356/2005 Sb.
FIND
The Constitutional Court
On behalf of the United States
The Constitutional Court ruled on 14 June 2005. July 2005 in plenary in the composition of Stanislav
Package, Francis Skinner, Turgut Güttler, Pavel Holländer, Ivana Janů,
Dagmar Lastovecká, Jiří Mucha, Jan Musil, Jiří Nykodým, Pavel
Rychetský, Miloslav Výborný, Elisabeth Wagner and Michael in April
draft applicant the municipal court in Brno, for which it is
President of the Chamber, Mgr. w. M., on the repeal of parts of the law No 590/2004 Coll.
to withdraw an additional salary for the second half of 2004, representatives of the
the State and some State authorities, magistrates, prosecutors and
members of the European Parliament, with the participation of the Chamber of Deputies
Parliament of the Czech Republic and Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic,
as follows:
The provisions of § 1 (b). h) of law No 590/2004 Coll., on the withdrawal of other
the salary for the second half of 2004, officials and
some government agencies, judges, prosecutors and members of the
The European Parliament, elected in the territory of the Czech Republic, shall be deleted;
date of publication of this finding in the statute book.
Justification
(I).
The proposal, which was delivered on 2 February 2005 the Constitutional Court. 3. in 2005, the
the appellant sought the annulment:
and part of the Act) No 427/2003 Coll., amending, for the year 2004
extraordinary measures in determining the amount of the salary and certain expenses
associated with the performance of the functions of the representatives of State power and some
Government authorities, members of the European Parliament, judges and public
representatives of the above additional salary of these people in the first half of 2004, and
amending certain related laws, and specifically in the
about one half of the salary of a judge of the district, further regional and
the High Court, Supreme Court and Supreme Administrative Court second
half of 2004 [paragraph 2 in relation to the provisions of § 1) (h)
Law No 427/2003 Coll.],
(b) the part of the Act) No 590/2004 Coll., on the withdrawal of the additional salary for the second
half of 2004 officials and some State
authorities, judges, prosecutors and members of the European Parliament, the
chosen in the territory of the United States, and specifically to section 1 (b). (h))
the law.
The Constitutional Court, after examining the conditions of discussing the proposal found that in
matters referred to the sub. and), IE. in the matter of the application for revocation under law No.
427/2003 Coll., has already been before the Constitutional Court initiated proceedings under SP. zn.
PL. ÚS 43/04. In this section therefore, the Constitutional Court in its resolution of 14 June 2001.
April 2005, ref. PL. ÚS 9/05-9, excluding the oral proceedings a draft municipal court
in Brno refused within the meaning of § 43 para. 2 (a). (b)) in conjunction with § 43 para. 1
(a). e) Act No. 182/1993 Coll., on the Constitutional Court, as amended
regulations, hereinafter referred to as the law on the Constitutional Court, as the proposal
inadmissible.
The Constitutional Court in the proceedings dealt with the only proposal set out above
Sub. (b)). the proposal to repeal section 1 (b). h) of law No 590/2004 Coll., on
the withdrawal of additional salary for the second half of 2004, representatives of the
the State and some State authorities, magistrates, prosecutors and
members of the European Parliament, elected in the territory of the Czech Republic.
This proposal has filed the applicant pursuant to § 64 para. 3 of the law on the constitutional
the Court, after the decision in connection with his activities in the
case conducted under the SP. zn. 34 C 18/2005 according to art. 95 para. 2 of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC
came to the conclusion that the provisions of paragraph 1 (b). h) of law No 590/2004 Coll.
to be used when addressing this matter, it is in breach of article. 1 (1). 1
in conjunction with article. paragraph 82. 1 of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC and article. 1 of the Charter of fundamental rights and
freedoms ("the Charter").
In the matter of SP. zn. 34 C 18/2005, the municipal court in Brno decided to
the application judge of the same court in which the plaintiff claims against the Czech Republic
-The municipal court in Brno, payment of additional salary for the second half of the year
2004 a total amount of CZK 47000.0, while your claim is based on compliance with
the terms of section 4 of Act No. 237/1995 Coll., on salary and other terms of
associated with the performance of the functions of the representatives of State power and some
State authorities and judges, as amended. In cash
15 deadline. in January 2005, however, as a result of the measures taken on the basis of
Law No 427/2003 Coll. and no 590/2004 Coll., additional salary for the second half
the year 2004 was paid out.
