104/2010 Coll.
FINDINGS


Constitutional Court
On behalf of the Republic


Constitutional Court decided on 2 March 2010 Plenary composed of the Chairman Pavel Rychetsky
court judges and Frantisek Duchon, Vlasta Formánková,
Vojen Güttler, Pavel Holländer, Ivana Janu, Vladimir crust Dagmar
Lastovecká , Jiri Mucha, Jan Musil, Jiri Nykodým, Miloslav Vyborny
Eliška Wagnerová and Michaela Židlická on the proposal
Municipal court in Brno, Roosevelt 16, Brno, for which it Mgr. Michael
roads, the presiding judge of the Municipal Court in Brno, the annulment
provisions of point 1. a) and b) and paragraph 2 of Art. XLVIII, the extraordinary
measure for determining the salary and certain reimbursements of expenses
representatives of state power and some state bodies and judges
in the years 2008 to 2010, the thirtieth of Law No. . 261/2007 Coll., on stabilization of public budgets
, and if it concerns a judge of the district, regional and
Supreme court, Supreme court and Supreme administrative court,
participation of the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Parliament and Senate
Czech Parliament as parties

Follows:

The petition is denied.
Reason


I.
Recap draft


First The Constitutional Court received 21 3. 2008 draft Municipal Court in Brno
repealing the provisions in point 1. a) and b) and paragraph 2 of Art. XLVIII, by
extraordinary measure for determining the salary and certain reimbursements of expenses
representatives of state power and some state bodies and judges
in the years 2008 to 2010, the thirtieth of Law No. . 261/2007 Coll., on stabilization of public budgets
if it concerns a judge of the district, regional and
Supreme court, Supreme court and Supreme administrative court.

Second The petitioner stated that before it of an action, which is
judge of the Municipal Court in Brno seeks against the Czech Republic - Municipal Court in Brno
payment of the amount of CZK 3900 entitlement to a salary supplement
within the meaning of § 28-31 of the Act no. 236/1995 Coll., on salaries and other
indemnities associated with the position of representatives of state power and
some state bodies and judges and members of the European Parliament,
in force at the time (hereinafter "the Act on salaries
representatives of state power") and the reimbursement of expenses pursuant to § 32 paragraph. 1 point. a)
same bill as him for the month of January 2008 was not paid the full salary and full
reimbursement of expenses (hereinafter referred to as "salary"), on what would have been entitled.
Application of provisions designed to abolish (the "relevant provisions")
happens that in calculating the salary of judges in the period from 1
1, 2008 to 31st 12. 2010 was the salary basis reached 31
12th, 2007. With effect from 1st 1, 2008 and to the judges does not increase the salary
although this is supposed to happen with regard to the provisions of § 3 para. 2 and 3 of the Law on salaries
representatives of state power.

Third The petitioner concludes that the provisions whose application is
to freeze judges' salaries, are contrary to Art. 1, paragraph. 1 in conjunction with Article
. 82, paragraph 1 or Article. 2. 1 of the Constitution of the Czech Republic and with
provisions of Art. 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, and therefore control of the action
cut and filed with the Constitutional Court to annul.
Compensation as regards judges described as an impermissible interference with their
judicial independence, and pointed to the loss of stability guarantees
their emoluments. He stated that the legislature formally once, but in a short period of time
regularly each year on the basis of generally worded
reasons, seeks to change the rules of the salary
remuneration of judges - in 1997-2001 custodial additional salary for II.
Half (Act no. 287/1997 Coll., Supplementing Law no. 236/1995
Coll., On salary and other indemnities associated with the duties
representatives of state power and some state bodies and judges in
amended by Act no. 138/1996 Coll .; Act no. 268/1998 Coll., on the withdrawal of additional
salary for the second half of 1998, representatives of state authority and
some state bodies, judges, state prosecutors and members of the Presidium
securities Commission; Act no. 308/1999 Coll., on the withdrawal of additional
salary for the second half of 1999 and the second half of 2000
representatives of state power and some state bodies, judges, prosecutors and
members of the presidium of the securities Commission, law no.
416/2001 Coll., on the withdrawal of additional salary for the second half of 2001 and

Determine the amount of additional salaries for the first and second halves of 2002
representatives of state power and some state bodies, judges, prosecutors
, members of the Presidium of the Securities Commission, representatives
Ombudsman and members of the Banking Board of the Czech national Bank) in 2002
custodial half of the additional salary for I. and II. half (Act no.
416/2001 Coll.), in 2003, freezing wages for the years 2003 to 2005
anchoring grade foundations 31. 12. 2002, custodial half pay for the next
I and II . half (Act no. 425/2002 Coll., which
for the year 2003 an extraordinary measure for determining the salary and some
reimbursement of expenses connected with the duties of representatives of state power and
certain state authorities, judges and prosecutors and laying
these persons the level of additional salaries for the first and second halves of
2003) and shortening the period for which it is paid while temporarily
unable to work [law no. 420 / 2002 Sb., which
shortens the time during which the representatives of state power and certain
state bodies, judges and prosecutors are paid while
temporary inability to perform functions, and laying down certain
measures in health insurance (care) and pension insurance]
in 2004 while continuing to freeze salaries custodial half pay for the next
I and II. half (Act no. 427/2003 Coll., which for years
2004, 2005 and 2006, an extraordinary measure for determining the salary and
some reimbursement of expenses connected with the duties
representatives of state power and some state authorities, judges and prosecutors, above
additional salaries of these people for the first and second halves of the years 2004, 2005 and
2006 and amending certain related laws) and imprisonment
remaining half of the additional salary for II. half (Act no. 590/2004 Coll., on
withdrawal of additional salary for the second half of 2004
representatives of state power and some state bodies, judges, prosecutors and
MEPs elected in Czech Republic), in 2005
dissolving one of the other salaries and canceling the second of them
(Act no. 626/2004 Coll., amending certain laws in connection with
implementation of public finance reforms in the area of ​​remuneration)
a reduction in salary as a result of the new method of calculating the salary base-bound
three times the average wage in the public sector [law no. 309/2002
Coll., on amendment to laws related to adoption of the law on civil service
employees in administrative authorities and remuneration of these employees and
other employees in the administrative offices (service Act)].

Fourth Wage restrictions, occurs by the petitioner to a disproportionate
unconstitutional interference in the legitimate expectation of those who were
law formulated conditions for an indefinite period.
Executive power in its legislative proposals, nor the legislature itself, despite a
proclamation salary restrictions in all areas of government
failed to observe the principle of proportionality. The petitioner, referring to the available
sources said that although the government officially no increase
'spreadsheet' salaries, but from the state budget earmarked for
salaries of civil servants by at least 1.5% more
financial resources than in 2007 and in 2008 should increase by 4.1%. For
teaching staff in regional schools, including private and church schools
whose salaries are also derived from the state
budget in 2008 was recorded across the board increase by a further 1.5%;
follows from that salary restrictions are far
not apply to all employees paid from the state budget.

Fifth In support of its arguments, the petitioner cited the reasoning of the judgment
Constitutional Court dated 16. 1. 2007 sp. Nos. Pl. US 55/05 (N 9/44 SbNU
103; 65/2007 Coll.) And a number of legal opinions expressed therein described as
general theses in assessing recurrent changes in the remuneration rules
judges that they were adoption of the Act on stabilization of public budgets in the
founding more (long-term) restriction judges' salaries
completely denied.

