{"id":16622,"date":"2021-12-27T14:28:57","date_gmt":"2021-12-27T12:28:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/?p=16622"},"modified":"2021-12-28T08:45:46","modified_gmt":"2021-12-28T06:45:46","slug":"__trashed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/?p=16622","title":{"rendered":"Vai vieni aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101ji ir vienl\u012bdz\u012bg\u0101ki par citiem?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Publisko iepirkumu likuma jaun\u0101kie groz\u012bjumi Satversmes ties\u0101<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Autores redz\u0113jums par to, k\u0101 Satversmes tiesa var\u0113tu v\u0113rt\u0113t pras\u012bbas no 2015. gada 1. augusta pretendentiem iepirkum\u0101 nor\u0101d\u012bt darbinieku vid\u0113jo stundas likmi atbilst\u012bbu vienl\u012bdz\u012bbas principam.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101ju apkaro\u0161ana joproj\u0101m ir Latvijas vald\u012bbas priorit\u0101te.1<\/a><\/sup> Valsts ie\u0146\u0113mumu dienests (turpm\u0101k \u2013 VID) c\u012bn\u0101s ar aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101jiem, veicot nozaru p\u0101rbaudes, piem\u0113ram, zob\u0101rstniec\u012bb\u0101,2<\/a><\/sup> autoservisos3<\/a><\/sup> un citur.4<\/a><\/sup> C\u012b\u0146as ietvaros ar\u012b atgriez\u0101s pie ierosin\u0101juma nepie\u013caut aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101jiem sa\u0146emt valsts pas\u016bt\u012bjumus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Likumdev\u0113js \u0161o ierosin\u0101jumu atbalst\u012bja v\u0113l 2010. gad\u0101, papildinot Publisko iepirkumu likuma (turpm\u0101k \u2013 PIL) 39. panta pirmo da\u013cu ar 6. punktu (turpm\u0101k \u2013 Atcelt\u0101 norma). Tas paredz\u0113ja autom\u0101tiski izsl\u0113gt no dal\u012bbas iepirkum\u0101 tos pretendentus vai kandid\u0101tus, kuru darbinieki sa\u0146\u0113ma maz\u0101k nek\u0101 70% no vid\u0113j\u0101s algas nozar\u0113.5<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Satversmes tiesa \u0161o normu 2011. gada nogal\u01136<\/a><\/sup> atzina par neatbilsto\u0161u Satversmes 91. pantam. T\u0101 konstat\u0113ja at\u0161\u0137ir\u012bgu attieksmi pret pretendentiem, kuru darbinieku alga ir maz\u0101ka par 70% no vid\u0113j\u0101s algas nozar\u0113, un tiem, kuru darbinieku alga ir liel\u0101ka. Turkl\u0101t apstr\u012bd\u0113t\u0101 norma paredz\u0113ja izsl\u0113gt pretendentus no dal\u012bbas iepirkum\u0101, ne\u013caujot tiem pier\u0101d\u012bt nodok\u013cu samaksu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Saeima 2014. gada 2. oktobr\u012b papildin\u0101ja PIL 48. pantu (turpm\u0101k \u2013 Groz\u012bjumi), dodot pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jiem iesp\u0113ju atz\u012bt pied\u0101v\u0101jumu par nepamatoti l\u0113tu un izsl\u0113gt pretendentu no t\u0101l\u0101kas dal\u012bbas iepirkum\u0101, ja kaut viens t\u0101 vai apak\u0161uz\u0146\u0113m\u0113ju darbinieks sa\u0146em maz\u0101k nek\u0101 80% no profesijas vid\u0113j\u0101s stundas likmes un VID tam neredz attaisnojumu. Pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam b\u016bs pien\u0101kums p\u0101rbaud\u012bt ikviena pied\u0101v\u0101juma cenas pamatot\u012bbu.7<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

VID pazi\u0146ojums presei par \u0161iem groz\u012bjumiem v\u0113st\u012bja, ka jaun\u0101 norma ne\u013caus aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101jiem sa\u0146emt valsts naudu. VID nemin\u0113ja Satversmes tiesas 2011. gada spriedumu (turpm\u0101k \u2013 Spriedums) ne preses pazi\u0146ojum\u0101, ne Groz\u012bjumu anot\u0101cij\u0101. Iest\u0101de vien atz\u012bm\u0113ja, ka Atcelt\u0101 norma zaud\u0113jusi sp\u0113ku.8<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