Removing the additional salary for the second half of the year 2004 according to the
the petitioner an undue interference with the judiciary and repetitive
independence. By law No 427/2003 Coll. There the judges was
withdrawn half of the next salary payable for the first and second half of the year
the years 2004, 2005 and 2006, that in those years, it's the salary
the base of the achieved under special legislation to 31.
December 2003 (which represents "salary freeze"). According to § 1 (b). (h))
Act No. 590/2004 Coll. was subsequently withdrawn by the other judges salary (the second
half) for the second half of 2004.
Municipal Court in this context also pointed out the fact that it was not
the last time an isolated intervention in judicial independence. Said
as an example, the Act No 420/2002 Coll., which was significantly reduced by judges
the period for which they are provided, the salary of temporary inability of the performance
features of the original 6 months for a period of 20 working days, while
the Institute providing full salary during temporary inability of the considered
one of the components of the material guarantees the security of the peace. For the next
the salary level of restrictions the judges then indicates the consequences resulting from the
Act No. 428/2002 Coll., laying down, for the year 2003 an extraordinary
measures in determining the amount of the salary and certain compensation expenses related to
the performance of the functions of the representatives of State power and some State authorities,
judges and prosecutors, and fixing the amount of such persons
other salaries for the first and the second half of 2003. According to the provisions of § 1
of the Act, for the determination of salary and other compensation and expenses
performance-related features in 2003 for the listed representative and
the judge applies the salary base of formal to 31. December
2002, while with regard to the amendment of the legislation and pay scales
personal supplement made for staff of ministries, with effect
following the date of 31. in December 2002, the salary base in that
the year has not increased. Thus for the normal flow of events should be according to the
the applicant from 1. January 2003 to increase the salary of a judge as a result of
changes to legislation, pay scales, and personal supplement made for
employees of ministries, adopted ad hoc law for judges
did not occur. Furthermore, the appellant referred to the explanatory memorandum to the law
No 420/2002 Coll. and no 425/2002 Coll., which implies that they
the legislature followed the target "maintaining a comparable position
each group of "people, IE. civil servants, representatives of the
State power and judges, with the special status of judges as regards
the amount of remuneration, the lawmakers seemed unfair and
fixed-width. This procedure is called the municipal court in Brno, for
unconstitutional, contrary to the judge on the physical security,
that is one of the guarantees of its independence. He pointed out while
the fact that the legislature request to preserve "the comparable
the position of the individual groups ", as referred to in the above mentioned persons reason
the news, later has omitted, because, among other things:
-amendments to Decree-Law No 253/1992 Coll., on salaries
employees of State administration bodies, certain other bodies and municipalities,
performed by Government Ordinance No. 582/2002 Coll., took place with effect from 1.
January 2003 to increase the pay scale based on grades and
grade grades for the employees referred to in § 1 (1). 2 Government Regulation
No 253/1992 Coll.,
-amendments to the regulation of the Government No. 251/1992 Coll., on salaries
employees of budgetary and certain other organizations, carried out
Government Ordinance No. 583/2002 Coll., took place with effect from 1. January 2003 to
the increase of the pay scale based on grades and salary
degrees for the employees referred to in § 1 (1). 2 of Decree-Law No. 251/1992
SB.
-amendments to Decree-Law No. 79/1994 Coll., on salaries
employees of the armed forces, security forces and services and authorities
the customs administration, soldiers and employees of certain fire protection
other organisations (staff salary order), carried out by regulation of the Government
No 584/2002 Coll., took place with effect from 1. January 2003 to increase the scale
pay scales based on grades and salary grade for
the employees referred to in § 1 (1). 2 of Decree-Law No. 79/1994 Coll.
-the adoption of Decree-Law No. 330/2003 Coll., on salaries
of employees in public services and administration took place with effect from 1 January.
January 2004 to increase the pay scale based on grades and
grade grades for the employees referred to in § 1 (1). 1 Government Regulation
No 330/2003 Coll.
These illegal hits continued into the next period, when based on
Act No. 435/2004 Coll., as amended, and then, law No 590/2004
Coll., the judges for more salary in the second half of 2004, completely withdrawn. Annual
Therefore, the judge not only income is stagnating, but noticeably decreases, even when in
in 2001 and 2002 a judge received a total of 14 salaries (12 monthly and 2 more
salaries), in 2003 it was the 13th salary (12 monthly and 2 halves of two
other salaries) and in 2004 just 12 monthly and half of the next salary.
