References
- Allemeersch, B., Alen, A., Dalle, B. (2012). Judicial Independence in Belgium. In Seibert-Foht, A. (Ed.). Judicial Independence in Transition (pp. 307-356). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
- Appleby G., Le Mire S. (2019). Ethical Infrastructure for a Modern Judiciary. Federal Law Review, 47(3), p. 335. DOI: 10.1177/0067205X19856500.
- Atmor, N., Hofnung, M. (2024). Public Opinion and Public Trust in the Israely Judiciary. Shetreet, Sh., Chodosh, H. (Eds.) Judicial Independence: Cornerstone of Democracy. Brill/Nijhoff. 183-203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004535091_014.
- Benvenuti S. The Italian System of Judicial Governance: An Arena of Confronting Informal Practices and the Push Towards Formalization. German Law Journal. 2023;24(8):1373-1392. doi:10.1017/glj.2023.67.
- Burbank, S.B. (2019). Reconsidering Judicial Independence Forty-Five Years in the Trenches and in the Tower. University of Pennsylvania Law Review Online, Vol 168, Public Law research Paper No 19, p. 25.
- Bustos Gisbert R. Judicial Independence in European Constitutional Law. European Constitutional Law Review. 2022;18(4):591-620. doi:10.1017/S1574019622000347.
- Celotto, A. (2020). Italy and Its Constitutional Court. In Ballin, E.H., Schyff, G., Stremler, M. (Eds.). European Yearbook of Constitutional Law 2019. Judicial Power: Safeguards and Limits in a Democratic Society (pp. 67-96). T.M.C. Asser Press, 1st ed. 2020 edition.
- Cielēns F. (1929). Latvijas Republikas Satversmes noteikumi par deputātu imunitāti. Tieslietu Ministrijas Vēstnesis, 1929. Nr. 1/2.
- Di Federico, G. (2012). Judicial Independence in Italy. Seibert-Foht, A. (Ed.). Judicial Independence in Transition. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, p. 398.
- Fiss, O.M. (1993). The Limits of Judicial In dependence. The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review, 25(1), 57-76.
- Fridman, B. (2023). What it takes to Curb the Court, Wisconsin Law Review, Vol 2023, Issue 2, p.513-546. DOI: 10.59015/wlr.GXEA6246.
- Gee, G., Hazell, R. Malleson, K. (2015). The Politics of Judicial Independence in the UK’s Changing Constitution. Cambridge University Press, p. 5.
- Geyh, C. G. (2002). Customary Independence. Burbank, S. B., Friedman, B. (Eds.). Judicial Independence at the Crossroads. An Interdisciplinary Approach. New York: Sage Publications Inc, p. 161.
- Geyh, C. G. (2012). Can the Rule of Law Survive Judicial Politics? Cornell Law Review, Vol. 97, No. 191 (2011-2012), Indiana Legal Studies Research Paper No. 252, p. 239.
- Hayo, B., Voigt, S. (2023). Judicial independence: Why does de facto diverge from de jure?. European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C). DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2023.102454.
- Jackson, V.C. (2012). Judicial Independence: Structure, Context, Attitude. In Seibert-Foht, A. (Ed.). Judicial Independence in Transition (pp. 19-86). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
- Jurcēna, L, Spale, A. (2017). Satversmes 54. panta komentārs. In Latvijas Republikas Satversmes komentāri. III nodaļa. Valsts prezidents. IV nodaļa. Ministru kabinets (pp. 451-455). Latvijas Vēstnesis.
- Jurcēna, L., Spale, A. (2020). Satversmes 28. panta komentārs. In Latvijas Republikas Satversmes komentāri. II nodaļa. Saeima (pp. 449.-456). Latvijas Vēstnesis.
- Kosar D, Šipulová K, Urbániková M. Informality and Courts: Uneasy Partnership. German Law Journal. 2023;24(8):1239-1266. doi:10.1017/glj.2024.1.