P\u0113c autores dom\u0101m, Groz\u012bjumi l\u012bdzin\u0101s Atceltajai normai un ir pamats tos apstr\u012bd\u0113t Satversmes ties\u0101. T\u0101d\u0113\u013c autore sniedz savu redz\u0113jumu par to, k\u0101 Satversmes tiesa var\u0113tu v\u0113rt\u0113t PIL 48. panta 2015. gada 1. augusta redakcijas atbilst\u012bbu Satversmes 91. panta pirmajam teikumam, k\u0101 ar\u012b dod ieskatu VID secin\u0101jumos par Spriedum\u0101 teikto, cikt\u0101l tie ir publiski pieejami.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Vai norma paredz at\u0161\u0137ir\u012bgu attieksmi pret visiem pretendentiem, kuri, visdr\u012bz\u0101k, maks\u0101 aplok\u0161\u0146u algas<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Atcelt\u0101 norma uzdeva pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jiem izsl\u0113gt no dal\u012bbas iepirkum\u0101 tos pretendentus, kuru darbinieku vid\u0113j\u0101 alga neatbilda 70% no nozares vid\u0113j\u0101 atalgojuma.9<\/a><\/sup> Satversmes tiesa p\u0101rbaud\u012bja t\u0101s atbilst\u012bbu 91. panta pirmajam teikumam saska\u0146\u0101 ar \u0161\u0101du testu:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. vai un kuras personas (personu grupas) atrodas vien\u0101dos un p\u0113c noteiktiem krit\u0113rijiem sal\u012bdzin\u0101mos apst\u0101k\u013cos;<\/li>
  2. vai apstr\u012bd\u0113t\u0101 norma paredz vien\u0101du vai at\u0161\u0137ir\u012bgu attieksmi pret \u0161\u012bm person\u0101m;<\/li>
  3. vai \u0161\u0101dai attieksmei ir objekt\u012bvs un sapr\u0101t\u012bgs pamats, proti, vai tai ir le\u0123it\u012bms m\u0113r\u0137is un vai ir iev\u0113rots sam\u0113r\u012bguma princips.10<\/a><\/sup><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Pirmk\u0101rt, Spriedum\u0101 Satversmes tiesa secin\u0101ja, ka visi ieinteres\u0113tie pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101ji atrodas vien\u0101dos un sal\u012bdzin\u0101mos apst\u0101k\u013cos. Lai ar\u012b Atcelt\u0101 norma uzdeva sal\u012bdzin\u0101t pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101ju darbinieku algu vienas nozares ietvaros saska\u0146\u0101 ar NACE klasifikatoru,11<\/a><\/sup> t\u0101s tv\u0113rums attiec\u0101s uz vis\u0101m nozar\u0113m. T\u0101tad ar\u012b Groz\u012bjumu apstr\u012bd\u0113\u0161anas gad\u012bjum\u0101 Satversmes tiesa, dom\u0101jams, identific\u0113tu sal\u012bdzin\u0101m\u0101s personas k\u0101 visus ieinteres\u0113tos pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101jus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Otrk\u0101rt, Satversmes tiesa secin\u0101ja, ka Atcelt\u0101 norma paredz\u0113ja at\u0161\u0137ir\u012bgu attieksmi pret ieinteres\u0113tajiem pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101jiem. T\u0101 no\u0161\u0137\u012bra sal\u012bdzin\u0101m\u0101s personas saska\u0146\u0101 ar darbinieku vid\u0113j\u0101 atalgojuma sal\u012bdzin\u0101jumu ar vid\u0113jo algu nozar\u0113. Tikai tie ieinteres\u0113tie pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101ji, kuru darbinieki peln\u012bja virs 70% no nozares vid\u0113j\u0101s algas, dr\u012bkst\u0113ja turpin\u0101t dal\u012bbu iepirkum\u0101.12<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Ar\u012b \u0161aj\u0101 posm\u0101 Satversmes tiesa konstat\u0113tu Groz\u012bjumu at\u0161\u0137ir\u012bgu attieksmi pret da\u017e\u0101diem pretendentiem. T\u0101 paredz pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam pien\u0101kumu izv\u0113rt\u0113t pied\u0101v\u0101jumu k\u0101, iesp\u0113jams, nepamatoti l\u0113tu, ja tas konstat\u0113 darbinieku atalgojumu at\u0161\u0137ir\u012bbu. Pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam nav pien\u0101kuma v\u0113rt\u0113t tos pied\u0101v\u0101jumus, kuru iesniedz\u0113ju darbinieki sa\u0146em algu starp 70% un 100% no vid\u0113j\u0101s stundas likmes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    T\u0101d\u0113\u013c, autores ieskat\u0101, Satversmes tiesa konstat\u0113tu, ka Groz\u012bjumi paredz at\u0161\u0137ir\u012bgu attieksmi pret da\u017e\u0101diem pretendentiem \u2013 atkar\u012bb\u0101 no darbinieku vid\u0113j\u0101s stundas likmes un t\u0101s sal\u012bdzin\u0101juma ar valst\u012b vid\u0113jo.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Vai Groz\u012bjumu m\u0113r\u0137is ir le\u0123it\u012bms<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Likumdev\u0113ja m\u0113r\u0137is, pie\u0146emot Atcelto normu, bija pan\u0101kt, lai ties\u012bbas sl\u0113gt iepirkuma l\u012bgumu ieg\u016bst tikai tie pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101ji, kuri, visdr\u012bz\u0101k, nemaks\u0101 aplok\u0161\u0146u algas.13<\/a><\/sup> Satversmes tiesa to skaidroja \u0161\u0101di: “Sabiedr\u012bbas labkl\u0101j\u012bbas veicin\u0101\u0161ana un citu personu ties\u012bbu aizsardz\u012bba, kas izpau\u017eas k\u0101 nodok\u013cus nepiln\u012bgi maks\u0101jo\u0161o pretendentu izsl\u0113g\u0161ana no dal\u012bbas iepirkuma proced\u016br\u0101, pilnv\u0113rt\u012bgas nodok\u013cu iekas\u0113\u0161anas