Additional salary of the applicant cannot be regarded as a bonus, according to the current
the monthly income of a judge, while avoiding mixes up the calendar, and
pay period. Therefore, detention even if only one of the other salaries
occurs automatically and to the overall reduction of the law guaranteed by the annual
income of a judge. Salary questions judges are thus left to the will of
the legislature, though the objective of Act No. 237/1995 Coll. was to create a solid
the rules for determining the amount of remuneration (and judges) to make these United States
the subject of political calculations.
Those measures took place at a time when lawmakers have been known in the preamble
Constitutional Court No. 198/2003 Coll. (SP. zn. PL. ÚS 11/02)
-pin the claimant agrees. He pointed out in particular at the conclusion of the constitutional
the Court, by which the remuneration of judges in a broad sense
stable nesnižovatelnou quantity, rather than the moving factor, with whom
calculates this or that government groups eg. because he seem to salaries
judges too high in comparison with the salaries of civil servants, or in
comparison with another professional group. The pursuit of such equality
stray from the category of constitutionality, it is a policy objective that does not support
in the constitutional field understood the principle of equality. This principle lies in the
material terms of their boundaries in the observations, according to which "the same shall not
be adjusted arbitrarily unevenly, but unequal shall not be
adjusted arbitrarily as well ". The principle of equality should not be understood as
in the result, but watering must be interpreted as a guarantee
the same starting chances. However, the principle of equality laid out as follows
the legislature apparently has not complied with. Even in this case, changes in legislation,
relating to the pay conditions of judges, exceed the constitutional limits for the
acceptance of the "uniqueness" of the Act, as defined by the finding of the Constitutional Court
in the matter of SP. zn. PL. ÚS 16/2000, published under no. 321/2000 Coll., and was
need to be based on a principled argument, which the Constitutional Court interpreted the
in finding SP. zn. PL. ÚS 13/99, published under no. 233/1999 Coll. in this
context the applicant pointed out at the end of the award No 198/2003 Coll., according
which, although it can be in wholly exceptional circumstances, focusing on the principle of
equality in the area of restrictions in pay of civil servants,
constitutional officers and judges before principle comprehensively understood
the independence of judges, this session both principles do not apply, however, in General, as
once and for all and in all circumstances.
Therefore, the appellant is of the opinion that, even in this case, the challenged
legislation is in breach of article. 1 (1). 1 of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC in connection with its
article. paragraph 82. 1, implying a duty of the State to ensure the judges and
the material independence, as a guarantee of an impartial and fair
deciding on the rights of the people. He also considers that the contested part of the
the law is in breach of article. 1 of the Charter, which provides for equality in the rights
When he leaned on the opinion of the Constitutional Court, according to which, in a given
If the legislature modified the same ratios for equal professional
categories with the aim of moving closer to leveling in the result, which is
illegitimate.
II.
The Constitutional Court first assessed the fulfilment of the conditions under which the
proposal for a decision. The proposal handed to the legitimate claimant within the meaning of § 64
paragraph. 3 of the law on the Constitutional Court. As is apparent from the design, the writ is
based on the provisions to be applied in solving the case, and this
provision is, in the opinion of the General Court in conflict with the constitutional
policy. It is therefore the condition article. 95 para. 2 of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC, as
the solution of the case is necessary that the Court used the § 1 (b). h) of law No.
590/2004 Coll., as Prosecutor of this provision based his statement
the proposal. The proposal also meets the condition of section 66 of the Act on the Constitutional Court, when
the contested provisions of § 1 (b). h) Law No 590/2004 not yet
amended accordingly. As well as this article meets a condition. 1 (1). 1 of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC and article.
1 of the Charter, which are the provisions of the constitutional order, which is supposed to be article 1
(a). h) Law No 590/2004 Coll., in violation of. The Constitutional Court finally
did not find the reasons for the termination of the proceeding within the meaning of section 67 of the Act on the constitutional
the Court.
Therefore, the Constitutional Court plan that called pursuant to § 69 para. 1
the law on the Constitutional Court of the Czech Parliament Chamber of Deputies
and the Senate of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, as the parties to the
comment on this proposal.
In its statement of 31 January. May 2005 the President of the Chamber of Deputies
Parliament of the Czech Republic, PhDr. Lubomír Zaorálek States that judicial
independence, as a legal institution, has its limits and cannot be understood
absolutely. The judge is not isolated, but exists in a particular system.