- Lurie G. The Invisible Safeguards of Judicial Independence in the Israeli Judiciary. German Law Journal. 2023;24(8):1449-1468. doi:10.1017/glj.2023.73.
- Nitu, D. (2011). Head of State Immunity in Criminal Law. http://doctorat.ubbcluj.ro/sustinerea_publica/rezumate/2012/drept/nitu_daniel_en.pdf
- Oellers-Frahm, K. (2005). Italy and France: Immunity for the Prime Minister of Italy and the President of the French Republic. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 3(1), 107-115.
- Parau, C.E. (2012). The Drive for Judicial Supremacy. Seibert-Foht, A. (Ed.). Judicial Independence in Transition. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, p. 623.
- Plank, T.E. (1996). The Essential Elements of Judicial Independence and the Experience of Pre-Soviet Russia. William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, 5(1), 1-74.
- Seibert-Fohr, A. (2012). Judicial Independence in Germany. In Seibert-Foht, A. (Ed.). Judicial Independence in Transition (pp. 447-519). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
- Van Dijk, F. (2018.). A Method for Assessment of the Independence and Accountability of the Judiciary, p. 2. https://pgwrk-websitemedia.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/production/pwk-web-encj2017-p/Projects/Article%20independenceandaccountability%202018-10-18.pdf
- Van Dijk, F. (2021). Perceptions of the Independence of Judges in Europe: Congruence of Society and Judiciary. Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 89-90 (119). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63143-7
- Макарова, З.М., Конева, Н.С. (2012). Категория «иммунитет» в конституционном праве России. Вестник ЮУрГУ, 20. http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kategoriya-immunitet-v-konstitutsionnom-prave-rossii
- Масловская Т.С. (2008). Неприкосновенность как элемент конституционно-правового статуса президента в зарубежных странах. Право и демократия. Сборник научных трудов. Минск: БГУ. http://elib.bsu.by/bitstream/123456789/19759/1/5_%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F.pdf
- Satversmes tiesa (Cnstitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia). (2010). Case 2009-11-01; 18.01.2010. https://www.satv.tiesa.gov.lv/cases/?search[number]=2009-11-01.
- US Supreme Court. (1997). Case Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681; 27.05.1997. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-1853.ZS.html
- US Supreme Court. (1982). Case Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731; 24.06.1982. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/449/200/
- US Supreme Court. (1980). Case United States v. Will, 449 U.S. 200; 15.12.1980. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/449/200/
- US Supreme Court. (1967). Case Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547; 11.04.1967. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/386/547/
- US Supreme Court. (1869). Case Randall v. Brigham, 74 U.S. 523; 1869. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/74/523/
- High Court of Australia. (2005). Case Fingleton v. The Queen, 2005, 227 CLR 166. https://jade.io/article/309
- Constitutional Court of Belgium. (1994). Case 66/94; 14.07.1994. https://www.const-court.be/en/judgments?year=1994
- Constitutional Court of the Republic of the Czech Republic. (2010). Case PL. ÚS 12/10; 07.09.2010. https://www.usoud.cz/en/decisions
- Supreme Court of Canada. (2016). Case Conférence des juges de paix magistrats du Québec v. Quebec (Attorney General), 2016 SCC 39, No 34317; 14.10.2016. https://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/index-eng.aspx
- Supreme Court of Canada. (1990). Case R. v. Lippé 2 SCR 114, No 22072, Gonthier; 05.12.1990.
- Supreme Court of Canada. (1989). Case Mackeigan v. Hickman 2 SCR 796, No 21315, 21351; 05.10.1989.
