The Constitutional Court initiated a case on the procedure of recalculation of invalidity pension
On 20 April 2012, the Second Panel of the Constitutional Court initiated the case “On Compliance of Para 16 (1) of Transitional Provisions of the Law “On State Pensions” insofar as It Applies to Invalidity Pension Recalculation Formula in Case of Change of the Invalidity Group Provided that the Beneficiary of Invalidity Pension before the Change of the Invalidity Group was an Employee or made Social Contributions, with Article 91[1] and 109[2] of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia”.
The Contested Norm:
Para 16 (1) of Transitional Provisions of the Law “On State Pensions” provides that pensions, which were granted before this Law came into force, but in relation to the invalidity pension – before 1 January 1997, shall not be recalculated, except for the case if the accrued length of period of insurance has been supplemented up to 1 January 1996, if there have been changes in the family composition, which affect the family members who have the right to a survivor’s pension, and if the invalidity group has changed.
The pension is calculated based on a particular formula taking into account the average wage subject to insurance contributions, that was applied in specifying the amount of the pension before the recalculation of the pension, the length of period of insurance in complete years, and the number of family members who have a right to receive a survivor’s pension.
The Facts
The Applicant, the Administrative Case Department of the Supreme Court [Augstākās tiesas Senāta Administratīvo lietu departaments] is reviewing a case where a natural person has been granted a permanent invalidity pension in 1986. In 1987, the person has been granted the third group invalidity pension that was recalculated in 2008 based on the granted second group of invalidity.
The person has contested the decision of the State Social Insurance Agency [Valsts sociālās apdrošināšanas aģentūra] insofar as it concerns recalculation of the second invalidity group pension without applying the average wage subject to social contributions, although the person has been constantly employed and mace social contributions.
According to the Applicant, the procedure established in the Contested Norm does not ensure observance of the principle of social insurance, which states that the amount of pension depends on contributions made. Moreover, it establishes an unequal attitude towards persons who had already received the third group invalidity pension before 1 January 1997 and continued working and making social contributions by thus obtaining the second invalidity group, and employees who obtained the second invalidity group after 1 January 1997.
The Applicant indicates that the different attitude is non-proportional and causes detriment that is greater than the benefit gained by the society.
Legal procedure
The Saeima was asked to provide, before 19 June 2010, a reply on the facts of the case and legal justification thereof.
The term of preparation of the case is 20 September 2012.
[1] Article 91 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia: „All human beings in Latvia shall be equal before the law and the courts. Human rights shall be realised without discrimination of any kind”.
[2] Article 109 of the Satversme: „Everyone has the right to social security in old age, for work disability, for unemployment and in other cases as provided by law”.
Linked case: 2012-09-01