Specific adjustment cannot ignore this system. Austerity measures in
resources spent on the salaries of employees of public services and
the Administration would not allow the already at 1. half of 2004 to provide additional salary or in
half of the amount, but only at the rate of ten percent. Due to the fact that
officials and some State authorities, judges and
prosecutors for the half-year was paid additional salary in
When piece measures 50-50, the only possible solution, which was meant to express
solidarity with the workers of public services and administration, was to accept the
an act to be entitled to an additional salary of officials,
some State authorities, judges and prosecutors in the second
half of 2004, be withdrawn. The purpose of the adjustment was received mainly expressions of
a certain solidarity with the employees paid from public sources, and not
an attack on judicial independence. The President of the Chamber of Deputies
Parliament of the Czech Republic also confirmed that law No 590/2004 Sb.
accepted after duly carried out by the legislative process, was signed by the
respective constitutional officials, and declared in the collection of laws. The legislative
the Corps acted in the belief that the law is adopted in accordance with the Constitution,
the constitutional order and laws of the Czech Republic, the
The Constitutional Court, in the context of the examination of the proposal to assess the constitutionality of
This law and issued the appropriate decision.
The draft also expressed by the President of the Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic
Mudr. Přemysl Sobotka, who briefly summarize the procedure
of the law by the Parliament of the Czech Republic. Remind you that along with
the draft of this Bill was being discussed in the draft law on amendments to certain
laws in the wake of the implementation of the public finance reform in the area of
remuneration, whose content was with effect from 1. January 2005 to cancel
Institute of additional salaries and like transactions in relation to all persons,
to whom such performance has been provided (a later law No. 626/2004 Sb.).
The Senate Bill to the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the United Kingdom
He returned with Amendment (the Chamber of Deputies. 4. the electoral period.
Print 679/4), which should be removed from the Bill the provisions on
the withdrawal of an additional salary of judges and prosecutors. Of the 60 present for
This change was voted against and 37 7 senators. Because it is a similar
issues as in previous cases, the deprivation of other salaries of judges,
to refer to the observations on those proposals. In conclusion, the Court held that it is up to
The Constitutional Court to assess the constitutionality of the contested provisions and in case
decided to.
III.
According to the provisions of § 44 para. 2 of the Act on the Constitutional Court, the Constitutional Court may
with the consent of the participants of the oral proceedings, to refrain from this cannot be
the negotiations expect further clarification of the matter. Due to the fact that both
participants, i.e.. the appellant in the submission of 30 March 2004. June 2005 and participant
proceedings in the remarks by President of Parliament of the United
the Republic of 8 September. July 2005 and President of the Senate of the Czech
Republic of 30 August. June 2005 expressed its approval of the abandonment of
hearings, and whereas, Furthermore, that the Constitutional Court has considered that the
from the negotiations cannot be expected to further clarification of the matter, it was from an oral hearing
in the case dropped.
IV.
The Constitutional Court in accordance with the provisions of § 68 para. 2 of the Act on the constitutional
the Court in proceedings for review of the standards required to assess whether the contested
the law, its individual provisions. another piece of legislation.
each of its provisions, was accepted and published within the limits of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC
set out competences and constitutionally prescribed way. From the Council
prints and těsnopiseckých messages, as well as the observations of the participant in the proceeding,
It was found that the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the United Kingdom
approved the proposal of the law on its 38. meeting on 23 June. November
2004, when the draft law in the version approved by the Senate of the Parliament of
The United States voted against, 46 voted 117 of 184
members of Parliament. For the original text of the draft law of 184 members
133 members voted against the No. The law was signed by the
respective constitutional officials, and was under no 590/2004 Coll. duly announced
in the amount of 203 of the laws, which have been circulated on 29. November
2004, and in its paragraph 2 took effect on the date of its publication, or date
circulation of the relevant amounts of the laws.
In the.
As regards the assessment of the content of paragraph 1 (b). h) of law No 590/2004 Coll., on
relation to the constitutional order of the Czech Republic and its international
obligations, the Constitutional Court came to the conclusion that the application for annulment of the
the provision is reasonable. Was guided by the following considerations.
The Constitutional Court is the issue of the pay restrictions against judges in the form of
the withdrawal of "the next salary" dealt with in a number of its decisions. Detailed
recap of that case-law is contained in the Constitutional Court No.