II.
Observations of the parties


6th Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic in response to the petition
dated August 21, 2007, signed by the Chairman of the Chamber of Deputies Ing. Miloslav Vlcek
, said that the bill on stabilization of public budgets was

Marked as Parliamentary print no. 222 and was discussed by the Budget Committee
on 27 June 2007 and 8 August 2007, and the Committee on Health on
26th June 2007; in both committees showed no
amendment or proposal "for its abolition." The Committee on Social Policy discussed the proposal
Act of 28 June 2007 and voted a motion to dismiss
bill as a whole. In the second reading of the law, which took place
on 14 and 15 August 2007 was the original article XLVIII

Extraordinary measure for determining the salary and certain reimbursements of expenses
representatives of state power and some state bodies and judges in the years 2008-2010

given "any amendment or proposal to reject this Article."
Deputies noted that the draft law on the stabilization of public budgets
approved on 21 August 2007 and that the law was after
properly conducted legislative process signed by the appropriate constitutional authorities
and promulgated in the Official Gazette.

7th The Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic in response to the petition dated 13
August 2008, signed by the Chairman of the Senate. Premysl Sobotka,
stated that the petition is directed against several provisions of the Act, which
Constitutional Court already addressed in proceedings conducted under file. Nos. Pl. US 24/07, Pl
. US 1/08 and Pl. US 2/08, which took the decision published in the Official Gazette
under no. 88/2008 Coll., No. 251/2008 Coll. and 166/2008 Coll. [Judgment
sp. Nos. Pl. US 24/07 of 31. 1. 2008 (N 26/48 SbNU 303); Finding sp.
Brand. Pl. US 1/08 of 20. 5. 2008 (N 91/49 SbNU 273); Finding sp. Ref.
Pl. US 2/08 of 23. 4. 2008 (N 73/49 SbNU 85)]. To discuss
Act on stabilization of public budgets in the upper chamber of Parliament said the Senate
everything essential in its statement of November 2007 (driving under file no. Ref.
Pl. US 24/07), and therefore further on this statement, including sending
stenographic report of the meeting of the Senate and its resolution in which it expressed
will deal with the bill, bequeathed. Appeal observed that
formal terms the constitutionality of the amendments proposed to abolish the Constitutional Court
already addressed in proceedings under file. Nos. Pl. US 02/08, where part
thirtieth Act on stabilization of public budgets was included in the reasoning of the judgment
no. 166/2008 Coll. under item 46 and the Constitutional Court a proposal to repeal this regulation
rejected the findings.

III.

Petitioners argument and supplement draft

8th In his reply, dated 21 October 2008 the parties' observations
petitioner disagreed with the view outlined by the Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic
according to which the case has already been decided, and that for this
obstacle to the Constitutional Court should reject the proposal . After a brief chronology
proceedings on a petition to repeal the Act on stabilization of public budgets to draft
group of deputies of the Chamber of Deputies and a group of senators
Senate of the Czech Parliament, originally under file. Nos. Pl. US 24/07,
from which the decision of the Plenum of the Constitutional Court ruled the
separate consideration of the petition under file. Nos. Pl. US 2/08,
petitioner pointed out that his proposal has exercised his right to enter into this
intervene (§ 35 para. 2 of Act no. 182/1993 Coll., On the Constitutional Court
). After him the management sp. Nos. Pl. US 2/08
not acted, the petitioner concludes that his proposal will be discussed separately
, which also indicates reasoning of the judgment of the Constitutional Court
case file. Nos. Pl. US 2/08, para. 67, in which the Constitutional Court noted
principle bound by the petition to repeal the legislation and concluded
that some of the laws governing claims of different categories of employees
listed in sections 27-35 Act on stabilization of public budgets
proposal were attacked, and therefore the Constitutional court can not cancel
. The petitioner therefore considers that the procedural steps of the Constitutional Court
suggests that the provisions in the Constitutional Court
still not examined and that res judicata is therefore not in the present case
given.

9th Its previous arguments in the petition, the petitioner added
noting that despite the proclamations of the legislature
salary restrictions in all areas of government occurred in 2008 to raise funds
teachers and this trend has continued in
, 2009. In 2009, moreover, has lead to an increase in civil servants' salaries
across the board by 1.5%. These measures petitioner considers not respected

Proportionality, thereby also no way disputing the claims of other
groups of persons paid from the state budget. In the petition dated 5. 1. 2009
petitioner pointed approved law no. 475/2008 Coll., On the state budget
Czech Republic for 2009, of which (resp.
Draft amendments thereto filed ) shows that in 2009, a rise of salaries
virtually all groups of civil servants, with the exception of teaching staff
regional education and public officials, including judges, at
where the base salary for the years 2008 to 2010 frozen.

10th To reply, the petitioner to supplement its proposal, the Chamber
Deputies and the Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic have not expressed.

11th In the petition dated 5. 1. 2009 The petitioner pointed to Law no.
475/2008 Coll., On the Czech State Budget for 2009, of which
(as well as the content of Annex no. 2 to Resolution Chamber
Deputies no. 965 from the 45th meeting of 10. 12. 2008) shows that within
amendments to the Act were increased salaries
virtually all groups of state employees by a total of 2 7 billion. CZK. Except
were teaching staff of regional schools, and where there
for repeated salary increase during 2008 and 2009, and
constitutional officials, including judges, where the base salary for the years 2008
-2010 frozen. The petitioner has repeatedly stressed
breach the principle of proportionality and denial proclamations legislature on pay
restrictions in all areas of government. He reiterated that
not dispute the claims of other groups of persons whose salary is paid from the state budget
, but his thing is to draw attention to the repeated non-compliance with the principle of proportionality
salary restrictions.

IV.

Information of the Ministry of Justice and express the petitioner

12th The Ministry of Justice a request under § 48 para. 1 of the Constitutional Court gave
on 12 3. 2009 Constitutional Court information
overall average annual salary being received by the District Judge,
regional and high court judges Supreme court and judges of the Supreme administrative court
according to length of service in 2007 and 2008: --------------------------
-------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
average monthly salary 2007 2008
Judge (CZK) Practice 6 years experience 30 years experience 6 years experience
30 years old ------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ----------------
OS 57 307 88 608 57 580 88 997
KS 63 333 99 195 64 000 99 225
VS 110939111136 || | NS 113 382 113 525
NSS 111 843 112 200 ---------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------- --------------

----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------
average annual salary 2007 2008
Judge (CZK) Practice 6 years experience 30 years experience 6 years experience
30 years old ------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ----------------
OS 687 684 1 063 296 690 6901 067 964
KS 759 996 1 190 340 768 0001 190 700
VS 1331 333 2681
NS 632 1 360 5841 362 300
NSS 1 342 1161 346 400
---------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -------------------

13th The petition, Justice Minister JUDr. Jiri Pospisil
said he was not in favor of withdrawing the salaries of judges and other necessities
associated with the performance of judicial duties, a condition where there is repeated
limiting the legal rights of judges and from the unfolding proceedings for their
constitutionality, described as unacceptable, since it is caused
undesirable impression of continuous rivalry between the judiciary and the power
legislative and executive branch of the remuneration for the performance of functions. He noted that
assessment of whether the legislative power is exercised, in relation to the development
government budgetary revenue and development sessions limited by law after a period of time
salary increases among persons paid from public budgets
is completely to the Constitutional court; in his opinion
such a measure, which is not confined only to judges, but to the principle of judicial independence does not
. Minister of Justice does not consider
correct view, where the level of independence of the judge, notwithstanding the

Any existing objective circumstances directly dependent on the amount
material security, and considers that financial security is only one of
supporting conditions which create an environment for the
principle of judicial independence in the performance of functions between whom and
essence of this principle not a direct connection.
Level of material security must necessarily be reflected real economic situation of the country in which the judiciary
as a public service. Concluding his statement
Justice Minister pointed out that the transitional measures
in relation to the salary restriction does not apply only to judges but also other
entities benefiting from salary and other essentials connected with
functions under the Act no. 236/1995 Coll.

