18th of June, 2009
Today 17 judges, prosecutors, notaries and advocates, also six ex- and present judges of the Supreme Court, have received Marks of Distinction of the System of Justice.
The Mark of Distinction of 2nd grade was presented to ex-senator of the Department of Criminal Cases of the Senate of the Supreme Court Astrida Kazarova, ex-senator of the Department of Civil Cases of the Senate Ruta Zake and ex-adviser of the Complaints Division, before – the Head of the Division of Rehabilitation, Biruta Puke.
The Mark of Distinction of 3rd grade was presented to the senator of the Department of Criminal Cases of the Senate of the Supreme Court Peteris Dzalbe, the judge of the Chamber of Criminal Cases Ramona Nadezda Jansone and the judge of Chamber of Civil Cases Raimonds Gravelsins.
The Mark of Distinction of 2nd grade has been presented for extremely significant contribution or achievement in development of the system of Justice, strengthening of democracy and rule of law, for extremely significant scientific achievements in the field of law, for extremely significant contribution to creation and formation of policy in the field of jurisprudence, creation of international relationship, development of the case-law and to promotion of professionalism and knowledge of officials belonging to the system of Justice.
18th of June, 2009
One more time great number of advocates admitted in the Board of Sworn Advocates on June 18, vowed to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and after this they can start working as a sworn advocates.
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Ivars Bickovics, speaking to new advocates, stressed that advocate in some sense is a free artist, and result of his/her work mainly depends on personal skills and individual work of each person, but this profession still belongs to the judicial system. So the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court wished, so that promise given in advocate’s vow would be bread for a way to routine work.
12th of June, 2009
Today, on June 12, the Supreme Court has been visited by the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Armenia Gagik Arutunyan and judge of this court Henrik Danielyan on official visit.
They had meeting with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Ivars Bickovics, the Deputy of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Chair of the Department of Criminal Cases of the Senate Pavels Gruzins, the Chair of the Department of Administrative Cases of the Senate Veronika Krumina and the Chair of the Department of Civil Cases of the Senate Valerijans Jonikans. The Chief Justice of the Consitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia Gunars Kutris also participated in the conversation.
Guests have visited also the museum of the Supreme Court.
The delegation of the Constitutional Court of Armenia arrived to Latvia in official visit to Latvia in order to discuss topical questions of work of constitutional courts of Latvia and Armenia and participate in the seminar „Topical questions of constitutional proceedings”. During the visit representatives of Armenian courts met the President Valdis Zatlers, judges and employees of the Constitutional Court, the Chair of the Saeima Gundars Daudze and teachers of Faculty of Law of University of Latvia.
8th of June, 2009
During the last visit of the delegation of the Supreme Court to the European Court of Human Rights, judges expressed a wish, that during the visit of the lawyer of the ECHR Juris Rudevskis in Riga, he could take the floor with reading in the Supreme Court. It was possible to organise meeting today – on June, 8. Mr. Rudevskis gave an opinion about topical questions of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and answered questions of judges about court practice and interpretation of separate Paragraphs of European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Convention).
Firstly, in discussion there was stressed dynamic development of the court practice of the ECHR, for example, sentences that were taken 5-6 years ago, can be a part of the court practice that is out-of-date and at present it is very important to follow newest statements of the case-law.
Secondly, the meaning of judges of national courts was stressed in application of the Convention. ECHR in its activity follows the principle of subsidiarity – procedural and material-law. Main persons, applying the Convention, are judges of national courts, not judges of ECHR. Firstly, important responsibility in application of the principle of subsidiarity lays on shoulders of judges of court of cassation instance, in order that Convention would be applied correctly. The ECHR interferes only when all national means of protection of rights have been depleted. Secondly, in relation to material-law aspect, the freedom of activity of the ECHR is quite limited, as interpretation of national legal standards, in principle, stands for the competence of domestic courts that know the real environment in the state – way of thinking, mentality – better. The ECHR can interfere only in case, if application of the legal standard was evidently lawless.
1th of June, 2009
As from June 1, in order to save means, the Division of Complaints of the Supreme Court has been closed. In the future, functions of the division – acceptance of applications of persons and issue of answers – will be distributed among departments of the Senate, chambers and Document Administration Division of the Administration of the Court.
Three ex-employees of the division will continue to work as advisers of the Department of Civil Cases of the Senate and Documant Administration Division, but labour relationship has been eliminated with two other employees. So the work load of judges will increase, as judges will have to review applications from inhabitants and give answers to them. In year 2008 in the Division of Complaints 1406 applications from persons had been received that were related to different questions on judicial instances of Latvia, and 22 application – on questions of rehabilitation.
Due to lack of means as from June 1, eleven employees of chambers and divisions of the Administration were dismissed from their posts. Their duties have been distributed among other employees, whose work load will also increase. In total, number of employees of the Supreme Court has been reduced for 10%.