198/2003 Coll. (SP. zn. PL. ÚS 11/02). In this context, it should be
highlight:
and Finding sp.). PL. ÚS 13/99 of 15 December 1999. September 1999, the Constitutional Court
set aside the part of the provisions of section 1 of Act No. 269/1998 Coll., on the withdrawal of other
the salary for the second half of 1998, representatives of the State power and
some government agencies, judges, prosecutors and members of the Presidium
Securities and Exchange Commission, and that the provisions governing the withdrawal of other
the salary of the judges for the second half of 1998. The main reason for this award was
argument principle of judicial independence, to which the Court
i put my "aspects of material nature". Another argument has become
voucher for the diversity of the constitutional position of the judges on the one hand, and
representatives of legislative and executive power, particularly the Government, to
the other side.
(b) in the event of a negative finding) of 3 July 2003. July 2000 No. 320/2000 Coll., SP. zn.
PL. ÚS 18/99 (application for annulment of part of the provisions of Section 4a of the Act No. 237/1995
Coll., as amended by Act No. 285/1997 Coll., regulating the withdrawal of other
the salary of the judges for the second half of 1997), the Constitutional Court emphasized that
judicial independence is one of the fundamental democratic
values, which certainly helps ensure security and material
judges. In doing so, he considered essential to the salaries of the judges of the other authorities
the State can not, in any form, arbitrarily and repeatedly.
For rozhodovaný case but the intervention of the legislator showed the characters of arbitrariness.
According to the Constitutional Court, in assessing the constitutionality of the contested legal
the provisions could not be put aside from the difficult social and economic
reality, in which the Czech Republic was in 1997.
(c)) as well as the Constitutional Court of the day. July 3, 2000, finding no. 321/2000
Coll., SP. zn. PL. ÚS 16/2000, rejected the application for annulment of part of the provisions of section
1 of Act No. 309/1999 Coll., on the withdrawal of the additional salary for the second half
the year 1999, and for the second half of the year 2000, officials and
some government agencies, judges, prosecutors and members of the Presidium
Securities and Exchange Commission, and that the provisions governing the withdrawal of other
the salary of the judges for the second half of 1999 and the year 2000. Has not changed yet
fundamental basis of assessment of the problem. He emphasized that the salary of the
judges should not be the moving factor according to immediate liking it
or that of a Government grouping. The withdrawal of "the next salary" assessed, therefore,
as an exceptional measure which can authorize only for serious reasons, for which
consider the impact of the financial problems of the State, and only in connection with
complex adopted austerity measures, relating to salaries in the whole
the realm of the State officials and employees.
(d)) on 11. June 2003 the Constitutional Court finding no. 198/2003 Coll., SP. zn.
PL. ÚS 11/02, annul the part of the provisions of § 1 of the law No. 416/2001 Coll., on the
withdrawal of additional salary for the second half of 2001 and the determination of the amount of the
other salaries for the first and the second half of 2002, the State
power and some government agencies, judges, prosecutors, members of the
the Presidium of the Securities and Exchange Commission, representatives of the Ombudsman and the
members of the Bank Board of the Czech National Bank, regulating the withdrawal of
additional salary for the judges for the second half of the year 2001 and decreasing other
the salary for the first and the second half of 2002 on the amount of half the amount for
which would otherwise be entitled.
Having regard to the circumstances of the case had to be considered a starting point to take
the legal opinion expressed in the report that sub. (d)), as it also
referenced by the appellant. Here, the Constitutional Court stated, the conclusion he had reached the
the basis of the assessment and other related legal provisions. By law No.
425/2002 establishing for 2003 provides for emergency measures in
determining the amount of salary and certain compensation expenses related to the performance of
the functions of the representatives of State power and some State authorities, judges and
prosecutors, and fixing the amount of these persons, other salaries
for the first and the second half of 2003, which took effect 1. October
2002, in paragraph 1 provided that, for the determination of salary and other compensation and
expenses related to the performance of functions in 2003 for the listed
Representative and judge it's salary base of formal to 31.
December 2002. As a result of changes to legislation and pay scales
personal supplement made for staff of ministries, with effect
following the date of 31. in December 2002, the salary base in that
the year has not increased. The provisions of § 2 of the Act includes shortening the next salary
the same people who owned by the specific provisions for the year 2003 on the
half. The provisions of § 3 has ruled out for the period from 1. from 1 January 2003 to 31 December 2004.