14th The Ministry of Justice petitioner filing of
8th 4. 2009 said that the ministry has turned the data on the net and gross salary
judge, and joined own comparison of the actual gross salary
judge with data published by the Ministry (in the attached table
italics):

----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------
monthly salary of a judge of practice since the beginning of the 6th year of practice since the beginning of the 30th year
----------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ------------------
district court in 2007 (according to the petitioner) 57.500 CZK 85.900 CZK
district court in 2007 (according to the Ministry of Justice) 57.307 CZK 88.608 CZK

District court in 2008 (according to the petitioner) 57.500, - CZK 85.900 CZK
district court in 2008 (according to the Ministry of Justice) 57.580 CZK 88.997 CZK

----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------
annual salary of a judge of practice since the beginning of the 6th year of practice since the beginning of the 30th year
----------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- ------------------
district court in 2007 (according to the petitioner) 690,000 CZK 1,030,800 CZK
district court in 2007 (according to the Ministry of Justice) 687684, CZK 1,063,296 CZK
district court in 2008 (according to the petitioner) 690,000 CZK 1,030,800 CZK
district court in 2008 (according to the Ministry of Justice) 690,960 CZK 1,067,964 CZK || | ------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------ || |
15th The petitioner stated that the salary of judges for 2007 is calculated by
base salary is determined in accordance with § 3 para. 3 of the Act no. 236/1995 Coll., Which
by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs no. 582 / 2006 Coll.
delivery of the salary base for determining salary and certain reimbursements
expenses under the Act no. 236/1995 Coll., on salary and other terms
associated with the office of representatives of state power and some
state bodies and judges and Members of the European Parliament, as
amended in 2007, the amount of CZK 56,847 per month,
and thus laid the base salary multiplied by the pay coefficient
according to § 28 of the cited law; the resulting amount is the salary of a judge (salary
rounded up to CZK 100). For the year 2008 amounted
base salary judge reached as of 31. 12. 2007, implying that
salary basis, and therefore the resulting gross salary of a judge in 2008
consistent with 2007 . Small disproportion in the figures of the Ministry of justice
according to the petitioner was apparently caused by errors in calculations.
In the conclusion of his statement the petitioner speculated that placing clean
salary is misleading, since it is a variable quantity, the amount of net salary
for each taxpayer and depends eg. The amount called.
amounts deductible from the tax base, etc.

16th The Chamber of Deputies and the Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, the Ministry of Justice
information to comment on it.

17th In submissions dated 6 5. 2009 The petitioner pointed out that the Government
Czech Republic approved the draft government regulation amending Regulation
Government no. 564/2006 Coll., On salaries of employees in public service
and governance, and Government Regulation no. 565/2006 Coll., the emoluments
soldiers, government decree no. 566/2006 Coll., on payment of personal emoluments
spiritual churches and religious societies, and government regulations | || no. 125/2009 Coll., Laying down the scale of basic tariffs for members of security forces
2009. The volume increase in salaries
employees in public services and administration as of 1. 6. 2009 by 3.5%

Represents an amount of 2.4 billion. CZK, which is a manifestation of the petitioner
repeated breach of the principle of proportionality salary restrictions.

18th In the petition dated 24. 7. 2009 petitioner also drew attention to the preparation
draft law amending some laws in connection with extraordinary
measure in determining the salary and certain reimbursements of expenses
representatives of state power and some state authorities, judges, members of the European Parliament and
prosecutors in 2011 and 2012. According
draft articulated wording of the Act and its explanatory memorandum to be changed
Act on stabilization of public budgets under Article thirtieth.
XLVIII and in the thirty-first Article. LI with effect from the date of publication;
change involves changing the numbers "2010" should be replaced with the number "2012".
Further, to be effective from 1 January 2013 changed the law on salaries and other
indemnities associated with the position of representatives of state power and
some state bodies and judges and members of the European Parliament
so that § 3 para. 3 of the Act no. 236/1995 Coll., as amended by Act no. 309/2002 Coll
., the word "three times" should be replaced by "2.5 times".
The explanatory memorandum states that in 2011 there should be a thaw
salaries and their sudden rise as a result of indexation restore
mechanisms set up in 2002. In addition to financial benefits can be as
benefit tag slight constriction of the gap between the salaries paid by the state budget
respectively. from public sources, and it is therefore proposed:

1) extend the freeze salary bases by the end of 2012

2) establish a permanent base salary amount as 2.5 times the average nominal monthly salary
individuals in the public sector reached
according to data released by the Czech Statistical Office before last
calendar year since the first year after thawing, ie. already in 2013.
the petitioner stated that he was aware that the reference to the perceived change in the above mentioned laws
argue the facts on which it is uncertain whether
occur, and which relate to the future (and not contested proposal)
legal adjustment of salaries for judges. It considers, however, that these
legislative intentions are quite clear repeated tendency of the executive
intervene in the regulation of salaries for judges against them
without respecting the Constitutional Court decision dealing with this
areas. The petitioner pointed out that the proposed amendment should not be
extension of the freeze judges 'salaries by an additional two years (so far)
a total period of 5 years, but has also been an unprecedented experience
step consisting in a real reduction of judges' salaries . Base salary has
fall of the coefficient "3" coefficient "2.5", which means its
decrease of 16.66%. The petitioner also highlighted one of the objectives of the proposed changes
, which is, according to the explanatory memorandum "grip scissors" between
salaries paid by the state budget. It follows that, according to promoters
proposal of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, appears as
judges' salaries too high compared to other groups of people whose incomes are
paid from the state budget, which is the goal of going expressly against
conclusions expressed by the Constitutional court in its judgment of 16
1, 2007, published in the Collection of laws under no. 65/2007 Coll. (Sp. Nos. Pl. US 55/05
- see above), whose basic thesis petitioner repeatedly pointed out.

19th On 24. 8. 2009 Minister of Justice JUDr. Daniela Kovářová
added information to the Ministry of Justice of the net monthly salary and annual
judge in 2007 and 2008. She said that when calculating
was carried out so that the base salary, which is under the Ministry of Communication
Labour and social Affairs no. 582/2006 Coll. 2007 and 2008
same and amounts to CZK 56 847, corresponding salary was multiplied by a factor
number of years of credited period for judges as they were
Constitutional Court requested, ie from the beginning of the 6th year and credited period
since the beginning of the 30th year credited period. By thus fixed gross salary
tax was deducted.

