On issues reviewed and decisions adopted by the Council for the Judiciary in the sitting of 24 November

Issues related to judicial careers

Courts for eight new judges are determined.The Council for the Judiciary determined courts for new judges confirmed by the Saeima (Parliament) in the office of a judge of a district (city) court to execute judicial duties. All eight new judges will work in Riga city courts.

Ieva Andzane and Inga Pujate – in Kurzeme district court, Inguna Casno – in Vidzeme suburb court, Lana Leja, Ilona Zelmene and Ludmila Vazdike – in Zemgale suburb court, Ieva Lucina-Linka and Martins Tupureins – in Latgale suburb court.

Candidacy of a deputy Chair of Riga city Vidzeme suburb court is supported.The Council for the Judiciary supported re-appointment of the judge Doloresa Bambere to the office of a deputy Chair of Riga city Vidzeme suburb court. The judge has 21 years of experience in judge’s office and she received positive assessment both from the Chair and body of the court when holding the office of the deputy Chair during previous term of office.

The judge is transferred from an administrative court to a court of general jurisdiction.The Council for the Judiciary supported transfer of Peteris Novicenoks in the office of a judge from Rezekne court house of the Administrative district court to the Rezekne court. The judge applied in a competition to vacant office of a judge in Rezekne court, and the competition committee considered his candidacy to be appropriate and the Judicial Qualification Committee gave a positive statement.

Increase of number of judges in regional courts is requested

To ensure reform of the Supreme Court stipulated in the law “On Judicial Power”, which envisages liquidation of court Chambers, the Council for the Judiciary will ask the Saeima (Parliament)to increase number of judges in regional courts for three offices. Posts are necessary for judges of the Chamber of Criminal Cases, who will not be appointed to the office of a judge of a department of the Supreme Court until 31December.

The Council for the Judiciary also approved procedure, how a proposal on transfer of a judge of a Chamber of the Supreme Court to work to other court, if a judge will not be appointed to the office of a judge of a Department of the Supreme Court until termination of operation of a court chamber, will be prepared and reviewed. In accordance with the Transitional Provisions of the law “On Judicial Power” the Saeima decides on transfer of a judge upon motivated proposal of the Council for the Judiciary.

Judges’ offices are redistributed in district (city) courts

The Council for the Judiciary asks the Saeima (Parliament) to change division of number of judges in district (city) courts, which is necessary due to amendments to the law “On Judicial Power”, which implement changes in list of courts included in catchment area of Riga regional court, namely, annexing Riga city Centre district court and Sigulda court to another courts as from 1 March 2015.

The Council for the Judiciary accepted a proposal of the Ministry of Justice to annex five offices of the Siglda court, which shall be liquidated, to Riga district court, and to distribute ten offices of judges of Riga city Centre district court – to annex two judge’s offices to Riga city Latgale suburb court, one office – to Riga city Ziemelu district court, and seven offices – to Riga city Vidzeme suburb court.

Additional office of a judge in its turn will be granted to Dobele district court upon proposal of Dobele district court and Zemgale regional court, transferring it from the Land Registry office of Dobele district court to Dobele district court. Redistribution is performed to equalize judges’ load in Dobele district court and its Land Registry office and to decrease accumulation of cases in the district court.

Guidelines for transfer of a case to another court are approved

The Council for the Judiciary approved guidelines, how transfer of a case received for proceedings to other court must be organised to ensure faster reviewof the case.

To equalize load of courts, such procedure is envisaged in Section 321of the Civil Procedure Law until the end of reform of so called clear court instances. The Council for the Judiciary had previously pointed out that unified procedure should be established how to apply legal provision and to organise process, when to transfer cases, review of which on merits has not been commenced yet, to courts of the same or another court region.

It has been stressed in guidelines that decrease and equalization of load of courts cannot be independent argument to transfer the concrete case to other court; the decision on transfer of a case to be reviewed in other court must be reasoned with objective considerations that it will be possible to review respective case in other court much faster.

Guidelines approved by the Council for the Judiciary establish procedure, which cases may be suggested for transfer to review to other court, how to choose court, to which the case is to be transferred, and cooperation among courts.

The Ministry of Justice has prepared project of guidelines in cooperation with courts, having listened to opinions provided by them.

Information on security solutions in court rooms is heard

The Ministry of Justice informed the Council for the Judiciary on how the question about ensuring of security in court rooms has been solved.

To discuss measures, which, having observed judgements rendered by the European Court of Human Rights, are to be taken to avoid violations of human rights, the Ministry of Justice organised discussion with participation of representatives of courts, the Court Administration and Bureau of the representative of Government before international human rights institutions. Taking into account that placing of a person behind a metal bar is a question of practice rather than of a law, which is related to guarding procedures and security guarantee measures, the issue was discussed separately at the meeting of Secretaries of the State of the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Interior.

It is concluded in result of negotiations that alternative solution to guarantee security of judges and participants of proceedings must be found and metal bars in court rooms are to be dismounted. The possibility to implement more modern security measures, for example, cabins made of organic glass, instead of metal bars should be assessed. However, it is related to necessity for additional financing. That is why now the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Interior ask judges to use videoconferencing in criminal proceedings more extensively; the Ministry of Justice would be ready to elaborate coefficient amendments to laws.

Hearing information of the Ministry of Justice, judges represented in the Council for the Judiciary expressed opinion that videoconference should be an exceptional form of a court hearing rather than a fundamental form, because it still restricts one of fundamental principles – right to direct participation in a court hearing. The Council for the Judiciary asked the ministry to continue to study experience and to solve issue regarding equipping of at least single court rooms with more modern means of security.

Information report on e-case project is accepted for knowing

The Council for the Judiciary heard information on project of information report “On implementation of e-case project in period of planning of structural funds of the European Union in 2014-2020” prepared by the Ministry of Justice in cooperation with the Office of the Prosecutor’s General and the Ministry of Interior, which was announced at the meeting of State Secretaries.

Project of information report provides information on necessity of implementation of e-proceedings in work of Latvian investigative, judicial and other law enforcement bodies, determines main directions of action and institutions involved in implementation of the e-case project.

The Council for the Judiciary conceptually supports further development of e-case project.

Information prepared by

Rasma Zvejniece, the Head of the Division of Communication of the Supreme Court

E-mail: , telephone: 67020396, 28652211