December 2003 the use of section 3 (2). 3 of the law no 236/1995 Coll., on salary and
other elements linked to the exercise of the functions of the representatives of the State
power and some State authorities and judges, as amended by Act No. 309/2002
Coll. in the grounds of the award No 198/2003 Coll. (SP. zn. PL. ÚS 11/02) the constitutional
the Court pointed out in the text of my messages to the proposals of both of the above-cited
laws from which it is clear that the plaintiff was pursued,
consisting of a "maintaining a comparable position of each group"
people, i.e.. civil servants, representatives of the State power and judges,
with the special status of judges as regards the amount of the remuneration,
the claimant appeared as unfair and fixed.
Implied changes in legislation related to gender pay circumstances
the judges, in the opinion of the Constitutional Court also in Act No.
590/2004 Coll., constitutional limits for the acceptance of the "uniqueness" of the Act, which
There has been a withdrawal of the additional salary for the judges, as these define in
previous decisions (cf. findings no 321/2000 Coll. and no 198/2003
SB.). So again, it must be held that, if it can be a very exceptional
circumstances, focusing on the principle of equality in the area of restrictions in pay
Government employees, officials and judges from the constitutional principle of
comprehensively understood the independence of judges, do not apply this session two
principles in General as a once and for all and in all circumstances. On the contrary,
remuneration of judges in a broad sense to be stable
nesnižovatelnou, not the moving factor, which calculates
This or that government groups eg. because he seem to salaries of judges
too high in comparison with the salaries of civil servants or in comparison
with another professional group. In other words, if you can accept the application
the principle of equality in the above sense in exceptional
the reduction of the salaries of all economically reasoned, cannot accept equality
all of the above mentioned groups (or as the target category)
the definitive amount of the salaries. The pursuit of such equality to stray from categories
constitutionality, it is a political goal, that finds no support in the constitutional field understood
the principle of equality. This principle lies in the material sense their
boundaries in the observations, according to which "the same shall not be adjusted
arbitrarily, unevenly but unequal manner shall not be
arbitrarily as well ". The principle of equality should not be understood as a leveling in
the result, but it should be interpreted as a guarantee of the same
starting chances.
From the perspective of comparative in developed democracies of Western Europe cannot
find case grade restrictions against judges, with this issue
It is therefore not confronted or doctrine or case law (cf. the three so-called.
pay the judgments of the Federal Constitutional Court-a collection of decisions
The Federal Constitutional Court, St. 26, s. 141n., St. 32, p. 199n., St. 55,
s. 372n. It can be said that it is of the opinion that, in the extreme
situations could affect the independence of the remuneration
However, when you decide which of the existing salaries of judges does not come into
considerations. At present, the discussion is conducted rather to the question of the potential savings in
the area of the salaries in the Executive Branch, there is, however, eliminated a net consolidate
the budget as a possible general theme, is attributed to him, only the additional
features-cf. Wolff, h. a.: Die Gestaltungsfreiheit des Gesetzgebers
IM Besoldungsrecht. DÖV, vol. 2003, no. 12, p. 498-499). Comparable
the situation appear only in post-Communist Europe.
An example of this is the extensive case law of the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Poland to the
questions the constitutionality of legal provisions, the salaries of judges, whether from the so-called. Small
the Constitution (see, in particular, the decision of the SP. zn. P 1/94 of 8 February 2005. November 1994,
13/94 of 14 September. March 1995, P 1/95 of 11 December. September 1995)
period today valid Constitution (see decision SP. zn. P 12/98, P 8/00 of
on 4 April 2006. October 2000, to 12/03 of 18 May. February 2004). In all of these
the decisions of the General Court dealt with the ústavností aspects of the determination of the amount
the salaries of the judges from the perspective of the article. 178 odst. 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, according to the
the salaries of judges must match the dignity of their Office and to ensure
the performance of their duties. (Federal Constitutional Court stressed not only these
circumstances, but pointed out the tasks and responsibilities of the judges, which is associated
with their authority, and also to the need to attract new candidates for Office and
Special risks associated with the Office of the judge-a collection of decisions of the Federal
the Constitutional Court, St. 26, p. 158).
