Based on the opinions expressed at the Plenary Session of the Supreme Court, the President of the Supreme Court Aigars Strupišs at the meeting of the Judicial Council on 14 February raised the issue of additional duties of judges and requested the Judicial Council to assess whether the participation of judges in ensuring the functions of the legislative and executive branches of government and taking decisions is consistent with the principle of separation of powers and the performance of the fundamental function of the judiciary.

The Judicial Council agreed that the Ministry of Justice and the Secretariat of the Judicial Council would collect information on the commissions, working groups and advisory councils where the participation of judges is provided for by law and would then return to assessing the legitimacy and appropriateness of these additional duties imposed on judges in each specific case.

The President of the Supreme Court noted that "over time, the legislative process has established a tradition in a number of legal acts of inviting judges of the Supreme Court and courts of other levels to participate as experts in the work of public administration bodies. In a number of cases, such participation has even been provided for by law, for example, participation of the President of the Supreme Court, senators and judges in disciplinary and examination commissions, as well as in advisory councils. The need for such membership should be reviewed for a number of reasons."

The most important reason is the principle of separation of powers as laid down in the Constitution, which states that the primary function of the court is to adjudicate. The court's active and continuous participation in the legislative and executive processes may not only give the impression of a lack of judicial neutrality and impartiality, but in some cases may even in fact violate the principle of separation of powers. This is particularly the case with regard to the court's involvement in bodies whose decisions may be challenged in court. The problem can also be seen with regard to various working groups within the legislative process, where judges express their opinions and engage in deciding on legal issues, thus giving the impression that the judiciary accepts one or another interpretation of a given law or norm, which may raise doubts both about the independence of the court and the impartiality of a particular judge when dealing with a particular case.

The second reason is the workload of judges. The President of the Supreme Court points out that currently 10 out of 35 senators are engaged in additional duties that are not specific to the judiciary. It should also be noted that many senators are also involved in judicial self-government, which falls within the direct competence of judges.

As examples of additional statutory duties of judges, the President of the Supreme Court mentioned the participation in the Disciplinary Commission for Insolvency Administrators and Bailiffs, the Commission of Certification and Attestation of Mediators, the Central Election Commission, the Examination Commission for Advocates, Notaries, Insolvency Administrators and Bailiffs, the Advisory Council for the Financial Intelligence Unit, the Advisory Council in Insolvency Matters, the Advisory Council to the State Probation Service.

At the meeting of the Judicial Council, opinions were expressed that the involvement of judges in examinations of candidates for professions belonging to the judicial system, as well as in working groups on legislative amendments, in particular on amendments to procedural laws, would be desirable. However, the personal involvement of individual judges could be replaced by methodological support to the examination commissions provided by the Senate or the Judicial Council.

 

Information prepared by

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

E-mail: rasma.zvejniece@at.gov.lv, telephone: +371 67020396, +371 28652211