sekm\u0113\u0161ana un iepirkuma proced\u016bras pretendentu god\u012bgas konkurences nodro\u0161in\u0101\u0161ana.”14<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Likumprojekta anot\u0101cija Groz\u012bjumu m\u0113r\u0137i neskaidro, jo Finan\u0161u ministrija tos ierosin\u0101ja tikai tre\u0161aj\u0101 las\u012bjum\u0101.15<\/a><\/sup> VID \u0123ener\u0101ldirektore In\u0101ra P\u0113tersone preciz\u0113jusi, ka normas m\u0113r\u0137is ir izskaust gad\u012bjumus, kad zem\u0101ko cenu iepirkum\u0101 pied\u0101v\u0101 \u0123ener\u0101luz\u0146\u0113m\u0113js, kur\u0161 ietaup\u012bjumu rod apak\u0161uz\u0146\u0113m\u0113ju darbinieku aplok\u0161\u0146u alg\u0101s.16<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    T\u0101tad likumdev\u0113ja m\u0113r\u0137is, pie\u0146emot gan Atcelto normu, gan Groz\u012bjumus, p\u0113c b\u016bt\u012bbas ir identisks. Tas paredz veicin\u0101t god\u012bgu konkurenci iepirkumos un nodok\u013cu iekas\u0113\u0161anu. Satversmes tiesa Spriedum\u0101 \u0161o m\u0113r\u0137i atzina par le\u0123it\u012bmu.17<\/a><\/sup> L\u012bdz ar to autorei nav \u0161aubu, ka t\u0101 to dar\u012btu, ar\u012b v\u0113rt\u0113jot Groz\u012bjumus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    P\u0113c tam Satversmes tiesa p\u0101rbaud\u012btu vienl\u012bdz\u012bgas attieksmes ties\u012bbu ierobe\u017eojuma pamatot\u012bbu saska\u0146\u0101 ar \u0161\u0101diem krit\u0113rijiem:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \u201cPublisko iepirkumu likuma ietvaros efekt\u012bvs risin\u0101jums aplok\u0161\u0146u algu probl\u0113mai, autores ieskat\u0101, b\u016btu zem\u0101k\u0101s cenas krit\u0113rija noz\u012bmes samazin\u0101\u0161ana.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    1. vai izraudz\u012btie l\u012bdzek\u013ci ir piem\u0113roti le\u0123it\u012bm\u0101 m\u0113r\u0137a sasnieg\u0161anai jeb vai ar izraudz\u012bto l\u012bdzekli var sasniegt le\u0123it\u012bmo m\u0113r\u0137i;<\/li>
    2. vai \u0161\u0101da r\u012bc\u012bba ir nepiecie\u0161ama jeb vai le\u0123it\u012bmo m\u0113r\u0137i nevar sasniegt ar indiv\u012bda ties\u012bbas maz\u0101k ierobe\u017eojo\u0161iem l\u012bdzek\u013ciem;<\/li>
    3. vai ierobe\u017eojums ir atbilsto\u0161s jeb vai labums, ko ieg\u016bst sabiedr\u012bba, ir liel\u0101ks par indiv\u012bda ties\u012bb\u0101m nodar\u012bto kait\u0113jumu.18<\/a><\/sup><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

      Ja, izv\u0113rt\u0113jot ties\u012bbu normu, Satversmes tiesa atz\u012bst, ka t\u0101 neatbilst kaut vienam no \u0161iem krit\u0113rijiem, tad norma neatbilst ar\u012b sam\u0113r\u012bguma principam un ir prettiesiska.19<\/a><\/sup> \u0160o krit\u0113riju p\u0101rbaudi attiec\u012bb\u0101 uz Groz\u012bjumiem autore analiz\u0113 n\u0101kamaj\u0101s sada\u013c\u0101s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Vai vid\u0113j\u0101s stundas likmes apm\u0113rs identific\u0113 aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101jus<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Atcelt\u0101 norma paredz\u0113ja autom\u0101tiski izsl\u0113gt no dal\u012bbas iepirkum\u0101 pretendentus, kuri maks\u0101ja p\u0101rlieku zemu algu, sal\u012bdzinot ar nozares r\u0101d\u012bt\u0101jiem. T\u0101d\u0113\u013c Satversmes tiesa atzina Atcelto normu par form\u0101li piem\u0113rotu le\u0123it\u012bm\u0101 m\u0113r\u0137a sasnieg\u0161anai.20<\/a><\/sup> Tom\u0113r t\u0101 v\u0113rt\u0113ja ar\u012b normas piem\u0113ro\u0161anas praksi, lai p\u0101rbaud\u012btu faktisko piem\u0113rot\u012bbu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Satversmes tiesas ieskat\u0101, Atcelt\u0101 norma nedeva pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam iesp\u0113ju izsl\u0113gt no dal\u012bbas iepirkum\u0101 tos pretendentus, kuru darbinieki sa\u0146\u0113ma virs 70% no nozares vid\u0113j\u0101s algas, bet kuri slepus nemaks\u0101ja visus darbasp\u0113ka nodok\u013cus.21<\/a><\/sup> Praks\u0113 norma ne\u013c\u0101va pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam izsl\u0113gt piln\u012bgi visus darbasp\u0113ka nodok\u013cu nemaks\u0101t\u0101jus. T\u0101d\u0113\u013c Satversmes tiesa secin\u0101ja, ka Atcelt\u0101 norma tikai da\u013c\u0113ji sasniedza le\u0123it\u012bmo m\u0113r\u0137i.