be preserved.
4) if the disability or disablement level of a person who has been granted disablement pension changes after 1 July 2010 (calculated in per cent), the pension shall be calculated based on the formula referred to in Clause 1 of the present paragraph based on the new disability level (calculated in per cent) and all those indices that have been applied to a particular person pursuant to the Law “On State Pensions” in the period from 1 July 2010 to the date of pension re-calculation;
5) if the disability (calculated in per cent) or disablement level of a person increases, the amount of recalculated pension of the person shall not be less than the pension amount before the recalculation.
The Facts
The applicant, the Ombudsman of the Republic of Latvia indicated that the legal regulatory framework of the Contested Norm prevents the different attitude towards beneficiaries of disablement pensions and survivor’s pensions. However, it restricts the right to social security compensating detriment of those persons who receive old age pension instead of disablement pension.
Likewise, the legislator holds that neither the Chernobyl Law, nor the Law “On State Pensions” envisage recalculation of old age pension for persons who have been granted old age pension instead of disablement pension after having reached the stipulated retirement age. Consequently, the Contested Norm admits a different attitude towards persons who enjoy equal and comparable conditions.
The Findings and the Ruling
First of all, the Constitutional Court assessed whether the Contested Norm restricts the rights of person who have been granted old age pension instead of disablement pension. The Court concluded that the Chernobyl Law does not regulate the procedure for recalculation of old age pension for persons who have been granted old age pension instead of disablement pension after having reached the stipulated retirement age; the Law neither establishes any restriction of rights to this group of persons.
The Constitutional Court concluded that, in the particular case, the aim of the legislator is to regulate all issues related with disbursement of old age pensions to persons who have been granted old age pension instead of disablement pension, by means of the Law “On State Pensions” rather than any other normative acts. Consequently, all issues related with granting and recalculation of old age pension are regulated by the Law “On State Pensions”, including the issue on establishment of such legal regulatory framework to persons who have been granted old age pension instead of disablement pension that would be equal to the one established in the Contested Norm.
Taking into account the fact that the Contested Norm does not restrict the rights of persons who have been granted old age pension instead of disablement pension, whilst respective norms of the Law “On State Pensions” have not been contested in the frameworks of the present case; moreover, the participants of the case have failed to provide their opinion on compliance of the norms of the particular law with the Satversme, the Constitutional Court terminates proceedings in the case No. 2011-12-01 “On Compliance of Para 1 of the Transitional Provisions of the Law on the Social Protection of the Participants of the Chernobyl Nuclear Clean-up and Persons Suffered as a Result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station Accident with Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia”.
The Constitutional Court also indicated that the legislator has the right to establish necessary procedure for calculation of the amount of different social services, including establishment of a different pension recalculation procedure in respect to persons having been granted disablement pension or old age pension. Consequently, the legislator enjoys the freedom of action when assessing whether persons who have been granted old age pension instead of disablement pension for disablement obtained as a result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station Accident should be established the same procedure for pension amount calculation that is applied in respect to persons who still are beneficiaries of disablement pension. However, the legislator is committed, according to Article 91 of the Satversme, to ensure equal attitude towards persons enjoying equal and, according to certain circumstances, comparable conditions.
The Constitutional Court indicated that, when receiving suggestions of the Ombudsman on the necessity to make similar amendments into normative acts, the Saeima should assess them on their merits rather than leave unnoticed.
The Judgment of the Constitutional Court is final and not subject to appeal.
Linked case: 2011-12-01