The Supreme Court doesn’t agree with opinion expressed after publication of statement of revision of Government Control in mass-media that in last year financing, given of means of government budget, were spent insufficiently. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Ivars Bickovics informed journalists on that at the press-briefing on Tuesday, on May 12.

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court turned attention of media on two essential points. Firstly, revision of Government Control was made for year 2008, when economic situation in the state was different from the present situation, and the Supreme Court acted according to laws that were in force last year. Secondly, in the report of revision of Government Control there are stated several imperfections, but none of them were considered by Government Control as of high priority.

Among imperfections, elimination of which Government Control has stated as of medium priority, is provision of such contributions and compensations to judges and employees of the Supreme Court, that on the basis of the Labour Law and Law „On Judicial Power” are stated in regulations of the Supreme Court.

As it has been mentioned before, the Supreme Court believes that rights of employess, beside wages, extras and bonuses to receive also other remuneration related to work are stated in the Law „On Labour” and there is no reason to think that legislator didn’t want to provide such rights for those, who work in the court.

Also in the law „On Judicial Power” there are stated such cases, when it is mandatory for the state to pay to the judge some extras and bonuses, but it doesn’t arise from the law that any other extras and bonuses cannot be paid to the judge.

Chief Justice said that these kinds of remuneration for the Supreme Court are defined like for state officials of Government Civil Service, but they were comparatively much less. Such procedure of compensations and bonuses existed in the Supreme Court since 2005, and none of previous years Government Control mentioned it as incompliance with law. Government Control in previous years even gave recommendations on how to register these kinds of remunerations more correct in book-keeping. I. Bickovics expressed quandary of change of opinion of the Government Control, because no changes were made in this field in legislation. The only amendment was that since January 1, 2009, it is prohibited by law to pay any extras and remunerations in institutions, which have been financed from means of state budget, and the Supreme Court abides by it strictly.

The second recommendation of medium priority of Government Control, while analysing medium imperfections, is payout of bonuses or extras work work in conditions of high intensity to judges and employees of the Supreme Court in December, 2008. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court turned attention to the fact that Government Control didn’t consider this fact of payout of means as illegal, but said that payment that was registered as supplement, actually were bonuses.

I. Bickovics underlined that the court acted amiss, because unlike other government institutions and ministries it hadn’t paid bonuses for State Holiday or the day before direction was given to the Public treasury to close bonus accounts. The Supreme Court abided its internal regulations, that extras have been paid according evaluation of work of each judge and employee of the Supreme Court for the quarter. However, executive power has no rights to state, how budget funds of the Supreme Court given to it by law, should be disposed.

Other facts mentioned in statement of the Government Control, for example, event for Ligo for employees or parting event of ex-Chief Justice A. Gulans, were underlined by I. Bickovics as inessential, because amounts of money spent were not so big so that they made essential influence on state budget.

 

 

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