Matches in Saeima for { <http://dati.saeima.korpuss.lv/entity/speech/2016_02_04_342-seq273> ?p ?o. }
Showing items 1 to 12 of
12
with 100 items per page.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 type Speech.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 number "273".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 date "2016-02-04".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 isPartOf 2016_02_04_342.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 spokenAs 101.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 spokenText "Godātie kolēģi! Taupot jūsu visu laiku, es vēlos tiem, kuri nav izlasījuši šo Satversmes tiesas spriedumu, tomēr pateikt, ka Satversmes tiesas spriedumā nav atzīts, ka šis Saeimas lēmums maksātnespējas administratoriem iesniegt valsts amatpersonu deklarācijas vienmēr būtu vērtējams kā Satversmei neatbilstošs. Satversmes tiesa skatīja ļoti šauru aspektu, proti, zvērināta advokāta darbību kopsakarā ar to, ka viņi papildus veic arī maksātnespējas administratora darbu. Par to arī šobrīd Tieslietu ministrijas priekšlikums, lai atbilstoši Satversmes tiesas spriedumam šo šauro, mazo administratoru kopas daļu regulētu atbilstoši tam, kā Satversmes tiesa to redz. Un ir pietiekams termiņš, kurā izvērtēt, vai ir kaut kādi jauni samērīgāki, iespējams, mīkstinošāki apstākļi, lai visi viņu klienti, visa šī informācija, ko advokatūras noslēpums aizsargā, nebūtu pieejama, ja runa ir par procesiem, kas nav saistīti ar maksātnespēju. Ļoti skaidrs Satversmes tiesas spriedums. Protams, ir daži gan politiķi, gan juristi, gan arī maksātnespējas administratori, kuri no šī Satversmes tiesas sprieduma ir uztaisījuši burbuli, bubuli un vēl visu ko citu, - ka tagad Satversmes tiesa būtu atzinusi, ka Saeima ir pārkāpusi visu maksātnespējas administratoru tiesības slēpt savus ienākumus. Tā tas nav. Satversmes tiesas spriedums ir ļoti pārdomāts, manuprāt, ļoti vērtīgs pienesums, un ļoti augstu to vērtēju. Tāpēc ar šo priekšlikumu, ar kuru Tieslietu ministrija gan, manuprāt, novēloti ir nākusi no 22.decembra jau, - varbūt arī ātrāk varēja, nekā tikai šodien pulksten 9.45 iesniegt priekšlikumu. Bet, ja reiz mums šis priekšlikums šodien ir jāvētī, kolēģi, es aicinu to atbalstīt. Tas labos likumu tā, kā Satversmes tiesa to redz. Un mums būs gandrīz septiņi mēneši - līdz 1.septembrim -, lai atrastu šo samērīgāko risinājumu tieši attiecībā uz zvērinātiem advokātiem. Tā ka nevajag baidīties. Juridiski šis risinājums, manuprāt, ir ļoti labs. Satversmes tiesas spriedums ir jāpilda, ir jāievēro, un ar šo priekšlikumu atbalstīšanu mēs to arī izdarīsim. Paldies. (Aplausi.)".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 language "lv".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 speaker Inese_Libina-Egnere-1977.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 translatedText "Ladies and gentlemen, by saving you all the time, I would like to tell those who have not read the judgment of this Constitutional Court, but to say that the judgment of the Constitutional Court does not recognise that the decision of this House of insolvency administrators to submit declarations of state officials would always be welcome. The Constitutional Court of the Constitution saw very narrow aspects of the Constitution, namely, the work of the jury in conjunction with the fact that they are also in addition to the work of the Insolvency Administrator On to the Justice Department's proposal to bring this to the point of the Constitutional Court ruling. The narrow, small part of the administrators' regulation would be regulated under the way the Constitutional Court sees it as a sufficient time frame to assess whether there is any new proportionate, possibly softer conditions for all of their customers, all of which are by the Advokes. The secret to the defence would not be available when it comes to proceedings unrelated to the insolvency of a Very Constitutional Court ruling of course, there are some politicians, lawyers and administrators and insolvency administrators, who are also the default administrators of this Constitutional Courta bubble, a bogeyman and more of anything else - that the Constitutional Court now would have recognised that Saeima has breached the right of all insolvency administrators to conceal their income in the failure of the Constitutional Court's highly considerate, in my opinion, highly considerate, in my viewa valuable contribution, and very high for this proposal, which, I think, the Ministry of Justice, both in my view, has already come from 22 December, perhaps more quickly than just today at 9 45but, once we have this proposal today, colleagues, I call for it to be supported in this good law, the way the Constitutional Court sees it and we will have almost seven months - 1 September - to find thisthe most proportionate solution, specifically for attorneys in particular, is that, in my opinion, a very good judgment of the Constitutional Court is a very good one, that is to be complied with, and we will do so with the support of those proposals (applause)".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 mentions Q822919.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 mentions Q1771611.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 mentions Q2498135.