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Saska\u0146\u0101 ar Groz\u012bjumiem pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam oblig\u0101ti j\u0101izv\u0113rt\u0113 nepamatoti l\u0113ts pied\u0101v\u0101jums, ja kaut viens pretendenta darbinieks sa\u0146em maz\u0101k nek\u0101 80% no profesijas vid\u0113j\u0101 atalgojuma stund\u0101. Form\u0101li norma at\u013cauj p\u0113c \u0161\u0101da v\u0113rt\u0113juma izsl\u0113gt pretendentu no dal\u012bbas iepirkum\u0101, t\u0101d\u0113\u013c t\u0101 form\u0101li ir piem\u0113rota le\u0123it\u012bm\u0101 m\u0113r\u0137a sasnieg\u0161anai.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      No faktisk\u0101s piem\u0113rot\u012bbas viedok\u013ca Groz\u012bjumi praks\u0113 sadala varb\u016bt\u0113jos darba sp\u0113ka nodok\u013cu nemaks\u0101t\u0101jus div\u0101s da\u013c\u0101s. Proti, tajos, kas maks\u0101 maz\u0101k nek\u0101 80% no vid\u0113j\u0101s profesijas stundas likmes un kurus p\u0101rbauda pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js un VID, un tajos, kuri netrauc\u0113ti turpina dal\u012bbu iepirkum\u0101.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Manupr\u0101t, \u0161aj\u0101 gad\u012bjum\u0101 Satversmes tiesa secin\u0101tu, ka pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ji, piem\u0113rojot Groz\u012bjumus praks\u0113, nep\u0101rbauda visu potenci\u0101lo nodok\u013cu nemaks\u0101t\u0101ju pied\u0101v\u0101jumus un nepak\u013cauj tos p\u0101rbaudes un izsl\u0113g\u0161anas riskam. L\u012bdz\u012bgi k\u0101 iepriek\u0161, norma sasniedz le\u0123it\u012bmo m\u0113r\u0137i tikai attiec\u012bb\u0101 uz tiem pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101jiem, kuru darbinieki nopelna maz\u0101k nek\u0101 80% no vid\u0113j\u0101s profesijas stundas likmes. T\u0101d\u0113\u013c Satversmes tiesa secin\u0101tu, ka Groz\u012bjumi nav praktiski piem\u0113roti le\u0123it\u012bm\u0101 m\u0113r\u0137a sasnieg\u0161anai.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      \u0160\u012bs hipot\u0113tisk\u0101s lietas ietvaros b\u016btu interesanti dzird\u0113t Satversmes tiesas v\u0113rt\u0113jumu par profesiju klasifikatora praktisko piem\u0113rot\u012bbu darbinieku likmju sal\u012bdzin\u0101\u0161anai.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Vai var efekt\u012bv\u0101k nepie\u013caut aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101ju dal\u012bbu publiskos iepirkumos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      T\u0101l\u0101k Spriedum\u0101 Satversmes tiesa v\u0113rt\u0113ja ierobe\u017eojuma nepiecie\u0161am\u012bbu. T\u0101 piem\u0113roja Eiropas Savien\u012bbas Tiesas (turpm\u0101k \u2013 EST) interpret\u0101ciju par rezult\u0101tu, kuru likumdev\u0113js v\u0113l\u0113j\u0101s sasniegt ar Atcelto normu.22<\/a><\/sup> Satversmes tiesas ieskat\u0101, EST aizliedza dal\u012bbvalst\u012bm izsl\u0113gt pretendentus no dal\u012bbas iepirkum\u0101 uz neatsp\u0113kojamas prezumpcijas pamata, ja \u0161\u0101da r\u012bc\u012bba p\u0101rk\u0101pa sam\u0113r\u012bguma, vienl\u012bdz\u012bbas un atkl\u0101t\u012bbas principus.23<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Satversmes tiesa piekrita konstitucion\u0101l\u0101s s\u016bdz\u012bbas iesniedz\u0113ja nor\u0101dei, ka Atcelt\u0101 norma attiec\u0101s uz kandid\u0101ta vai pretendenta profesion\u0101laj\u0101m \u012bpa\u0161\u012bb\u0101m, proti, profesion\u0101lo god\u012bgumu. Saska\u0146\u0101 ar EST judikat\u016bru Direkt\u012bvas 2004\/18\/EK24<\/a><\/sup> (turpm\u0101k \u2013 Direkt\u012bva) 45. pant\u0101 nor\u0101d\u012btie izsl\u0113g\u0161anas pamati, kas attiecas uz kandid\u0101ta vai pretendenta profesion\u0101laj\u0101m \u012bpa\u0161\u012bb\u0101m, ir izsme\u013co\u0161i.25<\/a><\/sup> \u0160\u012b norma nesatur ties\u012bbas dal\u012bbvalst\u012bm noteikt papildu izsl\u0113g\u0161anas pamatus, kas attiecas uz kandid\u0101ta vai pretendenta profesion\u0101laj\u0101m sp\u0113j\u0101m,26<\/a><\/sup> piem\u0113ram, pras\u012bbas vid\u0113j\u0101s algas l\u012bmenim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      T\u0101d\u0113\u013c Satversmes tiesa atzina Atcelto normu par neatbilsto\u0161u EST judikat\u016br\u0101 atrodamajam aizliegumam izsl\u0113gt pretendentus no dal\u012bbas iepirkum\u0101 uz neatsp\u0113kojamas prezumpcijas pamata. T\u0101 uzdeva likumdev\u0113jam izv\u0113l\u0113ties t\u0101dus nodok\u013ca nomaksas sasnieg\u0161anas veidus, kuri \u013cauj pretendentam pier\u0101d\u012bt saist\u012bbu