Minority issues in Latvia, No. 69

June 1, 2003

As in the previous issue of our newsletter (Minority issues in Latvia, No. 68), the topic of mass protest against
the minority education reform remains the main one. Therefore the largest part of information in this issue is
devoted to this problem too, although it is divided into a few chapters.

Yours sincerely,
Alexei Dimitrov
editor

Minority issues in Latvia, No. 69
Prepared by the Latvian Human Rights Committee (F.I.D.H.)
June 1, 2003

Content

- Meeting against the minority education reform: no incidents, no dialogue

- Authorities pressured schools principals not to participate in the meeting

- The Minister for Integration: contributing to producing democracy on export?

- Attitude towards the meeting: division along ideological lines

- Penalizing hate speech in Internet: on a way to precedent?

- Non-citizens in the EU: state asks to limit the rights of its residents?

- Citizenship of Latvia: children are not welcomed?

Meeting against the minority education reform: no incidents, no dialogue

Mass meeting against the minority education reform took place in Riga on May 23. Approximately
10,000 persons participated in the event organised by the NGO LASHOR (Association for Support
of Russian-Language Schools in Latvia) with support of some other pro-minority organisations. The
meeting was permitted by the Riga City Council after the mass rally scheduled for the same day had
not been allowed (see Minority issues in Latvia, No. 68). Organisers of the event promise that
protest actions will be continued.

There were no incidents reported during the event. Unfortunately, once again mass media providing
information in different languages evaluated the meeting in very different ways. For example,
Latvian-language newspapers mentioned that �4000-6000� or �a few thousand� persons participated
in the event, as well as paid attention to �hostile slogans�, traffic problems and anthem of the USSR
reproduced by mobile phone of a participant. In the meantime, the main news agencies and
broadcasting companies (Reuters, Associated Press, Euronews) stated that it was the biggest
protest meeting since the independence of Latvia had been restored in 1991 ("Chas" ("The Hour"),
May 26).

The day before the meeting the Saeima (Parliament) of Latvia rejected amendment to the Education
Law submitted by the pro-minority faction "For Human Rights in United Latvia" ("HRUL"). The aim
of the amendment was to eliminate collision between provisions of the Education Law and General
Education Law (see Minority issues in Latvia, No. 68). Only another one pro-minority faction of the
People�s Harmony Party has supported "HRUL". It demonstrates clearly that the ruling parties do
not wish to start a dialogue with minorities in respect of secondary education in minority languages,
but all decisions in this sphere also in future will be adopted without any consultations. Moreover,
the nationalistic ruling party "For Fatherland and Freedom"/LNNK has suggested that the state
language knowledge of teachers in minority schools is to be re-examined in order "to promote the
education reform" ("Chas" ("The Hour"), May 16).

Authorities pressured schools principals not to participate in the meeting

Directors of schools with the Russian language of instruction on May 23 received letters from the
Department on Education, Youth and Sports Affairs of the Riga City Council. The message instructed
not to allow participation of the teachers and schoolchildren in the meeting "in order to avoid
provocations". The fact of receiving such letters was confirmed to our newsletter by several
school principals. As it was mentioned in the newspaper "Vesti Segodnya" ("The News Today"),
"We would only remind that the manifestation was scheduled well-before and agreed with the Riga
Council" ("Vesti Segodnya", May 24). It is interesting to mention that the Department did not
advise to prevent schoolchildren�s participation in activities of the Eurovision Song Contest on May
24, although this event was much more problematic from the viewpoint of public order (use
of alcohol, etc.).

The Minister for Integration contributing to producing democracy on export?

The weekly English-language newspaper "The Baltic Times" published an article written by Nils
Muiznieks, Minister for Special Task in the Field of Integration Affairs (�The Baltic Times�, May 22-28).
There he provides his opinion about the meeting on May 23. The Minister informs that the aim of the
protesters is �to garner sympathy for their cause from the many foreign journalists who will be in the
city [for the Eurovision Song Contest]�. He also points out, �Latvia is a democratic society and the
government has no problem with peaceful demonstrators expressing their views, even if we disagree
with them�.

Besides, the Minister provides his own interpretation of the Education Law, adopted in 1998. �The law
foresaw increasing the percentage of instruction in Latvian/bilingually in state-supported secondary
education to 60 percent starting in 2004... Within Latvia parents, teachers and students are divided,
according to sociological surveys; about half support the reform, and half are uneasy about it�.

Our commentary

We regret that the Minister for Integration is either not aware or misinforms the English-reading
audience about the running of the education reform. At least, there are some facts that must be
well-known to Mr Muiznieks.

The first is that the aim of the protesters was to make the Latvian authorities to revise the
minority education reform. It seems weird to us, that Mr Muiznieks portrays the journalists writing
on music to be the target group of organisers of the meeting. Of course, foreign journalists could
provide a wider information coverage of the event, but they are not the target group in any case.

The second fact is that the Education Law stipulates that starting with the year 2004 the instruction
will be provided only in the Latvian language. The government hastily adopted the regulations
provided that up to 40% of the curricula could be taught in minority languages only reacting to the
declared manifestation. The Education Law has not been amended yet.

Also, the professional sociological surveys demonstrate that only 4% of teachers, 7% of schoolchildren
and 14% of the Russian-speaking parents would welcome the studies overwhelmingly in the Latvian
language (see the research �Analysis of the implementation of bilingual education� conducted
by the Baltic Institute of Social Sciences).

We would urge Mr Muiznieks in future not to sacrifice genuine promotion of democracy to its
producing on export.