The principle of an independent judiciary is one of the essential requirements
democratic rule of law (article 9, paragraph 2, of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC). Request
independent of the judiciary stems from two sources: from the neutrality of judges, such as
the guarantee of a fair, impartial and objective legal proceedings and of
safeguarding the rights and freedoms of individuals judge separate from the political
power. The independence of judges is guaranteed by a special legal safeguards
position (to be classified, non-repudiation, nesesaditelnost
integrity), further guarantees of organisational and functional independence from the
bodies, representing the legislative and executive power in particular, as well as
separation of the judiciary from the legislative and executive powers (in particular by the
the principle of incompatibility). In terms of the content is then judicial
independence ensured only by law, judges vázaností IE. the exclusion of
any elements which in his decision making. The essential
the components of the principle of independence of the judiciary, the Constitutional Court comprehensively
dealt with in the report No. 349/2002 Coll. (SP. zn. PL. ÚS 7/02).
Arbitrary interference by the legislature in the field of material ensuring of judges,
where are the salary restrictions, should be protected in the framework of the principle of
their independence, for their part, for two reasons.
The independence of judges is primarily conditioned by their moral integrity
and professional levels, but it is associated with their appropriate
the material provision. This component of the principle of the independence of judges
He was enshrined in the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers Recommendation no r (94) 12
of 13 October. October 1994 concerning the independence, efficiency and role of judges,
which is between the "proper working conditions" and "ensure the ranks of the judges
the adequacy of the remuneration of judges and the position with regard to the dignity
their profession and work load "(principle III, paragraph 1b). Similar
Maxima is contained also in article. 6.1 the European Charter on the Statute for judges,
adopted by the participants in the multilateral meetings organised by the Council of Europe
in the days of 8. up to 10. July 1998, according to which the judges of the profession have the
the right to salary, the amount to be fixed so that it is protected
pressure, leading to their decision and generally affected to
affecting their behavior when finding the law that could be
compromised their independence and impartiality.
The reason for this second downshift the prohibition of unfair interference with the material
ensure the judges (of the salary restrictions) within the framework of the principle of their
the independence is to exclude the possibility, the possibility of coercion Act,
or Executive on the decisions of the judges. In other words, exclude arbitrary
alterations to the material to ensure the judges as the eventual form of the
"penalty" of judges by the legislation and executive branch, and thus take the form of
coercion in their decision making.
Following the assessment of the constitutionality of the terms set out pay restrictions against
the judges applied consistently in the Constitutional Court finding no. 198/2003 Coll. (sp.
Zn. PL. ÚS 11/02), which set aside the part of the provisions of § 1 of the law No. 416/2001
Coll., the provisions governing the withdrawal of additional salary for judges
the second half of 2001 and further reducing the salary for the first and second
half of 2002 on the amount of half of the amount to which they would otherwise
qualify.
The reasons that led the legislature to adopt the law No. 416/2001 Sb.
in doing so, identical to those which led to the adoption of level restrictions
to the judges in the law No 427/2003 Coll. and in Act No. 590/2004 Sb.
by the legislature by the alleged plight of public finances and
disproporcionalita in the level of remuneration of judges and other public areas
sphere. According to the explanatory memorandum to the draft law No 427/2003 Coll.: "must be
savings in resources spent on salaries of employees in the public
services and administration ... will not allow you to make additional salaries provided by each
half of the calendar year have been ... in the following years, paid in
the full amount. For these reasons in the present Bill proposes
to make up for the years 2004, 2005 and 2006, the salary base for determining the amount of
salary and certain refunds associated with the performance of the functions of the representatives
of State power and some other people not to, and to be more
salary in each half of the listed years provided (as well as
employees in public services and Administration) at half rate. ...