izpildi.27<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Satversmes tiesa neanaliz\u0113ja Atcelt\u0101s normas sam\u0113r\u012bgumu, jo secin\u0101ja, ka normas le\u0123it\u012bmo m\u0113r\u0137i var\u0113ja sasniegt ar pretendentu ties\u012bbas maz\u0101k ierobe\u017eojo\u0161u l\u012bdzekli.28<\/a><\/sup> Tom\u0113r Sprieduma nosl\u0113gum\u0101 Satversmes tiesa skaidroja: “Likumdev\u0113jam ir vai nu j\u0101izv\u0113las t\u0101di l\u012bdzek\u013ci, kuri neierobe\u017eo nodok\u013cus maks\u0101jo\u0161o pretendentu ties\u012bbas turpin\u0101t dal\u012bbu iepirkuma proced\u016br\u0101s, vai ar\u012b j\u0101nosaka t\u0101da tiesisk\u0101 k\u0101rt\u012bba, lai pretendents var\u0113tu pier\u0101d\u012bt, ka ir veicis visus normat\u012bvajos aktos paredz\u0113tos nodok\u013cu maks\u0101jumus.”29<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Groz\u012bjumi paredz iesp\u0113ju pretendentam p\u0101rliecin\u0101t pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ju par nodok\u013cu nomaksu un zemas cenas pamatot\u012bbu.30<\/a><\/sup> Tom\u0113r pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam \u0161aj\u0101 proces\u0101 j\u0101iesaista ar\u012b VID. Tas 15 dienu laik\u0101 p\u0101rbaud\u012bs pretendenta darb\u012bbu un sniegs atzinumu par pretendenta izmaks\u0101t\u0101 zem\u0101 atalgojuma pamatot\u012bbu.31<\/a><\/sup> Rezult\u0101t\u0101 pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js v\u0113rt\u0113s pretendenta paskaidrojumus kop\u0101 ar iepirkuma ietvaros neapstr\u012bdamu32<\/a><\/sup> VID atzinumu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Groz\u012bjumi attiecas uz nepamatoti l\u0113ta pied\u0101v\u0101juma v\u0113rt\u0113\u0161anu, kuru regul\u0113 Direkt\u012bvas 55. pants. T\u0101d\u0113\u013c Satversmes tiesa, v\u0113rt\u0113jot Groz\u012bjumus Eiropas Savien\u012bbas ties\u012bbu gaism\u0101, piem\u0113ros EST judikat\u016bru attiec\u012bb\u0101 uz Direkt\u012bvas 55. pantu, nevis tikai izsl\u0113g\u0161anas pras\u012bbu regul\u0113jumu. T\u0101s anal\u012bze paliks \u0101rpus \u0161\u012b raksta, jo, manupr\u0101t, lietu iz\u0161\u0137irs Groz\u012bjumu piem\u0113ro\u0161anas prakse un pretendentu faktisk\u0101 iesp\u0113ja pier\u0101d\u012bt nodok\u013cu nomaksu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Ja pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ji autom\u0101tiski pa\u013causies uz negat\u012bvu VID atzinumu par sp\u012bti ticamam un pier\u0101d\u012bjumos balst\u012btam pretendenta skaidrojumam, tad Satversmes tiesa var\u0113tu konstat\u0113t p\u0101rk\u0101pumu Groz\u012bjumu piem\u0113ro\u0161an\u0101. Proti, tai b\u016bs pamats atz\u012bt, ka nelabv\u0113l\u012bgs VID atzinums faktiski izlemj pied\u0101v\u0101juma likteni.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Savuk\u0101rt Satversmes tiesa var\u0113tu atz\u012bt piem\u0113ro\u0161anas praksi par atbilsto\u0161u taisn\u012bgai proced\u016brai, ja VID atzinuma sagatavo\u0161anas process un pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja v\u0113rt\u0113jums atbild\u012bs dialogam ar pretendentu, nevis darbasp\u0113ka nodok\u013ca maks\u0101t\u0101ja tematiskai p\u0101rbaudei.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      T\u0101tad pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jiem j\u0101dod pretendentam re\u0101la iesp\u0113ja atsp\u0113kot VID atzinumu PIL 48. panta ietvaros, lai Satversmes tiesa atz\u012btu Groz\u012bjumus par piem\u0113rotiem le\u0123it\u012bm\u0101 m\u0113r\u0137a sasnieg\u0161anai. Tad Satversmes tiesa v\u0113rt\u0113tu Groz\u012bjumu sam\u0113r\u012bgumu, visdr\u012bz\u0101k izmantojot EST judikat\u016bru par Direkt\u012bvas 55. pantu un t\u0101s principiem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Secin\u0101jumi: vai var no\u0137ert aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101jus ar PIL<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Groz\u012bjumi var novest pie div\u0101m nev\u0113lam\u0101m situ\u0101cij\u0101m. Pirmaj\u0101 situ\u0101cij\u0101 jaunie vai mazie uz\u0146\u0113m\u0113ji pa\u0161i cenz\u0113 savus pied\u0101v\u0101jumus un neiesniedz tos, jo nev\u0113las skaidroties ar VID. Rezult\u0101t\u0101 valsts ieg\u016bst d\u0101rg\u0101kus pied\u0101v\u0101jumus maz\u0101kas konkurences d\u0113\u013c.