Financial Services, Latvia, Law and Regulations, Legislation, Wages

The court said that as it decided on the judges’ pay system Saeima had to ensure that each judges’ salary guarantees the judge’s independence regardless of the instance of the court or the judge’s length of service.

It has also been noted in the ruling that the under the disputed provision judges’ salaries have to be aligned with the salary of the head of a legal department of a direct public administration institution. But by equating the above positions, lawmakers have not taken into account differences in functions, status and responsibility.

It has also not been taken into consideration that heads of legal departments of direct public administration institutions are entitled to bonuses and various other monetary awards for good job performance, but the size of judges’ salary does not change depending on their job performance.

The unconstitutional regulation will become invalid as of January 1, 2019, which means that lawmakers have been given time to draw up new legislation in accordance with the Constitution.

The balance was broken after judges were included in the public sector’s unified salary system and their salaries were aligned with the salaries of highly-qualified lawyers, applying a specific coefficient. However, when caps on public sector employees’ bonuses and extra allowances were lifted, the judges were left with salaries that were 50% smaller than those of public servants, the association of administrative judges said.