Public confidence in the independence of Latvia’s judicial system has increased significantly. The European Commission’s 2026 Rule of Law Scoreboard published (EU Justice Scoreboa

On 4 June this year, the European Commission published the 2026 report on the Rule of Law Scoreboard in the European Union Member States, issued for the fourteenth time. The statistical data characterising the functioning of judicial systems included in this edition reflect the indicators for 2024. The report shows that Latvia has generally maintained a stable position among the European Union Member States, recording average results for several indicators while ranking among the leaders in certain areas.

Overall, during the reporting period, as in previous years, Latvia ranked in the middle range among the European Union Member States for several statistical indicators. At the same time, several positive results should be highlighted. For example, the report states that Latvia is among the countries ensuring all the elements of child-friendly justice and has also introduced a wide range of digital tools available to courts.

The latest European Commission report shows that Latvia has an average number of incoming contentious civil and commercial cases at first instance per 100 inhabitants—1.8 cases. This is lower than in Lithuania (2.8 cases), but higher than in Estonia (1.2 cases). In terms of the length of proceedings for contentious civil and commercial cases across all court instances, Latvia ranks 9. (7. in the previous reporting period), meaning that the average duration of proceedings in Latvian courts has increased slightly. In terms of the length of administrative proceedings at first instance, Latvia ranks 6. among the countries with the shortest proceedings, thereby improving the speed of proceedings and moving up from 7. place in 2025.

The report assesses the speed of the work of courts and other responsible institutions in processing specific categories of cases. In this section, particular attention is paid to categories of cases that are of major importance for the functioning of the internal market, including cases involving competition law, trademarks, consumer rights, the telecommunications sector, the prevention of money laundering and corruption.

Adequacy of resources

When analysing the country’s overall judicial system budget expenditure per capita, Latvia ranks 15th, indicating that expenditure on the judicial system per capita is below the European Union average. However, when assessing this expenditure in relation to gross domestic product (GDP), Latvia consistently ranks second after Bulgaria, meaning that one of the largest shares of GDP in the European Union is allocated to financing the judicial system.

The report compares the remuneration of judges and prosecutors with the average wage in the country, analysing separately the remuneration of judges and prosecutors recently appointed to office and those at the highest level. The assessment shows that, in terms of judges’ remuneration levels, Latvia is placed alongside Belgium, Germany, France, Croatia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Finland and Sweden. In terms of the number of lawyers per 100,000 inhabitants, Latvia ranks second to last, ahead only of Sweden.

Quality of justice

The European Commission’s 2026 Rule of Law Scoreboard included a clarifying question on access to justice, with particular attention to access to court and state-provided legal aid. This year, the European Commission also analysed the approximate costs required for proceedings in consumer rights cases, criminal cases and civil cases.

Particular emphasis was also placed on out-of-court divorce, pointing to significant differences in the approaches of the European Union Member States to divorce by mutual consent. This question prompted a broader discussion about the types of cases and situations in which disputes can be resolved out of court using alternative dispute resolution methods.

The European Commission also addressed the digitalisation of the judicial system, primarily assessing the availability of information on the instruments necessary for the protection of rights (state-provided legal aid, compensation mechanisms, litigation costs and information channels) and their compliance with the needs of modern information users.

In this assessment, Latvia ranked at the bottom of the table because it has introduced only some of the digitalisation solutions that facilitate public access to justice. At the same time, the report states that all the digital tools available to courts that are considered essential have been established in Latvia, and that the country is among the leaders in developing digital access to court documents and digital solutions for the management of court proceedings.

Perceptions of the rule of law and judicial independence

An assessment of the latest Eurobarometer survey on public perceptions of judicial independence reveals positive changes. Compared with the previous survey, the proportion of respondents in Latvia who have no opinion on judicial independence has decreased (from 34% to 26%). At the same time, the number of respondents who rate the level of judicial independence as good or very good has increased (from 42% to 50%).

According to the views of businesses compiled by Eurobarometer, the main sources of threats to judicial independence are pressure or influence from governments, politicians, as well as economic and other narrow interest groups. When assessing the effectiveness of investment protection in the courts, businesses identify frequent changes in the regulatory framework, insufficient quality of the legislative process, unpredictable and insufficiently transparent administrative action, and difficulties in challenging administrative decisions in court as the main obstacles.

This year, the European Commission also paid particular attention to the regulation of the probationary period for appointed judges. The Commission stressed that such regulation exists in only a few European Union Member States, including Latvia, and that the content, procedures and institutional framework of the probationary period differ significantly between countries.

Attention was also paid to the allocation of criminal cases to prosecutors, analysing the criteria and mechanisms according to which incoming criminal cases are distributed among prosecutors.

Further information and the full text of the report are available on the European Commission’s website.