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Otraj\u0101 situ\u0101cij\u0101 pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101ji samazina VID zi\u0146oto darbinieku stundu skaitu, uz pap\u012bra palielinot produktivit\u0101ti. \u0160\u0101d\u0101 gad\u012bjum\u0101 Groz\u012bjumi zaud\u0113s j\u0113gu, jo pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101ji pras\u012bbas apies. Pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js nekonstat\u0113s p\u0101rlieku zemu darbinieku atalgojumu un nekonsult\u0113sies ar VID pat tad, ja VID paral\u0113li s\u0101ks p\u0101rbaud\u012bt darbinieku faktisko slodzi. T\u0101d\u0113\u013c Groz\u012bjumu piem\u0113ro\u0161anas rezult\u0101t\u0101 VID neno\u0137ers aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101jus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Tom\u0113r PIL jau ir 39.1 panta pirm\u0101s da\u013cas 5. punkts, kura m\u0113r\u0137is ir izsl\u0113gt no dal\u012bbas iepirkumos tos pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101jus, kuri nemaks\u0101 nodok\u013cus piln\u0101 apm\u0113r\u0101. \u0160\u012b norma atbilst Direkt\u012bvas pras\u012bb\u0101m.33<\/a><\/sup> Turkl\u0101t l\u012bdz ar Groz\u012bjumiem st\u0101sies sp\u0113k\u0101 PIL 39. panta groz\u012bjumi, kuri atce\u013c pa\u0161reiz\u0113jo iesp\u0113ju pretendentiem apmaks\u0101t nodok\u013cu maks\u0101jumu par\u0101dus \u012bsi pirms iepirkuma l\u012bguma nosl\u0113g\u0161anas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Lai ar\u012b Groz\u012bjumu un PIL 39.1 panta pirm\u0101s da\u013cas 5. punktam ir le\u0123it\u012bms m\u0113r\u0137is, tie nevar aizst\u0101t efekt\u012bvu VID prevent\u012bvo un sodo\u0161o darbu. T\u0101d\u0113\u013c PIL ietvaros efekt\u012bvs risin\u0101jums aplok\u0161\u0146u algu probl\u0113mai, autores ieskat\u0101, b\u016btu zem\u0101k\u0101s cenas krit\u0113rija noz\u012bmes samazin\u0101\u0161ana. Ja pieg\u0101d\u0101t\u0101jam nav j\u0101sacen\u0161as ar zem\u0101ko cenu, tad tam j\u0101pied\u0101v\u0101 pieredz\u0113jis person\u0101ls vai produkts ar pievienoto v\u0113rt\u012bbu. \u0160ie krit\u0113riji ietekm\u0113 iepirkuma izpildes kvalit\u0101ti un pal\u012bdz izv\u0113l\u0113ties uzvar\u0113t\u0101ju.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Finan\u0161u ministrija \u0161obr\u012bd str\u0101d\u0101 pie jauna iepirkumu likuma, lai ieviestu Eiropas Savien\u012bbas ties\u012bbu normas,34<\/a><\/sup> kuras paredz zem\u0101k\u0101s cenas krit\u0113rija samazin\u0101\u0161anu iepirkuma uzvar\u0113t\u0101ja noteik\u0161an\u0101.35<\/a><\/sup> T\u0101d\u0113\u013c iesp\u0113jams, ka 2016. gad\u0101 Groz\u012bjumi zaud\u0113s sp\u0113ku. Mums atliek vien sagaid\u012bt, vai to pan\u0101ks likumdev\u0113js vai Satversmes tiesa.<\/p>\n\n\n

      Atsauces:<\/p>\n

      1. Deklar\u0101cija par Laimdotas Straujumas vad\u012bt\u0101 Ministru kabineta iecer\u0113to darb\u012bbu, 4. priorit\u0101te. 2014. gada novembris. Pieejama: http:\/\/www.mk.gov.lv\/sites\/default\/files\/editor\/05_deklaracija.pdf<\/a>\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      2. VID aicina zob\u0101rstniec\u012bbas nozar\u0113 str\u0101d\u0101jo\u0161os nov\u0113rst p\u0101rk\u0101pumus saimnieciskaj\u0101 darb\u012bb\u0101 l\u012bdz novembra beig\u0101m. 2014. gada 6. novembra pazi\u0146ojums presei. \u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      3. VID: turpm\u0101kie divi m\u0113ne\u0161i \u2013 autoservisu p\u0113d\u0113j\u0101 iesp\u0113ja nov\u0113rst p\u0101rk\u0101pumus saimnieciskaj\u0101 darb\u012bb\u0101. 2014. gada 7. j\u016bnija pazi\u0146ojums presei. \u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      4. VID prevent\u012bv\u0101 darba rezult\u0101t\u0101 iemaksai valsts bud\u017eet\u0101 papildus apr\u0113\u0137in\u0101ti 3175,7 t\u016bksto\u0161i eiro. 2014. gada 19. septembra pazi\u0146ojums presei. \u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      5. PIL 39. panta pirm\u0101s da\u013cas 6. punkts 2010. gada 4. decembra redakcij\u0101: “Pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js izsl\u0113dz kandid\u0101tu vai pretendentu no turpm\u0101k\u0101s dal\u012bbas iepirkuma proced\u016br\u0101, k\u0101 ar\u012b neizskata pretendenta pied\u0101v\u0101jumu jebkur\u0101 no \u0161\u0101diem gad\u012bjumiem: (..) Latvij\u0101 re\u0123istr\u0113ta (atrodas past\u0101v\u012bg\u0101 dz\u012bvesvieta) kandid\u0101ta vai pretendenta darba \u0146\u0113m\u0113ju m\u0113ne\u0161a