Attitude towards the meeting: division goes along ideological lines

Two articles evaluating the meeting are published at the public policy portal politika.lv. One is
written by Gita Feldhune, director of the Institute of Human Rights of the University of Latvia,
and called "Freedom of Assembly - a Hard Nut to Crack".

There, Mrs Feldhune points out that "it is not a shame if there is a thousand, ten thousand or more
people, whose opinion does not coincide with the government�s and society�s majority one. It is not a
shame, if these people want to express this opinion at the moment, where it could reach broader
auditoria, than insufficiently hearing local ears..." . As regards the refusal of the Riga City Council�s
authorities to permit the rally arguing that it is hard to ensure security, Mrs Feldhune points out, that
"of course, it is easier to ensure security, when no assemblies take place".

Another article, written by Deniss Hanovs, MA in Social Science, PROVIDUS Public Policy Fellow, is
named "Ilya Muromets has risen. Where shall he go?"). There, he stresses that "manifestations
are short-living moments of aggravation of political emotions. They can solve nothing, but worsen
much, because they function, involving into the policy process emotionally affected masses... The
protest is only the final point of the segregation process".

"Sleeping peacefully away, the marginalized Russian-speakers have failed to notice that Latvians'
attitude towards other nationalities have changed, as have the government�s activities. Political
backwardness has reduced the meaning of Russian culture to the issues of Orthodox Christmas
and the activities of left-wing politicians in the Riga City Council", Mr Hanovs points out. "The
Russian political culture is close to emptiness. Their identity is in miserable situation, it is deaf
and dumb towards other cultures. It is developing following the aggressive nationalistic and
irredentism pattern".

Penalizing hate speech in Internet: on a way to precedent?

The first criminal case concerning hate speech in Internet could be initiated soon. 16-years-old
Russian male, nicknamed "Artyom", was arrested for posting comments at the Internet portal
Delfi urging ethnic hatred and threatening terrorist acts during the meeting in support of education
in minority languages (the news agency BNS, May 26).

In our opinion, the police should pay attention to hate speech postings at the portal Delfi long time
ago. We regret that similar hate speech postings at Delfi written in Latvian remain unpunished.

Non-citizens in the EU: state asks to limit the rights of its residents?

As we reported earlier, the issue of Latvia�s non-citizens status in the European Union has become
topical, taking into account Latvia�s forthcoming accession (see Minority issues in Latvia, No. 67).
Recent discussions on the issue in Latvia are related to proposal for a Council Directive concerning
the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents).

According to the proposal, status of the long-term resident should be provided for third-country
nationals (non-EU nationals, including refugees and stateless persons), who have resided legally
and continuously for five years in the territory of the member state, have stable resources and
sickness insurance. For such persons long-term resident�s EC residence permit should be issued by
national authorities. Long-term residents should enjoy equal treatment with nationals as regards
access to employment, education, social protection. Besides, long-term residents might exercise
the right of residence in the territory of other EU member states for a period exceeding three
months.

Two questions arose in Latvia concerning the proposal. The first one is, whether all non-citizens
of Latvia will be entitled to receive the status of long-term residents, or they will be divided into
two categories, depending on �stable resources� and �sickness insurance�.

The second question is more serious. Latvia has agreed to a transitional arrangement in respect of
the free movement of workers put forward by the EU (2-7 years). In the meantime, the proposal does
not include transitional provisions in respect of the new member states. Official position of the
government expressed by Minister for Justice Aivars Aksenoks and Minister for Special Task in the
Field of Integration Affairs Nils Muiznieks is, that Latvia will try to influence the decision-making
process in order to include such provisions. In other words, Latvia will ask to limit the rights of
its non-citizens, which might appear to be wider than those of citizens. According to Mr Muiznieks,
it could hinder naturalization and integration of the society ("Chas" ("The Hour"), May 22).

Citizenship of Latvia: children are not welcomed?

The Saeima (Parliament) of Latvia rejected amendments to the Citizenship Law aimed at easier
obtaining of the citizenship by children and pensioners on May 15. The amendments were submitted
by the pro-minority faction �For Human Rights in United Latvia� and supported by the faction of
the People�s Harmony Party.

The main aim of the amendments was to eliminate gaps in legislation, which hinder access to
citizenship by children. For example, it was proposed to register as Latvia�s citizens, all
children of Latvia�s non-citizens born after the restoration of independence automatically, not
by request of their parents, as it is stipulated now (see text of the Citizenship Law).
Besides, the draft amendment suggested to register as Latvia�s citizens under-age children of
naturalised persons upon request of their parents. The Citizenship Law stipulates that only
children, information about whom is included into the naturalization application, could be
naturalized together with their parents. Therefore there are problems concerning children, who
are not naturalized because of mistake of their parents or were born after the application is
submitted, but before the citizenship is received (see Minority issues in Latvia, No. 58).

The pro-minority faction also proposed to eliminate some limitations for naturalization of
former military officers, members of the Communist party, and KGB agents. Besides, it was
suggested to cancel the naturalization examination in history of Latvia, Constitution and
national anthem for persons above 65.

Compiled by:

Alexei Dimitrov
Tatyana Bogushevitch
Yuri Dubrovsky

===========================================================
Minority issues in Latvia
Newsletter published by the Latvian Human Rights Committee (F.I.D.H.)
Subscription/inquiries: [email protected]
Back issues:
http://www.minelres.lv/count/latvia.htm#MinIssuesLatvia
===========================================================