- Constitutional Court of Kosova. (2011). Case KO 98/11; 30.09.2011. CODICES: KOS-2014-2-005. http://www.codices.coe.int/NXT/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm
- Constitutional Court of Ukraine. Case 19-rp/2003; 10.12.2003. Judgment. CODICES: UKR-2003-3-022. http://www.codices.coe.int/NXT/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm
- Constitutional Court of Hungary. (1991). Case 48/1991; 26.09.1991. CODICES: HUN-1991-S-002. http://www.codices.coe.int/NXT/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm
- Court of Justice of the European Union. (2022a). Case C-430/21; 22.02.2022. Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber).
- Court of Justice of the European Union. (2022b). Case C-430/21; 20.01.2022. Opinion of Advocate General Collins.
- Court of Justice of the European Union. (2019). Joint cases. C-585/18, C-624/18 un C-625/18; 27.06.2019. Opinion of Advocate General Tanchev.
- European Court of Human Rights. (2023). Case 21181/19, 51751/20 Tuleya v. Poland; 06.10.2023. Judgment.
- European Court of Human Rights. (2016). Case 20261/12 Baka v. Hungary [GC]; 23.06.2016. Separate opinion of judge Sicilianos.
- European Court of Human Rights. (2015). Case 5682/06 Sergey Zubarev v. Russia; 05.02.2015, Judgment, p. 32.
- European Court of Human Rights. (2012). Case 19673/03 Grayaznov v. Russia; 12.06.2012. Judgment.
- Satversmes tiesas likums 05.06.1996. Latvijas Vēstnesis, 103, 14.06.1996.; Latvijas Republikas Saeimas un Ministru Kabineta Ziņotājs, 14, 25.07.1996.
- Tiesnešu disciplinārās atbildības likums 27.10.1994. Latvijas Vēstnesis, 132, 10.11.1994.; Latvijas Republikas Saeimas un Ministru Kabineta Ziņotājs, 23, 15.12.1994.
- Likums “Par tiesu varu”. 15.12.1992 Latvijas Republikas Augstākās Padomes un Valdības Ziņotājs, 1/2, 14.01.1993.
- Tiesnešu disciplinārkolēģijas lēmums. 03.12.2021. Lieta Nr. D-9/2021.
- Latvijas Republikas Rīgas apgabaltiesas 16.06.2022. atbilde Nr. 1-14.4/257 uz iesniegumu par tiesneša rīcību.
- United Nations. (1985). Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary . Latvijas Vēstnesis, 148, 28.09.1995.
- CCJE. (2010). Magna Carta of Judges, 17.11.2010. https://rm.coe.int/16807482c6
- Central Council of the International Association of Judges. (1999). The Universal Charter of the Judge. https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/IAJ-Universal-Charter-of-the-Judge-instruments-1989-eng.pdf
- Council of Europe. (2010). Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 and Explanatory Memorandum. Judges: Independence, Efficiency and Responsibilities. Council of Europe Publishing. https://rm.coe.int/cmrec-2010-12-on-independence-efficiency-responsibilites-of-judges/16809f007d
- GRECO (2010). Lessons Learnt from the Three Evaluation Rounds (2000-2010). Thematic Articles. https://rm.coe.int/16806cbfc6
- UN GA. (2020). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers. A/75/172, 17.07.2020. UN_GA_Independence of Judges and Lawyers_A_75_172-EN_2020.pdf
- UN GA. (2014). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul. A/HRC/26/32, 28.04.2014, pp. 52, 53, 84
- Venice Commission. (2013a). On proposals amending the Draft Law on the amendments to the Constitution to strengthen the independence of Judges of Ukraine. CDL-AD(2013)034. Opinion. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
- Venice Commission. (2013b). Ukraine. On the draft Law on the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine CDL-AD(2013)025. Joint Opinion. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2013)025-e
- Venice Commission. (2013c). Republic of Moldova. On the Immunity of Judges for the Constitutional Court of Moldova. CDL-AD(2013)008. Amicus curiae brief. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2013)008-e
- Venice Commission. (2013d). On the Relationship between Political and Criminal Ministarial Responsibility. CDL-AD(2013)001. Report. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2013)001-e