20th In 2007, tax amounted to CZK 61,212 plus 32% of the base (ie. The salary
fixed base and a coefficient) in excess of 331 200 CZK.
After deducting the tax was obtained pure salary "model" judge in
, 2007.

21st In 2008, the tax was determined as follows: The gross salary
(defined identically in r. 2007 base salary and coefficient) was

Offset 34% from the gross salary (ie. 25% of premiums for
social security and 9% for the entire health insurance, ie 34%
paid by the employer), and has been obtained so. Super gross wage .
From the super gross wage was calculated 15% tax and the amount is deducted from your gross salary
fixed base salary and a coefficient.
The result was a net salary of a "model" judge in 2008.

22nd In the attached tables justice minister said on the one hand
net monthly salary and annual net salary of one hand, and for all the desired categories
"Model" judge, and the other referred to a previous statement
Minister of Justice of 12 3 . 2009.

----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------
monthly net salary model 20072008
practice practice practice practice
judge (CZK) 6 years 6 years 30 years 30 years
----------------- -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
OS 42 773 62 100 45 874 68 584 45 865
KS 68286 49,508 75,852
VS 48 957 74 857 53 141 83 573 74 857
NS 83,573
SAC 74,857 83,573 ---------------
-------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------


----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------
Annual net salary model 20072008
practice practice practice practice
judge (CZK) 6 years 6 years 30 years 30 years
----------------- -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
OS 513 279 745 211 550 496 823 015
KS 550391819434 594102910228
VS 587 494 898 292 637 698 1 002 886
NS 898,292 1,002,886
NSS 898,292 1,002,886 ------------
-------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------

23rd The Constitutional Court, Ministry of Justice of the overall
average net annual salary of judges in 2007 and 2008 associated with
expression of Ministers of Justice JUDr. J. Pospisil and lawyer.
D. Kovářová, as well as observations on the petitioner's information minister
Justice JUDr. J. Pospisil and complement the arguments of the petitioner
on 5th and 6th of 24. 7. 2009 the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate
Czech Republic; the parties to the information in the court specified period
they responded.

24th Overview of the Minister of Justice JUDr. D. Kovářová commented
petitioner that the filing of 22. 9. 2009
attention to inaccuracies in the calculation of net wages, which in his opinion was probably
neodečtením mandatory contributions, ie. Health and social insurance.
Petitioner exact salary recalculated using the so-called.
Salary calculator on the website www.mesec.cz and came to the following results
:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
monthly salary of a judge from the early 30th year of practice
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge monthly salary monthly salary monthly monthly salary monthly salary monthly
assigned to Judge Judge Judge Judge net salary net salary in the court of
(gross) (net) under Judge (gross) (net) judge according
SMEs SMEs
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OS 85,900 55,425 62,100 85,900 59,832 68,584
KS 95,000 60,832 68,286 95,000 65,950 75,852
VS 104,600 66,544 74,857 104,600 72,400 83,573
NS 104,600 66,544 74,857 104,600 72,400 83,573
NSS 104,600 66,544 74,857 104,600 72,400 83,573
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the annual salary of judges from the beginning of the 6th year of practice
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge annual salary of annual salary annual net annual salary of annual salary annual net
assigned to Judge Judge Judge Judge Judge salary salary of a judge at the court of
(gross) (net) in accordance with SMEs (gross) (net) according to MSP
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OS 690,000 462,180 513,279 690,000 488,724 550,496
KS 744,000 494,460 550,391 744,000 525,180 594,102
VS 799,200 527,400 587,494 799,200 565,140 637,698 798,528
NS 1255200 1255200 1025700 rating rating
NSS 1,255,200 798,528 1,255,200 1,025,700 rating rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the annual salary of judges from the beginning of 30th year of practice
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge annual salary of annual salary annual net annual salary ročníplat annual net
assigned to Judge Judge Judge Judge Judge salary salary of a judge at the court of
(gross) (net) in accordance with SMEs (gross) (net) according to MSP
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OS 1,030,800 665,100 745,211 1,030,800 717,984 823,015
KS 1,140,000 729,984 819,434 1,140,000 791,400 910,228
VS 1,255,200 798,528 898,292 1,255,200 868,800 1,002,886
NS 1255. 200 798,528 898,292 1,255,200 868,800 1,002,886
NSS 1,255,200 798,528 898,292 1,255,200 868,800 1,002,886
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

25th The petitioner stated that, in assessing the constitutionality of the contested salary
restrictions can not be decisive net pay, but only comparable
variable salary may be just rude. This is so because all
deductions, including deductible items from the tax base, insurance etc.
Are variable and can be changed only by each judge, but in different time periods
without these legislative changes occurred in
relation to Act no. 236/1995 Coll. Claimant admitted that in comparison
years 2007 and 2008 resulted in increased net salary of a judge, but
stressed that the increase occurred at the same (frozen) gross salary.
The increase was due to the reduction in taxes and other levies, but are there
increase the net salary or wages also in all other employee groups
paid from public funds. If the Constitutional Court agreed to
argument that tax cuts increased salary would have
according to the petitioner, on the contrary pay and that if they were to raise taxes and thus
decline in net salary, it would be a unacceptable decrease in salary.

V.

Waiving hearing

26th According to § 44 par. 2 of the Constitutional Court, the Constitutional Court
consent of the parties waive a hearing, unless from him
expected to clarify the matter. The petitioner also Chairman of the Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic expressed
according to § 44 para. 2 of the Constitutional Court
agreement to waive a hearing in submissions dated 16. 2. 2009
25th 2nd, 2009. The Chairman of the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Parliament at
challenge, if he agrees to waive a hearing within the time
did not respond to their agreement to waive a hearing pursuant to §
101 para. 4 of the Civil Procedure Code in connection with § 44 paragraph
. 2 and § 63 of the Law on the Constitutional Court expressed in silence.

VI.

Terms of management and recap the results of the current review of the Act on stabilization of public budgets


27th Based on the demand-file of the Municipal Court in Brno file. Ref. 14 C
37/2008 Constitutional Court verified that the petitioner is actively petition

Legitimized, because the proposal is related to its decision-making activities. When reached
petitioner concludes that the contested statutory provisions are in conflict with the constitutional order
was not only the right but also the duty to submit a proposal
(cf. Art. 95 para. 2 of the Constitution of the Czech Republic) .

28th If the petitioner mentioned that to him, the Constitutional Court in previous
management on proposals to repeal the Act on stabilization of public budgets
as intervener had not acted, the Constitutional Court recalls its
resolution of 15 No. 1, 2008. j. Pl. US 24 / 07-158, which ruled that
Municipal Court in Brno is an intervener, as at the time
filing its proposal in November 2007 was not authorized petitioner
under § 35 para. 2 of the constitutional court.

29th The Constitutional Court also notes that the discussion of the draft does not prevent an obstacle
res judicata, since the content of the relevant provisions
not yet been reviewed.

