Judicial Safeguards of Members’ of Parliament and Municipal Councillors’ Competence

Abstract

This article examines the judicial protection of the public-law competence of members of parliament and municipal councillors (hereinafter also – deputies). Its topicality arises from the fact that Latvian legislation does not provide a legal mechanism by which a deputy may individually safeguard his or her public-law competence. While the Latvian legal system offers remedies enabling deputies to defend their subjective rights as private persons, it does not regulate whether and how they may protect their subjective public rights, i.e. their competence.

Against this background, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia has adjudicated three cases in which this legal lacuna became evident. In these judgments, the Court articulated its perspective and developed an approach to ensuring effective legal protection, even in the absence of legislative amendments.

The article argues that constitutional courts can play a decisive role in filling such “white gaps” in the system of legal protection. By doing so, they ensure the comprehensive safeguarding of rights and maintain the balance of constitutional democracy, particularly in situations where the legislature delays in fulfilling its constitutional responsibilities.

The article’s contribution lies in conceptualising mandate-related competences as enforceable subjective public rights and in proposing effectiveness criteria – timeliness and enforceability – for judicial remedies in competence disputes where legislation is silent.