The Prosecutor’s Office must introduce an employee well-being program, establish specialized structural units, and make combating domestic violence and financial crimes a top priority, according to the development concept prepared by Juris Juriss, a Constitutional Court judge and candidate for the position of Prosecutor General.
Juriss’s concept outlines eight priority areas of action.
At the top of the list is the effective implementation of prosecutorial functions in the fight against corruption, financial and economic crimes, terrorism, and violations of international sanctions, as well as violence against women and domestic violence.
The second priority focuses on improving the work environment for prosecutors and prosecution staff.
This is followed by strengthening the role of chief prosecutors and senior prosecutors in supervising high-quality pre-trial investigations, criminal prosecutions, and maintaining state prosecution in court.
As the fourth priority, Juriss highlights effective oversight of operational activities, intelligence and counterintelligence processes of national security institutions, and the system for protecting state secrets.
The fifth priority concerns international integration and cooperation of the Prosecutor’s Office.
Next comes increasing public trust in the prosecution service as a judicial authority and enhancing the professional growth of prosecutors.
Among his additional priorities, Juriss emphasizes the broader use of modern technological tools and further development of the prosecution’s information system.
In greater detail, Juriss stresses that improving the work environment also requires promoting the well-being of prosecutors and staff — maintaining a supportive work culture that fosters both satisfaction and productivity.
He proposes introducing a “well-being monitoring system” for prosecutors
who perform their duties under high-intensity conditions and deal with complex, high-profile cases.
He also calls for the creation of a well-being program based on an assessment and analysis of the current situation, alongside measures to increase remuneration for prosecutors and staff.
Juriss further believes the control system within the information management structure should be improved — specifically regarding how chief and senior prosecutors oversee pre-trial investigations, prosecutions, and the conduct of cases in court.
The evaluation criterion, he suggests, should be direct oversight by superior prosecutors over key procedural decisions and ensuring reasonable timeframes for completing criminal proceedings without unjustified delays.
Another important objective, according to Juriss, is improving the quality of indictments, with active involvement of chief and senior prosecutors in the process.
Although methodological guidelines have already been developed, their implementation remains a weak point, the concept notes.
Juriss proposes regular quality checks of indictments
— at least twice a year in all regions of Latvia — through random sampling of cases conducted jointly with responsible prosecutors.
These reviews, he stresses, should serve as supportive and educational tools, helping prosecutors better understand the criteria of quality prosecution.
He also recommends structured discussions between prosecutors and judges on the criteria for indictment quality as an additional mechanism for improving consistency. Juriss believes that in ensuring proportionate and deterrent sentencing for priority crimes, the prosecution should develop and refine sentencing guidelines.
He also calls for a review of minimum evidentiary standards for priority and cybercrime cases, ensuring sufficient proof thresholds.
Supervision of investigations, prosecutions, and state representation in court for priority and cybercrimes, he argues, cannot be separated from prosecutorial specialization — therefore, specialized structural units must be established within the Prosecutor’s Office.
As previously reported,
the Judicial Council will on the 7th of November interview four candidates for the position of Prosecutor General.
The candidates are: the current Prosecutor General Juris Stukāns, Constitutional Court judge Juris Juriss, Chief Prosecutor of the Riga Judicial District Armīns Meisters, and former Organized Crime and Other Branch Prosecutor Jānis Ilsteris.
After hearing all candidates, the Council will decide which one to nominate to the Saeima (Parliament) for appointment.
The Judicial Council announced a repeat competition for the post in mid-July, with applications accepted until the 1st of September.
Stukāns’s term expired on the 11th of July, but no new Prosecutor General was selected in the first competition held in spring. The repeat competition did not prevent Stukāns from reapplying.
According to the Prosecutor’s Office Law, the Prosecutor General is appointed by the Saeima for a term of five years, based on a proposal from the Judicial Council. The same person may serve no more than two consecutive terms.
Until a new Prosecutor General is appointed, the duties of the office are being performed by Chief Prosecutor Arvīds Kalniņš.
Read also: Latvia’s Prosecutor General seat: candidates and their professional paths
The post Latvia’s Prosecutor General candidate Juriss: The Prosecutor’s Office must become more modern and humane appeared first on Baltic News Network.