30th The Constitutional Court notes that the proceedings for the group of Deputies
Chamber of Deputies under file. Nos. Pl. US 24/07 was examined
legislative procedure of adoption of the Act on stabilization of public budgets
as a whole and the content of the reviewed part one (amendment to the Act on
Income Tax), Part Two (amending the law on amendments to laws related
with the enactment of the employee accident insurance), part Three (
change the law on reserves for determining the income tax base), part Four
(amendment to the Act on value added tax), part Five (amendment to the Act tax
real estate), part Six (amendment to the Act on inheritance tax, gift
and real estate transfer taxes), part Seven (amendment to the Act on registration
tills), part Eight (amending the Law on administration taxes and charges), part
Nine (amending the Act no. 545/2005 Coll.), paragraph 1 of Article XVII of the tenth
(amendment to the Act on administrative fees) of the eleventh (amendment to the Act on excise
Tax) of the twelve (amendment to the Act on living and subsistence minimum
) of the thirteen (amendment to the Act on valuation
participants in the struggle for the establishment and liberation of Czechoslovakia and some survivors
them on a special contribution to the retirement some persons for lump sum cash
some participants in the national liberation struggle in
1939 to 1945 and amending certain laws), part of the fourteenth (
change the registered partnership Act and amending certain related laws
) part of the forty-fifth (tax on natural gas and some other gases
), part of the forty-sixth (tax on fossil fuels), part Forty
seventh (electricity tax), part of the fiftieth (amendment to the accounting Act) || | part of the fifty-first (Repeals), part of the fifty-second
(efficiency) of the Act on stabilization of public budgets.
Proposal to repeal the law or its parts were finding rejected other proposals were excluded
for separate discussion.

31st In proceedings under file. Nos. Pl. US 01/08, the Constitutional Court ruled on
exclude a proposal to repeal sections 3 and 4 in Article XVII in Part Ten
(amendment to the Act on Administrative Fees), Part Forty (amending the law on public health insurance
) part Forty One (
change the law on premiums for general health insurance), part Forty Two
(amendment to the Act on General health insurance company of the Czech Republic), part
Forty Three (amending the Act on Ministry, Department, company, and
other health insurance), part Forty Eight (amending the Act on
competence of the Czech Republic in prices) and
Forty Nine (amending the Act on prices) Act on stabilization of public budgets.
The proposal was rejected findings.

32nd In proceedings under file. Nos. Pl. US 02/08, the Constitutional Court ruled on
exclude a proposal for the abolition of the fifteenth (changing the law on state social support
), part of the sixteenth (to change the law on aid in material distress
), part of the seventeenth (amendment to the Act on
competence of the Czech Republic in social security), part of the eighteenth (
amendment to the Act on social services), part of the nineteenth (amendment of the sickness
employee insurance), part Twenty (to change the law on hospital care in || | armed forces), part of the twenty-first (amendment to the Act on the extension
maternity leave, maternity benefits and child allowances from

Sickness insurance), Part Twenty Two (amending the law on the organization and implementation
Social Security) of the twenty-fourth (
amendment to the Act on pension insurance), part of the twenty-fifth (amendment of the Sickness Insurance
) of the twenty-sixth (change in the law amending some
laws in connection with the adoption of the Health insurance Act), section
twenty-seventh (change the Labour Code), part Twenty Eight (amendment
about soldiers occupational) of the twenty-ninth (amendment to the Act on the service
members of the security forces), part of the thirtieth (
change the law on salary and other indemnities associated with the duties
representatives of state power and some state bodies and judges and Members of the European Parliament
) of the thirty-first (to change the law on salaries and other terms of some
prosecutors) of the thirty-second (
amendment to the municipalities Act) of the thirty-third (amendment to the Act on regions) , part
thirty-fourth (amendment to the Act on the capital city of Prague) of the thirty-fifth
(amendment of the Civil service Act) of the thirty-sixth (
amendment to the Act on employment) of the thirty-seventh (contribution for increased living | || costs) of the thirty-eighth (amendment to Act no. 585/2006 Coll., which
amends Act no. 187/2006 Coll., on Sickness insurance Act no. 189/2006
Coll. amending some laws in connection with the enactment of
Sickness insurance Act no. 262/2006 Coll., the Labour Code, Act no. 264/2006 Coll
. amending certain acts in connection with adoption
Labour Code, Act no. 589/1992 Coll., on social
security contributions and the state employment policy, as
amended, Act no. 117/1995 Coll., on state social support
amended, Act no. 111/2006 Coll., on assistance in material distress
, as amended by Act no. 165/2006 Coll., and Act no. 582/1991 Coll.
organization of social security, as amended
amended) of the thirty-ninth (amendment of the universities Act) and
Forty Four (the amendment to the Act on electronic communications)
Act on stabilization of public budgets . From the reasoning of the judgment then
clear that in relation to the thirtieth of the Act on stabilization of public budgets
Constitutional Court merely stated the changes that the provisions of this section
brought (para. 46), their content evaluation, however || | addressed. Finding was abolished specific provisions of Law no. 54/1956
Coll., On Employee Sickness Insurance, as amended,
and the remainder of the application was rejected.

VII.

Wording of the contested provisions and their relationship to the law on salaries of representatives of state power


33rd Thirty parts of the Act on stabilization of public budgets
there is a change in the law on salary and other indemnities associated with the duties
representatives of state power and some state bodies and judges and
MEPs. The contested provisions of Art. XLVIII reads:

Art. XLVIII

Extraordinary measure for determining the salary and certain reimbursements of expenses
representatives of state power and some state bodies and judges in the years 2008-2010


First To determine salary, or even some reimbursement of costs of

A) who is mentioned in § 1 of the Act no. 236/1995 Coll., On salaries and other
indemnities associated with the position of representatives of state power and
some state bodies and judges and members of the European Parliament in
amended

B) in which special legislation stipulates that his salary provided
as someone mentioned in a), in the period 2008-2010 uses
salary basis reached as of 31 December 2007. | ||
Second § 3 par. 3 of Law no. 236/1995 Coll., On salaries and other
indemnities associated with the position of representatives of state power and
some state bodies and judges and members of the European Parliament, as amended by Act
no. 309/2002 Coll., in the period from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2010
apply.

34th Under § 1 of the Law on salaries of representatives of state authorities
adjusts salary and certain other matters related to the functions ... g)
judge of a district, regional and high court, the Supreme Court and Supreme Administrative Court
.


35th § 3 par. 3 of the same law determines the salary base that
is from January 1 to December 31 of the calendar year, triple the average nominal monthly salary
individuals in the public sector reached
according to data released by the Czech Statistical Office
before last calendar year. The amount of the base salary for the calendar year
announced by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs in the Official Gazette
statement.

VIII.

Constitutionality of the legislative process

36th According to § 68 par. 2 of Act no. 182/1993 Coll., On the Constitutional Court
, as amended by Act no. 48/2002 Coll., The Constitutional Court, in addition to assessing
contested statute is consistent with constitutional laws, finds whether
was adopted and issued within the bounds of the Czech Republic provided jurisdiction and in a constitutionally prescribed manner
.

