Constitutional Court rules that law on preservation and protection of Riga's historic center complies with Constitution
The Constitutional Court has reviewed Riga City Council^apostrofs;s petition stating that the law on preservation and protection of the historic center of Riga does not comply with the Constitution^apostrofs;s Article 1 and Article 58, and ruled that the law complied with the Constitution^apostrofs;s Article 58.
The Constitutional Court has reviewed Riga City Council's petition stating that the law on preservation and protection of the historic center of Riga does not comply with the Constitution's Article 1 and Article 58, and ruled that the law complied with the Constitution's Article 58. The Constitutional Court also decided to end proceedings over the law's conformity with the Constitution's Article 1.
As reported, the Riga City Council turned to the Constitutional Court believing that the law infringed on the city council's right to manage its properties in Riga's Old Town.
The Constitutional Court's ruling says Riga's historic center is not being preserved, protected and developed properly, therefore there have to be specific regulations on this territory of the city.
The court admits that the law on preservation and protection of the historic center of Riga limits Riga City Council's construction initiatives in the territory. However, the court also believes that such restrictions are justified and necessary.
The Constitutional Court's ruling cannot be appealed.
As reported, the Riga City Council turned to the Constitutional Court believing that the law infringed on the city council's right to manage its properties in Riga's Old Town.
The Constitutional Court's ruling says Riga's historic center is not being preserved, protected and developed properly, therefore there have to be specific regulations on this territory of the city.
The court admits that the law on preservation and protection of the historic center of Riga limits Riga City Council's construction initiatives in the territory. However, the court also believes that such restrictions are justified and necessary.
The Constitutional Court's ruling cannot be appealed.
