On 20 April, President of Latvia Egils Levits hosted a virtual swearing in ceremony for the judge of the Constitutional Court Anita Rodiņa from the Riga Castle.
Here is the speech by the President of Latvia Egils Levits to the participants of the virtual ceremony:
“Honourable Justice Rodiņa, you just took the oath of a judge of the Constitutional Court, starting a new chapter in you professional life. Constitutional Court is now also complete with seven judges required to have the full capacity.
I am happy that after acquiring a substantial experience and expertise on constitutional law and Constitutional Court procedures you have decided to continue working in this field in your new quality as the judge of the Court. Until now, you have been watching the Constitutional Court from the outside. You interpreted its decisions. Now you have an opportunity to be part of the Court and one of the judges creating the case-law. Your transition from academia to judiciary is, without a doubt, a great loss for the constitutional law research community. However, I am absolutely confident that, like your colleagues, you will find a way to fit science into your professional life. As you all know, legal science and application of law are totally inseparable, the way I see it. You will, however, find it harder to criticise the Constitutional court from now on. You can still say it to yourself. What I really want to emphasise is that we need the constitutional law experts to help us understand whether the Constitutional Court is at its best.
If one would take a look at your CV, he would quickly learn that the Constitutional Court is the exact place where you started your career path. Back then, the Court had just been established. You started there as a legal secretary. And now, 25 years later, Court marks its anniversary and a crucial milestone in the modern history of the Latvian State, history of our rule of law and our legal system. And I am certain that the experience that you have accrued over the years and your academic accomplishments give you an excellent starting point for your work at the Constitutional Court.
Traditionally, swearing in ceremony is attended by all judges of the Constitutional Court. I think the anniversary year is a good time to take the stock of Court’s achievements in the past quarter of a century. The first reference to a Constitutional Court in a constitutional document can be found in the Declaration ‘On the Restoration of the Independence of the Republic of Latvia’ of the 4 May 1990. Declaration is the first fundamental constitutional document by which the national independence of Latvia was restored. It is the first document, which called for the creation of a new state institution, which did not exist according to Satversme (the Constitution), the Constitutional Court. And six years later, in 1996, Constitutional Court came into being. And I am happy to have been involved with the Constitutional for all this time since 4 May 1990 until today. Constitutional Court was my priority as a Minister for Justice. I was also the one who drafted the Constitutional Court bill in 1993 and later submitted it to the parliament.
People do acknowledge and appreciate your work a lot. You are the constitutional institution, judicial body, but not in the traditional sense. You are a legal body sui gerenis. It means ‘autonomous’. Constitutional Court is responsible for matters related to the state of Latvia, how it functions, how it interacts with its people, citizens, and how it all works together in our country. If we analyse the scope of competence of our Constitutional Court according to the special law governing its work, we can see that the scope is very wide and comprehensive. Not all constitutional courts around the world have such a broad mandate. I think that is how it should be in Latvia, because that is how the rule of law works here. One of its tasks is to review the constitutional claims. Not all constitutional courts in the world do that. The initial bill that I already mentioned did call for introduction of judicial review of constitutional claims, but there was strong scepticism about giving natural persons the right to sue the state. This section was deleted from the bill. Nevertheless, some years later, in 2000, constitutional claim was reintroduced into the scope of competence of the Constitutional Court through the special law. And now it has become one of the main types of claims that you are dealing with. And I am extremely happy that Mrs Rodiņa has chosen to focus her professional efforts on the constitutional claim to Constitutional Court as one of the main remedies available under the rule of law and fundamental human rights protection legislation of Latvia.
As we also know, Constitutional Court sets the precedent for the entire national judicial system. Our judicial bodies follow these standards of justification, legal interpretations and legal doctrines. And that is very important. Constitutional Court sets the bar high. And you constantly kept the bar high. I am certain that you will continue to do so in the future too.
I am also happy to see that the Constitutional Court is actively engaged in international cooperation. Cooperation with the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and constitutional courts in Europe and the world. When I was still working at the CJEU as a judge, Constitutional Court of Latvia collaborated with CJEU on an initiative for the establishment of the European Union (EU) constitutional court network. We had already set the date for the kick-off conference, but the pandemic came, and we had to push it back, but it will definitely take place as soon as it is safe to start building EU constitutional court cooperation network. Such cooperation is of crucial importance, because our Constitutional Court and our legal system are no longer exclusively governed by Satversme as the only set of constitutional standards and constitutional framework since 2004. They are strongly integrated with the EU law, and thus also the Court of Justice of the European Union. I should also stress that we should not take the openness to cross-national dialogue and international cooperation for granted, especially from the European and global perspective. Latvian Constitutional Court is very innovative in this sense.
I would also like to focus on another unique feature of our Constitutional Court. Our court is probably the first constitutional court in Europe to engage in active public communication on its judgements. I know that most of the courts (courts other than constitutional) follow the traditional approach where court, and also the judges, communicate predominantly through their rulings. There is no other communication from a court. Unfortunately, people expect more from a court in the 21st century. People have become more sceptical. This applies also to courts and their judgements. People need more information, explanations as to why the court has ruled as it has and why no other outcome was possible. And our court is ahead of the curve in this regard if you, again, compare us and Europe, setting a very strong example for its European peers.
Every judge has an enormous responsibility towards people and the state. You are the one who decide which one matters most in respective case. And the holistic approach is essential here, as the state and its population is the field that you are regulating with you judgements, the domain that you adjudicate. You have to follow the perspective and best interests of an individual, and the best interests and perspective of the state. Sometimes, people tend to oversimplify the matters by claiming that on one side you have an individual and on the other side there is a state. This is a very naïve way to look at it – democratic countries are always driven by people, including people who have lodged their constitutional complaints with the Constitutional Court. And, if you read the judgements of the Constitutional Court, you can see the holistic approach there. From the rule of law angle, that is the best approach, the best way to interpret our constitution and constitutional system. Approach based on understanding that the state and the citizens, individual persons are one is crucial, and it is important to be able to understand which interests and rights should prevail in the context of state and its people being one.
Honourable Mrs Rodiņa, I hope you feel inspired by the oath that you just gave to accept your new duties at the Constitutional Court with pride, while the Court will benefit from new, highly qualified and competent colleague. All the best to you!”