37th Constitutionality of the procedure and the adoption of a law on the stabilization of public budgets
The Constitutional Court has already considered in previous proceedings.
Legislative procedure for the adoption of the Act on stabilization of public budgets
described in Judgment. Nos. Pl. US 24/07 (Part VIII.) And engaged her in finding
sp. Nos. Pl. US 1/08 (para. 83), and finding sp. Nos. Pl. US 2/08
(para. 25 and 26). Evaluation of the constitutionality and competence
legislative process carried out in its judgment. Nos. Pl. US 24/07 (Part X)
finding sp. Nos. Pl. US 1/08 (para. 85 and 86) and judgment no. Nos. Pl. US 2/08
(para. 28-32). The result of the evaluation was concluded that the Act on stabilization of public budgets
was adopted and issued within the bounds
Czech Republic provided jurisdiction and in a constitutionally prescribed manner.

38th In the present case, the petitioner did not defect in the legislative process
neither exceeded the Constitution of the Czech Republic set
competence of the legislature, and the Constitutional Court with regard to the principles of procedural economy
considered it necessary to re-examine this question and in this range
refers to the findings and conclusions that were formulated in the above-cited judgments
.

IX.

Rating Constitutional Court

IX.a)

Existing relevant case law of the Constitutional Court

39th The petitioner concludes that the contested statutory provisions,
in short, represent a (non-proportional) restriction salaries of judges
Constitution, Art. 1. 1 of the Constitution of the Czech Republic, according to which the Czech Republic
sovereign, unified and democratic rule of law based on
respect for the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, in conjunction with Art. 82, paragraph 1
Czech Constitution, which states that judges in the performance of their duties
independent and their impartiality can not nobody threaten or Article.
paragraph 2. 1 of the Constitution of the Czech Republic, which reflects the principle of separation of state
powers into legislative, executive and judicial powers, and with the provisions of Art. 1
Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, which states that people are free
and equal in dignity and rights and that the fundamental rights and freedoms are
inherent, inalienable, imprescriptible and irrevocable.

40th The Constitutional Court in its decision-making practice repeatedly dealt with cases where the
judges were once taken away, eventually. One of reduced
entitlement components of their remuneration without this reduction was offset by increases in other
claimable folder. In the judgment of 16. 1. 2007 sp. Ref.
Pl. US 55/05 (N 9/44 SbNU 103; 65/2007 Coll.) Constitutional Court summarized the reasons supporting
previous relevant case law ^ 1 (para. 41-48), which was formulated
fundamental general theses assessment
constitutionality of salary limitations regarding judges. These theses, as well as basic
arguments on which the Constitutional Court based its solution
intervention of the legislature in the material security of judges, the Constitutional Court
recapitulated in paragraphs 49 to 51 of the judgment.

41st In the case file. Nos. Pl. US 55/05, the Constitutional Court was first confronted with
different problem, and with the measure, which was (2003 and 2004)
reduced rate of growth in judges' salaries (salaries were "frozen").
When assessing whether the measure was wage restriction or not
was for the Constitutional Court, the basic criterion quantification
material security of judges in the form of their total income in a calendar year. For
regular monthly income judge Constitutional Court ruled that salary and
multipurpose flat reimbursement; reimbursement of expenses, while not
character rewards for performance, but for its regularity,
nezúčtovatelnost and her pecuniary form the Constitutional Court for

Quantification of material security of judges as part of a regular income
judge considered (cf. Paragraph. 54). In the judgment, the Constitutional Court did
concluded that »as another form of wage restraint is needed ...
regarded as the freezing of law anticipated revenue growth
judges or other court officials, and for example." Persistent "
freeze the salaries of some representatives of the State Constitutional court would undoubtedly judged as
step constitutionally inadmissible "(para. 55), but they also pointed out that although
" the tenor of existing precedents's thesis (principle) that the salary || | of judges, in a broad sense should be a stable
quantity, unless there are quite exceptional and extraordinary circumstances
state, "not" from the existing case law of the Constitutional court, however, infer
permanent and unquestionable entitled to an annual growth of salaries of judges " (para. 57
). For real progress in the area of ​​remuneration of judges and other representatives of state power
Constitutional Court considered the state of degradation
called. Additional salaries and their "dissolution" in monthly salaries,
without this measure there was an annual decrease of total income
judge; as a significant element of the guarantee of adequate material security
judges under the principle of division of state powers into legislative, executive and judicial
requirement and their mutual balance and considered
direct link between the salary of representatives of legislative and executive power to
one side and the salary of judges on the other.
The Constitutional Court also expressed confidence that the construction of the law on salary
representatives of state power which with a single base salary and statutory
coefficients ensures that along with the increase in salaries of representatives of power
legislative and executive branches are at the same rate automatically increase salaries and
judges is an important, in the legal system built-in fuse that
ratio in the material security of representatives of the various branches of power will be maintained in the future
(para. 59).

42nd At that merits the Constitutional Court examined and found that income
judge in the period from 2001 to 2006 decreased.
In contrast, annual revenue grew judge, even in 2003, compared with
2002, although the judge income for 2003 influenced by the Act
extraordinary salary measures for 2003 ^ second As a result of the adoption of the Law on the extraordinary
salary measures for 2004 ^ 3, while "gross" income
judge in 2004 compared with 2003 increase, the crucial thing was that
not fallen (para. 56). Stopping the increase in judges' salaries for one year only
Constitutional Court did not for payment restriction, which would be in conflict with the constitutional principles
democratic rule of law, separation of powers and independence of the judiciary
, so by rejecting finding ^ 4th

IX.b)

43rd The contested provisions of the Act on stabilization of public budgets
should be in 2008, 2009 and 2010, the growth rate frozen the salaries of judges
district, regional and high courts and judges of the Supreme Court and Supreme Administrative Court
, said measures can be consistent with the legal opinion
landed in its judgment. Nos. Pl. US 55/05 regarded as a salary
restriction. When assessing the constitutionality of this intervention, the Constitutional Court did
fundamental generalizing propositions that emerged from his previous
making practice in the assessment of interference by the legislature in
material security of judges and that at this point it considers necessary to remind
:

Constitutionality of salary limitations regarding judges
for a specific period of the year falls within the framework defined by the principle of judicial independence
. Constitutional status of judges on one side and representatives
legislative and executive powers, especially the government, on the other hand
due to the principle of separation of powers and the principle of judicial independence
different, suggesting a different layout and space
lawmakers to pay restrictions on judges in comparison with the layout space for
such restrictions in other areas of the public sphere.
Interference in the material security of judges guaranteed by law can not be an expression
arbitrariness of the legislature but must be based on the principle of proportionality
, justified by extraordinary circumstances, eg.
The difficult financial situation of the state, with and for the fulfillment of this
conditions must be taken into account different function of judges and representatives of the legislative and

Powerful, especially the state administration; such interference may not create grounds for
concerns that it may limit the dignity of judges, if necessary. unless
expression of constitutionally unacceptable pressure by the legislative and executive branches on
judicial power.

44th If the freezing of the law assumed growth of income
judges, the Constitutional Court the following proposition - as already mentioned - added so that
short-term suspension does not increase judges' salaries salary
restriction affecting the constitutional principles according to Art. 1, paragraph . 1, Art. 2
paragraph. 1 and Art. 82 para. 1 of the Constitution of the Czech Republic.

