The Council for the Judiciary believes that, when publishing final decision adopted in disciplinary cases of judges, it is possible to disclose the name of a judge the examined case is related to.  However, the issue concerning protection of other data included in the decision in the disciplinary case, for example, particular court cases, secret of deliberation of court,  identity of third parties, sensitive data of a judge, etc.

The issue concerning transparency in assessment of activity of judges and an idea to amend the Judicial Disciplinary Liability Law, envisaging greater transparency and availability of information on examined disciplinary cases, was reviewed by the Council for the Judiciary upon request of the Judicial Policy Subcommittee of the Legal Affairs Committee of the Saeima (Parliament) to provide an opinion on necessity and opportunities of implementation of such amendments to law.  

Aldis Lavins, the Chairman of the Constitutional Court, when commenting the judgement of the Constitutional Court during the discussion on this issue, also pointed out that the Constitutional Court, in its judgement on compliance of Section 11.6 (1) of the Judicial Disciplinary Liability Law with Article 100 of the Constitution, indicated that restriction on disclosure of judge’s name must be ensured only at initial stage of proceedings, until adoption of final decision in the disciplinary proceedings.

The decision was adopted in the sitting of the Council for the Judiciary of 21 December. See information on all issues reviewed in the sitting here



Information prepared by

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

E-mail:, telephone: 67020396, 28652211