vid\u0113jie darba ien\u0101kumi pirmajos trijos gada ceturk\u0161\u0146os p\u0113d\u0113jo \u010detru gada ceturk\u0161\u0146u period\u0101 l\u012bdz pieteikuma vai pied\u0101v\u0101juma iesnieg\u0161anas dienai ir maz\u0101ki par 70 procentiem no darba \u0146\u0113m\u0113ju vid\u0113jiem darba ien\u0101kumiem valst\u012b min\u0113taj\u0101 period\u0101 attiec\u012bgaj\u0101 nozar\u0113 atbilsto\u0161i NACE 2. red. klasifik\u0101cijas divu z\u012bmju l\u012bmenim p\u0113c Valsts ie\u0146\u0113mumu dienesta apkopotajiem datiem, kas public\u0113ti Valsts ie\u0146\u0113mumu dienesta m\u0101jaslap\u0101 internet\u0101. Ja kandid\u0101ts vai pretendents k\u0101 nodok\u013cu maks\u0101t\u0101js ir re\u0123istr\u0113ts p\u0113d\u0113jo \u010detru gada ceturk\u0161\u0146u period\u0101 l\u012bdz pieteikuma vai pied\u0101v\u0101juma iesnieg\u0161anas dienai, tiek \u0146emti v\u0113r\u0101 darba \u0146\u0113m\u0113ju m\u0113ne\u0161a vid\u0113jie darba ien\u0101kumi period\u0101 no n\u0101kam\u0101 m\u0113ne\u0161a p\u0113c re\u0123istr\u0101cijas m\u0113ne\u0161a l\u012bdz pieteikuma vai pied\u0101v\u0101juma iesnieg\u0161anas dienai.”\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      ”<\/p>\n

      6. Satversmes tiesas 2011. gada 3. novembra spriedums liet\u0101 Nr. 2011-05-01. Latvijas V\u0113stnesis, 8.11.2011., Nr. 176.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      7. PIL 48. panta pirm\u0101s prim da\u013cas s\u0101kums v\u0113sta: “Pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101jam ir pien\u0101kums izv\u0113rt\u0113t, vai pied\u0101v\u0101jums nav nepamatoti l\u0113ts, ja (..) Pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101js pieprasa, lai pretendents kop\u0101 ar pied\u0101v\u0101jumu iesniedz izdrukas no Valsts ie\u0146\u0113mumu dienesta elektronisk\u0101s deklar\u0113\u0161anas sist\u0113mas par pretendenta un t\u0101 pied\u0101v\u0101jum\u0101 nor\u0101d\u012bto apak\u0161uz\u0146\u0113m\u0113ju vid\u0113j\u0101m stundas tarifa likm\u0113m profesiju grup\u0101s.”\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      8. Groz\u012bjumi Publisko iepirkumu likum\u0101 valsts un pa\u0161vald\u012bbu iepirkumu jom\u0101 mazin\u0101s \u0113nu ekonomikas \u012bpatsvaru. 2014. gada 3. oktobra pazi\u0146ojums presei. \u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      9. Publisko iepirkumu likuma 39. panta pirm\u0101s da\u013cas 6. punkts 2010. gada 20. maija redakcij\u0101.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      10. Piem\u0113ram, Satversmes tiesas 2010. gada 2. febru\u0101ra sprieduma liet\u0101 Nr. 2009-46-01, 7., 16.2. punkts. Latvijas V\u0113stnesis, 4.02.2010., Nr. 20.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      11. Sprieduma 17. punkts.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      12. Sprieduma 18. punkts.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      13. Sprieduma 19. punkts.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      14. Sprieduma 19. punkts.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      15. Groz\u012bjumu 2014. gada 11. marta anot\u0101cija. Pieejama: http:\/\/titania.saeima.lv\/LIVS11\/SaeimaLIVS11.nsf\/0\/B83600A3D121FFDEC2257C990052DDC7?OpenDocument.<\/a>\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      16. I. P\u0113tersone: atjaunojot iepirkumos pras\u012bbu par vid\u0113jo algas apm\u0113ru nozar\u0113, p\u0101rs\u016bdz\u012bbu ties\u0101 esam r\u016bp\u012bgi apsv\u0113ru\u0161i. Nozare.lv, 9.06.2014.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      17. Sprieduma 19. panta sest\u0101 rindkopa.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      18. Sprieduma 16.2. punkts.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      19. Satversmes tiesas 2011. gada 18. marta spriedums liet\u0101 Nr. 2010-50-03, 12., 20. punkts. Latvijas V\u0113stnesis, 22.03.2011., Nr. 45.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      20. Sprieduma 21.1. punkts.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      21. Sprieduma 21.2. punkts.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      22. Sprieduma 22.1. punkts.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      23. Eiropas Savien\u012bbas Tiesas 2005. gada 3. marta spriedums apvienotaj\u0101s liet\u0101s C-21\/03 un C-34\/03 Fabricom, 33. un 36. rindkopa; Eiropas Savien\u012bbas Tiesas 2009. gada 19. maija spriedums liet\u0101 C-538\/07 Assitur, 30. rindkopa.