45th In this case, the Constitutional Court is confronted with repeated
growth rate freeze judges' salaries. It can not ignore that, with effect from 1
1, 2004, has changed the concept of the salary base, from which derives
salary of a judge, and therefore the Constitutional Court addressed the issue
whether this amendment could have impact assessment on the pay of judges, and the restriction
contested exceptional measure.

46th Salary Base salaries for representatives of state power, including judges
was in § 3 para. 3 of the Act no. 236/1995 Coll. Originally established as the sum
highest salary and the maximum amount of personal bonuses
set of special regulations for employees of ministries. In the year 1996 amounted
base salary 31 200 CZK and the basic salary of a judge
is calculated by multiplying the salary base and the corresponding salary
coefficient determined depending on the responsibilities and demands
functions performed, respectively. length of judicial practice.
Mechanism of calculating the basic salary of a judge based on the same base salary for
all representatives of state power has not changed. Until the end of 2002
base salary was increased again following the highest growth
(twelfth) step of employees of ministries and
31st 12th 2002 amounted to 46 440 CZK.

47th In 2003, the base salary frozen for the first time and stayed at the level reached
31. 12. 2002. This was done by Act no. 425/2002 Coll.
Fixing for 2003 the extraordinary measure for determining the amount | || salary and certain reimbursements of expenses related to the performance of functions
representatives of state power and some state bodies, judges and prosecutors
and laying these persons the level of additional salaries
for the first and second halves of 2003. according to the provisions of § 1
was the reason for the failure to raise the wage base in 2003 legal amendment
pay grades and a personal bonus for employees of ministries from
first 1, 2003.

48th With effect from 1st 1, 2004 the Act no. 309/2002 Coll., On the amendment
acts related to the enactment of the Civil Service Employees
administrative authorities and remuneration of these employees and other employees in administrative
offices (service Act) changed the way
determining the salary base for determining the level of judges' salaries (and other constitutional officials
). [From the same date there was also Government Regulation no.
330/2003 Coll., On salaries of employees in public services and
Administration, the introduction of a new pay system for public employees
services and administration (has been extended original twelve grades to sixteen
grade)] salaries of constitutional officials (and judges)
been linked to the development of wages in the public sector and the newly determined that
salary basis is from 1 1 to 31 12.
calendar year, triple the average nominal monthly wage of individuals in the public sector
achieved by the data released by the Czech statistical Office for
last calendar year. Since then, however, the amount of the salary base
was more than three times (was 3,4násobek) was devised
increase the salary base. As part of the reform of public budgets
suggested slowing down the growth of salaries of constitutional officials (and judges)
to hasten the achievement of the target state, the base salary for 2004
frozen Act no. 427/2003 Coll., For the year
2004 provides extraordinary measure for determining the salary and certain reimbursements of expenses
associated with the office of representatives of state power and some
state bodies, deputies of the European Parliament, judges and state representatives
, the amount of additional salary for these people for the first half of 2004, and
amending certain related laws, as amended
regulations; Thus, the base salary remained at the level of 2002. Freezing

Growth rate of the wage base in 2003 and 2004 was the subject
Constitutional Court review (sp. Nos. Pl. ÚS 55/05) and the Constitutional Court is
approved of, although the reasons for the suspension growth rates were different ai | || calculation of the base salary based on other criteria.

49th From the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, which is set annually
salary basis for determining the salary and certain reimbursements
expenses under the Act no. 236/1995 Coll., The Constitutional Court found that salary
base for representatives of state able for 2005 amounted to 50 400 CZK ^ 5
2006 accounted for 53,283 CZK ^ 6 and for 2007 was set at EUR 56,847
CZK ^ 7th

50th Act on stabilization of public budgets, respectively.
extraordinary measure that is subject to constitutional review, there was a
freeze judges' salaries in 2008-2010 at the level of the salary base
reached 31. 12. 2007, ie. is three times the average nominal monthly
wages of individuals in the public sector achieved a year
2005, ie. 3 x CZK 18,949, or CZK 56,847.

51st To summarize, the gross annual salary of the judge calculated from the salary base
2007, while in 2008 did not increase, but nor did.
The Constitutional Court has in its judgment. Nos. Pl. US 55/05 stated that
stopping the increase in judges' salaries for one year is not
restrictions in conflict with constitutional principles and in this case had the question whether
stopping the growth of the gross salary of judges for a period of three years (
simultaneous increase in real income) is constitutionally impermissible,
respond negatively. Following the adoption of a new concept of calculating salary
base coupled to an average nominal wages of individuals
public sector (ie. 1 1, 2004) was the first to suspend
growth rate of the base salary of judges (and other constitutional officials )
result in real exceeded three times the average nominal wage in the business sphere
within the period fixed examination of the legal
adjusting the rate of growth suspended as a result of the reform of public
budgets for three years in a situation where the average nominal
wage in the public sector amounted communication by the CSO in 2006 the amount
19 786 CZK (the amount determined for the calculation of the wage base in 2008)
in 2007 the amount of CZK 21,117 (determined for the calculation of the wage base in
2009), and in 2008 the amount of CZK 22 037 (decisive for calculating the salary
base in 2010).

52nd The Constitutional Court notes that, under the principle of separation of powers and the requirement
their mutual balance, while remaining safeguards and guarantees designed
law on salaries of representatives of state power maintained, and for present purposes
this issue in detail referring on finding
sp. Nos. Pl. US 55/05 (para. 59), but notes the trend of reducing the proportion
between the salaries of judges (and other constitutional officials) to law
fixed multiple of the average nominal wages in the public sector. However
extraordinary measures contested by the appellant can not be considered in isolation
, but it is necessary that even in light of the legal opinions
expressed in its judgment. Nos. Pl. US 55/05 was examined actual impact
income situation of judges. He had the character of a permanent reduction
material security of judges, especially when one considers also the top-ranked
(real Judiciary receiving positive) impact of the tax reform
.

53rd The Constitutional Court had not worn arguments of the petitioner on the preparation of future
additional salary restrictions. At the time of filing the present
draft was adopted by Act no. 418/2009 Coll., Which inter alia amends the
Act no. 236/1995 Coll., On salary and other compensation related to performance of functions
representatives of state power and some state bodies and
judges and Members of the European Parliament, so that from 1 January to 31 December 2010 shall
salary of deputies, officials, judges and members of the European Parliament
96% of salary by this Act and in accordance with Art. XLVIII
Act no. 261/2007 Coll. This change in the material security of judges with effect from 1
1, 2010 can not be relevant for assessing the constitutionality
salary adjustments judges in previous years, ie for
decision of the Constitutional Court in the present case now. Other upcoming
amendment to Act no. 236/1995 Coll., Which should be addressed by adjusting the calculation
wage base from 1. 1. 2011, is still under development and is not
clear whether and in what will not form the Parliament of the Czech Republic

Presented with what result discussed.

