It is early Thursday morning and today's Saeima should have a busy day. The Latvian parliament must decide first, whether there will be popular referendums this summer, or MP's would understand that the present governance style leads Latvian state into coul de sac, thus agreeing with the constitutional amendments proposed by the Union of Free Trade Unions? The referendum scenario seems more likely because in addition to constitutional amendments further on the parliamentary majority would have to legislate about amendments in pension laws.
The emergency session and cross examining the PM in the parliament about the state of economy, that opposition parties demanded for today, is postponed until next Wednesday. And then there is the last day of tenure for the incumbent Head of the Supreme Court Mr Andris Guļāns today. The collegium of Latvian lawyers have designated Mr Ivars Bičkovičs for this position. The past of the latter person is not impeccable however. The media has found out that Mr Bičkovičs as an official was first denied access to the information shared by the NATO countries. Because paternity of Mr Bičkovičs is questionable investigative journalists found out that his mother got Latvian citizenship under rather questionable circumstances. Mr Bičkovičs is also not very keen to talk about the cases revealed in the national bestseller "Home made Adjudication", although he should considering the fact that the book showed the roots of corruption in the Latvian legal system. Regardless of his questionable ethical standards the Saeima judicial commission agreed on promoting him for the position of the new Head of the Supreme Court. Quick agreement on Mr Bičkovičs among the governing clique very much resembles the way how the governing clique found the incumbent president with questionable credentials (he officially admitted evading taxes). It means that from the onset the Supreme Head of the legal profession in Latvia would be manipulative due to his past. Several parliamentary majority members already showed their contempt for the voices raised in media about Mr Bičkovičs. Most of the governing clique conveniently forget that they squeezed into parliament due to illegal election campaign, and also the Senate of the Supreme Court on November 13, 2006 had the same opinion. So the question still stands, whether Mr Bičkovičs is going to be an independent head of the Supreme Court or a mere manipulative doll for the minigarchic families of Latvia?