On June 4, the Department of Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court refused to initiate cassation proceedings, and thus the judgment of the Latgale Regional Court entered into force, according to which four defendants were convicted for acting for greedy purposes, in a group of persons, and deliberately trying to provide several persons with the opportunity if illegal stay in the Republic of Latvia. One of the defendants was sentenced to imprisonment for eight months, while the rest three were sentenced to one‑year imprisonment. All the accused persons have been deprived of the right to hold positions in the field of passenger transport for a time period of one year. As the criminal tools (two cars and one mobile phone) belong to other persons, their value was recovered from the defendants who used these tools.

According to the description of the criminal offense included in the appealed judgement, the defendants met eight illegal migrants at the agreed place, who illegally crossed the border of the Republic of Latvia from the territory of Belarus, with an intent to ensure their illegal stay in the Republic of Latvia, taking them to Germany by car. The intent did not materialize, because the officials of the State Border Guard detained the defendants.

When refusing to initiate cassation proceedings, the Senate found that the defence counsels of two defendants repeated the arguments contained in the appeals regarding the severity of the punishment, however, contrary to what the defence counsels indicated, the court of appeal had assessed the nature of the criminal offense, the damage caused, the personalities of the offenders, as well as the purpose of the punishment.

In the appealed judgment, it is justified, inter alia, why the purpose of punishment can only be achieved by deprivation of liberty. According to the judgement, the number of criminal offenses related to provision of persons who illegally cross the state border of the Republic of Latvia with the opportunity of illegal stay in the Republic of Latvia by relocating then in the state territory has significantly increased, and previously imposed punishments in similar cases have not deterred defendants from committing the criminal offense, and what is more – in the region, where a state of emergency is declared in connection with the migration crisis at international borders.

Commission of a criminal offense during an emergency situation has been established as one of the aggravating circumstances. In this regard, the judgment explains that the defendants caused additional damage to the state administration procedure, because the services involved in the supervision of emergency situations, in addition to performing the assigned functions, had to be involved in the detection of the criminal offense. The defendants caused additional damage to national security, as they destabilized the legal order at the national border, hindered the operation of institutions involved in national border protection, and tried to ensure the movement of persons, who illegally cross the national border, in the territory of the European Union.

In compliance with the aforesaid, the Senate recognized that the references to violations of the Criminal Law contained in the cassation complaints are based on the desire to obtain a re-evaluation of the circumstances, affecting the sentence imposed on the defendants, in the court of cassation, however, in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law, the court of cassation does not re-evaluate the evidence in a case and the circumstances affecting a sentence.

Senate’s decision. Case No SKK-244/2024 (18240009823)

 

Ilze Butkus, Communication adviser of the Supreme Court

Telephone: +371 67020302; e-mail: ilze.butkus@at.gov.lv