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      24. Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes Direkt\u012bva 2004\/18\/EK (2004. gada 31. marts) par to, k\u0101 koordin\u0113t b\u016bvdarbu valsts l\u012bgumu, pieg\u0101des valsts l\u012bgumu un pakalpojumu valsts l\u012bgumu sl\u0113g\u0161anas ties\u012bbu pie\u0161\u0137ir\u0161anas proced\u016bru, OV L 134, 30.04.2004., 132. lpp.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      25. Eiropas Savien\u012bbas Tiesas 2009. gada 19. maija spriedums liet\u0101 C-538\/07 Assitur, 19.-21. punkts.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      26. Eiropas Savien\u012bbas Tiesas 2008. gada 16. decembra spriedums liet\u0101 C-213\/07 Michaniki, 43. punkts.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      27. Sprieduma 22.1. punkts.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      28. Sprieduma 23. punkts.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      29. Sprieduma 23. punkta tre\u0161\u0101 rindkopa.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      30. PIL 48. panta otr\u0101 da\u013ca 2015. gada 1. augusta redakcij\u0101.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      31. PIL 48. panta tre\u0161\u0101 da\u013ca 2015. gada 1. augusta redakcij\u0101.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      32. PIL neparedz iesp\u0113ju apstr\u012bd\u0113t VID atzinumu vai pas\u016bt\u012bt\u0101ja pien\u0101kumu gaid\u012bt str\u012bda izn\u0101kumu pirms pie\u0146emt l\u0113mumu par to, vai pretendents pied\u0101v\u0101jis nepamatoti l\u0113tu cenu.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      33. EST v\u0113rt\u0113jumu par l\u012bdz\u012bg\u0101m pras\u012bb\u0101m It\u0101lij\u0101 skat. t\u0101s 2014. gada 10. j\u016blija spriedum\u0101 liet\u0101 C-358\/12 Consorzio Stabile Libor Lavori Pubblici, 37. rindkopa.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      34. Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes Direkt\u012bva 2014\/24\/ES ( 2014. gada 26. febru\u0101ris ) par publisko iepirkumu un ar ko atce\u013c Direkt\u012bvu 2004\/18\/EK Dokuments attiecas uz EEZ, OV L 94, 28.03.2014., 65. lpp.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      35. Turpat, 67. pants. T\u0101s pras\u012bbas joproj\u0101m nepie\u013cauj noteikt jaunus kandid\u0101tu vai pretendentu izsl\u0113g\u0161anas pamatus, kas attiecas uz vi\u0146u profesion\u0101laj\u0101m sp\u0113j\u0101m.\u21a9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n

      <\/p>\n

      P\u013cavi\u0146a K. Vai vieni aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101ji ir vienl\u012bdz\u012bg\u0101ki par citiem. Jurista V\u0101rds, 27.01.2015., Nr. 04 (856), 14.-17.lpp.
      27. janv\u0101ris 2015 \/NR. 04 (856)<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      Aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101ju apkaro\u0161ana joproj\u0101m ir Latvijas vald\u012bbas priorit\u0101te. Valsts ie\u0146\u0113mumu dienests (turpm\u0101k \u2013 VID) c\u012bn\u0101s ar aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101jiem, veicot nozaru p\u0101rbaudes, piem\u0113ram, zob\u0101rstniec\u012bb\u0101, autoservisos un citur. C\u012b\u0146as ietvaros ar\u012b atgriez\u0101s pie ierosin\u0101juma nepie\u013caut aplok\u0161\u0146u algu maks\u0101t\u0101jiem sa\u0146emt valsts pas\u016bt\u012bjumus.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1936,"featured_media":15927,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[396,23,71],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16622"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1936"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=16622"}],"version-history":[{"count":24,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16622\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":16655,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16622\/revisions\/16655"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/15927"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=16622"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=16622"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zurnalsiepirkumi.lv\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=16622"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}