54th As the Constitutional Court has previously explained, interference by the legislature in
material security of judges is guaranteed by law must be evaluated in the context of
protected by the principle of independence. The independence of judges is
although conditioned on their moral integrity and professional level, but also the
connected with the appropriate material security;
ban arbitrary salary restrictions also allows to eliminate various forms
pressure on their decisions. The Constitutional Court is convinced that in this case
temporary suspension of the guaranteed increase in salaries of judges does not affect their
yet reached the level of material security
way which was founded doubts about whether it is arbitrary action by the legislature having
the effect of restricting or loss
judicial independence. The Constitutional Court distinguished the suspension of the increase in judges' salaries
permanent withdrawal from salary or part thereof, which already represents a real
negative impact on the achieved level of material security of judges;
for assessing the constitutionality of salary restrictions of this nature has in its case law
drew fundamental general theses [see. Finding sp. Nos. Pl.
US 34/04 of 14. 7. 2005 (N 138/38 SbNU 31; 355/2005 Coll.)].

55th All in other words: review legislation and does not constitute
constitutionally impermissible deprivation
salary of judges, because the withdrawal and in opposition to him, standing (only temporarily)
freezing gross income of judges can not be identified. This applies a fortiori
that the amount of material security of judges stayed - assessed in complex
statutory regulation - in the period examined frozen; In fact, revenue
judges have undergone an increase.

56th It follows, however, also, that the pace of the legislature, which (would)
was not to suspend the rate of growth of judges' salaries, but to even a partial withdrawal
already achieved their level of material security,
hardly could Constitutional terms of the principles of a democratic legal state
approve of. This is especially true if it were shown that such
fundamentally unacceptable restriction affects only or main income
of judges, and not at the same time other income "servants" of the state. K
is convenient to explicitly recall the findings of the Constitutional Court
contained in its judgment no. Nos. Pl. US 34/04 ^ 8).

57th The Constitutional Court concluded that it did not find grounds to annul the provisions of point 1
. a) and b) and paragraph 2 of Article. XLVIII, the extraordinary measures during
determining salary and certain reimbursements of expenses
representatives of state power and some state bodies and judges in the years 2008-2010, part
thirtieth Act no. 261/2007 Coll., on stabilization of public budgets, and it
regarding the judge of a district, regional and high court, the Supreme
court and the Supreme administrative court, and therefore the proposal under § 70 paragraph
. 2 of the Law on the Constitutional Court.

Chairman of the Constitutional Court:

JUDr. Own hand

Dissenting opinions according to § 14 of Act no. 182/1993 Coll., On the Constitutional Court,
amended, took the decision of the plenum judges Vlasta
Formánková, Pavel Holländer, Vladimir Kurka and Elisabeth Wagner.

1 Findings sp. Nos. Pl. US 13/99 (N 125/15 SbNU 191; publ.
In the Collection of Laws under no. 233/1999 Coll.), Sp. Nos. Pl. US 18/99 (N 104/19 SbNU 3;
320/2000 Coll.), Sp. Nos. Pl. US 16/2000 (N 105/19 SbNU 23; 321/2000 Coll.)
Sp. Nos. Pl. US 11/02 (N 87/30 SbNU 309; 198/2003 Coll.), Sp. Nos. Pl. US
9/05 (N 140/38 SbNU 81; 356/2005 Coll.), Sp. Nos. Pl. US 34/04 (N 138/38
SbNU 31; 355/2005 Coll.), Sp. Nos. Pl. US 43/04 (N 139/38 SbNU 59;
354/2005 Coll.)

2 Provisions § 1 point. h) and § 3 of Act no. 425/2002 Coll., which for
2003 an extraordinary measure for determining the salary and some
reimbursement of expenses connected with the duties of representatives of state power and some state bodies
judges and prosecutors and laying
these persons tent level of additional salaries for the first and second halves of
2,003th

3 Provisions § 1 point. i) and § 3 and 4 of the Act no. 427/2003 Coll., which
for 2004, 2005 and 2006, an extraordinary measure for determining the amount
salary and certain reimbursements of expenses related to the duties of representatives
state power and some state bodies, deputies
European Parliament, judges and prosecutors, the amount of additional salary

These people for the first half of 2004, and amending certain laws related
(pos. Ed .: the original name of this action when
determining salary and certain reimbursements of expenses related to the performance of the office of representatives
state power and some state bodies, judges and prosecutors
, the amount of additional salary for these people
first and second halves of the years 2004, 2005 and 2006 and amending certain laws related
)

4 Finding sp. Nos. Pl US 55/05 was published in the Collection of Laws under no. 65/2007 Coll
.

5 Communication of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs no. 648/2004 Coll.

6 Communication from the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs no. 488/2005 Coll.

7 Communication of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs no. 582/2006 Coll.

8 On the issue of constitutionality of subsequent statutory withdrawal of judges' salaries, which were not
before taking this cautious given a statutory entitlement,
can draw the following fundamental general theses:

- Evaluating the constitutionality of the restrictions imposed on judges for a specific period of the year
falls within the framework defined by the principle of judicial independence
,

- The constitutional position of judges on the one hand, and representatives of legislative and executive
, especially the government, on the other hand
because of the principle of separation of powers and the principle of independence of judges differs
implying i different layout space for the legislature to pay
restrictions on judges in comparison with the layout space for such
restrictions in other areas of the public sector,

- Interference in the material security of judges guaranteed by law can not be
expression of arbitrariness by the legislature, but must be based on the principle of proportionality
, justified by extraordinary circumstances, eg.
The difficult financial situation of the state, where even meet this condition must be taken into account
different function of the judiciary and representatives of the legislative and executive
, especially the state administration; such interference may not provide a reason for
concerns that it may limit the dignity of judges, if necessary. unless
expression of constitutionally unacceptable pressure by the legislative and executive branches on
judicial power.

Principle of an independent judiciary is one of the essential
democratic state of law (Art. 9 Sec. 2 of the Constitution of the Czech Republic).
Requirement for an independent judiciary stems from two sources: the neutrality of judges
as a guarantee of a fair, unbiased and objective trial
and of ensuring the rights and freedoms of individuals
judge separated from political power. Judicial independence is guaranteed
guarantees of a special legal status (which must include demoted,
finality, immunity), also guarantees
organizational and functional independence from bodies representing the legislative and executive power in particular
, as well as separation judiciary from the legislative and executive power
(particularly by applying the principle of incompatibility).
In terms of content, judicial independence ensured
judges are bound only by the law, ie. Excluding any elements of subordination in
judicial decision. The basic components of the principle of independence of the judiciary
Constitutional Court comprehensively considered in its judgment. Ref. Pl.ÚS
7/02 (Collection of Decisions of the Constitutional Court, volume 26, judgment no. 78;
promulgated as no. 349/2002 Coll.)

Arbitrary interference by the legislature in the material security of judges,
in the context of the wage restrictions, must be protected within the framework of the principle of independence
subsumed two reasons.

Independence of judges is primarily conditioned by their moral integrity
and professional level, but it is connected with their appropriate
material security.

The second reason downshift prohibition of arbitrary interference in the material security of judges
(salary restrictions) within the framework of the principle of independence
exclude the possibility, pressure by the legislative
respectively. executive on judicial decision-making. In other words, eliminate arbitrary
interference in the material security of judges as a possible form
"penalization" of judges by the legislative and executive, and thus also forms
pressure on their decisions.