The proposed adjustment, "continues the Government's explanatory memorandum," is in accordance
with the constitutional order of the Czech Republic. " Similarly, in the explanatory memorandum to the
a later law No 590/2004 Coll. (the Chamber of Deputies. 4. the election
period. Print 679/0) States that "... based on the law No 427/2003
Coll., laying down, for the years 2004, 2005 and 2006 provides extraordinary measures
in determining the amount of the salary and some compensation expenses related to the performance of
the functions of the representatives of State power and some State authorities, judges and
prosecutors, above other salaries of these persons for the first and second
half of the years 2004, 2005 and 2006, and amending some related
laws, the additional salary for the first half of 2004 referred to persons
paid in 50% of the amount, it is proposed that to settle the procedure for
employees of public services and administration, the additional salary for the second half
2004 (regardless of the results of the negotiations with employees) withdrawn. This will
in conjunction with the "freezing" of salaries shall ensure equal access to energy-efficient
measures in both groups. "
Both laws, i.e.. how the law No 427/2003 Coll. and Act No. 590/204, Coll.,
already been adopted in the similar question decided the Constitutional Court finding
No 198/2003 Coll. However thus the Constitutional Court prior to the adoption of the law
clearly formulated maxim, according to which the principle of equality in the field of
restrictions in the remuneration of public servants, constitutional officers and
judges can be comprehensively understood before focusing on the principle of the independence of the
judges only in wholly exceptional circumstances, and this defined space
the constitutional conformity level restrictions on judges, the legislature is this
in the process of adopting the law maximou no 427/2003 Coll. did not drive and vice versa
to refer to the earlier case-law of the Constitutional Court on the issue of salaries
judges in the form of findings no 320/2000 Coll. and no 321/2000 Coll. [sub above. (b))
and (c))] from the year 2000.
The Government in the position of the applicant in doing so, calling into question the above
Law No 427/2003 Coll., and this increase in pay scale
employees of the public sphere, with effect from 1. January 2003 (regulations
Government No 582/2002 Coll., no 583/2002 Coll., no 584/2002 Coll. and no 330/2003
SB.). Declaration of Zdeněk Škromacha, Minister of labour and social
things in the 2. reading the discussion of the draft law No 427/2003 Coll.
Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic on 24. September 2003:
"For the next year in spite of the problems that exist today, would increase salaries
more than 3.6%. So the increase in budgetary and contributory sphere
It will be. " (Těsnopisecká report on the 20th meeting of the Chamber of Deputies, p. 168).
According to the table of the annex to the draft State budget for the year 2004 (Chamber
the Chamber of Deputies. IV. the electoral period. Print no. 460/0), submitted by the Government of the
The Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, then to employees in
central bodies of State administration was the actual amount of
resources for salaries for the year 2002 4 840 899 thous. CZK, the 2003 budget
5 669 263 thousand. CZK, the proposal for the year 2004 then 5 916 963 thousand. $ ("Table #.
9), in the organizational components of the State was the actual amount of
resources for salaries for the year 2002 8 755 060 thousand. CZK, the 2003 budget
10 319 286 thousand. CZK, the proposal for the year 2004 then 10 524 110 thous. $ ("Table
# 10), defense, security, customs and legal protection
was the actual amount of funds to salaries for the year 2002 26 999 082
ths. EUR, budget 2003 29 161 674 thousand. CZK, the proposal for the year 2004
30 156 796 thousand. CZK (table 11). other organizational
components of the State was the actual amount of funds to salaries per year
2002 11 406 195 thousand. $ Budget for 2003 12 545 862 thousand. CZK, design
for 2004, then 13 205 240 thousand. CZK (table 12). Further possible
an attachment to amend the draft law on the State budget for the year 2004 (on the
at http://www.psp.cz/cgi-bin/win/docs/tisky/tmp/T0460j0.doc, under the
the heading 3.2.6. Expenditure on staff salaries and other payments for
the work carried out), where it is stated that salaries in the State administration is compared to
the approved budget for the year 2003 in the draft budget for 2004, the increase
about 4.2%.
In these circumstances, can hardly accept the thesis of "the necessary savings in
resources spent on the salaries of employees in public services and
manage "in General, specifically for salary restrictions judges then examined
statutory argument lacks any "exceptional circumstances", which
would justify the priority of the principle of equality in the area of restrictions in
the remuneration of civil servants and judges, constitutional factors before
principle comprehensively understood the independence of judges.
On the basis of the following reasons should be considered as pay landed restriction
against the judges contained in paragraph 1 (b). h) Act No. 590/2004 Sb.
for rozpornou with the article. 1 (1). 1 of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC in conjunction with its article. paragraph 82. 1
and article. 1 of the Charter. Therefore, it was decided, that, pursuant to section 70 para. 1
the law on the Constitutional Court this provision repealed on the date of publication of this
the finding in the journal of laws.
The President of the Constitutional Court:
JUDr. Rychetský v.r.
Different opinions under section 14 of Act No. 182/1993 Coll., on the Constitutional Court,
as amended, a decision of the plenary, the judges adopted a
Stanislav Package and Miloslav Výborný.