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practice of the ECHR, for example, sentences that were taken 5-6 years ago, can be a part of the court practice that is out-of-date and at present it is very important to follow newest statements of the case-law.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.

During discussion concrete cases that had been reviewed in the ECHR, were discussed, for example, „Andrejeva versus Latvia”, „Mentzen versus Latvia”, „Zavoloka versus Latvia”, „Kononovs versus Latvia”, and influence of decisions taken on application of legal standards.

During last year more than 800 cases had been registered in the ECHR, in which claims against Latvia were accepted, that’s why it is essential to discuss the topicality of the court practice of the ECHR. It will be possible to come to conclusions upon solidity of claims submitted after a while, but such indicator of number of claims submitted in scale of Europe ir relatively high, in proportion to the number of inhabitants in the Republic of Latvia.

In the end of the meeting J. Rudevskis thanked the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Ivars Bickovics and judges for invitation and said that he would likely agree for some other meeting.


Information prepared by

Head of the Division of Communications of the Supreme Court Rasma Zvejniece

E-mail: rasma.zvejniece@at.gov.lv, telephone: 7020396, 28652211