Source: United Nations – Geneva
The Human Rights Committee today concluded its consideration of the fourth periodic report of Latvia on how it implements the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Committee Experts welcomed the adoption of the 2020 Latvian citizenship law, which granted Latvian citizenship to children who would otherwise be stateless, while raising questions on hate crimes against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons and access to elections for minorities and non-citizens.
One Committee Expert welcomed the adoption of a 2020 law which automatically granted Latvian citizenship to children of non-citizens who were not nationals of another State, and the recent reduction in the number of non-citizens.
Another Expert commended the State party for the establishment of a special unit to investigate hate crimes, and on changes in the criminal law addressing motivations for such crimes, including sexual orientation and gender identity. How were these changes publicised? Incidents of violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons remained underreported, the Expert noted; how was law enforcement trained to facilitate reporting and to recognise and support victims?
A Committee Expert said the Pre-Election Campaign Law prohibited pre-election campaign materials in any language other than Latvian, except for European Parliament elections. How did the State party ensure that this prohibition did not unduly restrict accessibility and the participation of minorities in elections? Could the State party explain why non-citizen residents, including long-term residents, were excluded from elections?
Osams Abu Meri, Minister for Health of the Republic of Latvia, introducing the report, said the fact that Latvia was a neighbouring country of Russia, which had invaded parts of Georgia and launched a full-scale military aggression against Ukraine, must not be overlooked. According to article 89 of the Constitution, the international human rights obligations binding upon Latvia formed an integral part of the domestic legal system. Domestic courts in Latvia had referred to the general comments and opinions issued by the Committee in numerous cases.
The delegation said work had been done to raise the awareness of those individuals in charge of prosecuting hate crimes, addressing victims’ rights from a broader, human rights-focused framework. The Ministry of Justice had also disseminated a circular on the interpretation of existing legal frameworks on hate crime and targeting the members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex community. As this was a very hot topic for Latvian society, the public broadcaster had also addressed the issue.
The delegation also said that if someone wanted to be elected or vote in Latvia, they needed to obtain citizenship. A Constitutional Court decision issued at the beginning of the year stated that the contested legal provisions did not impose a complete ban on the use of foreign languages, and only applied to individual campaigning with voters, hence they were in conformity with the Constitution. The Court decided that restrictions on fundamental rights were proportional.
In concluding remarks, Mr. Abu Meri expressed gratitude for the open and constructive dialogue. Latvia’s experience during these challenging times, as its neighbours Russia and Belarus deployed the full arsenal of hybrid warfare, had a broader relevance. Latvia would not only withstand these threats but remain steadfast in the rule of law, the principles of human rights and a rule-based law and order.
Changrok Soh, Committee Chairperson, in concluding remarks, expressed gratitude to all who had contributed to the dialogue. The Committee commended the State party for progress in several areas, including access to justice and gender equality, however remained concerned about the treatment of asylum seekers and non-residents, among other issues.
The delegation of Latvia was made up of representatives of the Ministry of Health; the Ministry of Welfare; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; the Ministry of Education and Science; the Ministry of Justice; the Ministry of Culture; the Ministry of the Interior; the Ministry for Culture on Cooperation with Non-governmental Organisations; the Ministry of Defence; the Prosecutor General’s Office; the Office of Citizenship and Migration Affairs; the Internal Security Bureau; the State Police; the State Border Guard; the Cadet Force Centre; and the Permanent Mission of Latvia to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Human Rights Committee’s one hundred and forty-fourth session is being held from 23 June to 17 July 2025. All the documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, can be found on the session’s webpage. Meeting summary releases can be found here. The webcast of the Committee’s public meetings can be accessed via the UN Web TV webpage.
The Committee will next meet in public at 3 p.m., Wednesday 2 July to begin its consideration of the seventh periodic report of Spain (CCPR/C/ESP/7).
Report
The Committee has before it the fourth periodic report of Latvia (CCPR/C/LVA/4).
Presentation of the Report
HOSAMS ABU MERI, Minister for Health of the Republic of Latvia, presenting the report, said the situation in Europe had changed significantly since Latvia had last reported to the Committee. The fact that Latvia was a neighbouring country of Russia which, starting from 2008, had invaded parts of Georgia and acquired military and political control over parts of Ukraine, and on 24 February 2022 launched a full-scale military aggression against Ukraine, must not be overlooked. Because of these events, Latvia increasingly had legitimate reasons to fear for its security, territorial integrity, and democratic order. These events, along with information and hybrid warfare operations directed against Latvia, had strengthened efforts to defend democracy, national security, and effectively implement the rights and freedoms protected by the Covenant.
According to Article 89 of the Constitution of Latvia, the international human rights obligations binding upon Latvia formed an integral part of the domestic legal system. To illustrate, domestic courts in Latvia had referred to the General Comments and opinions issued by the Committee in numerous cases.
The financial resources allocated to domestic courts had steadily and consistently increased. Moreover, in 2024, the Academy of Justice, a new institution for the professional development of judges, prosecutors, prosecutor assistants, and investigators, was established. The Ombudsperson’s Office of Latvia had consistently received the highest “A” status of accreditation, and continued to operate in accordance with the highest international standards concerning respect for human rights and good governance. In 2022, Latvia ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The Ombudsperson had been entrusted with the function of the national preventive mechanism, and, as of October 2024, had a new Department on the Prevention of Discrimination.
Latvia had continued to support the naturalisation of non-citizens; these were not stateless persons, as they enjoyed the right to reside in Latvia, along with a set of rights and obligations that extended beyond those prescribed by the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons. In recent years, Latvia had seen a gradual and steady decline in the number of non-citizens residing in the country. A significant achievement in reducing the number of non-citizens in Latvia was the enactment of the law on the discontinuation of the non-citizen status for children, which had contributed to a substantial decrease in the number of non-citizens among younger age groups. Since 2020, all children born in non-citizen families had been granted citizenship at birth.
Between 2024 and 2027, Latvia had identified three priority areas for gender equality: increasing equal rights and opportunities in the labour market and education; reducing negative gender stereotypes; and integrating the principle of gender equality into policy planning.
In respect to combating gender-based violence, Latvia had significantly strengthened legal protections, expanded victim support services, and increased awareness-raising campaigns to challenge societal norms that perpetuate violence. Between 2022 and 2024, the authorities, together with non-governmental organisations, held workshops and discussions for young people on how to build non-violent relationships, based on the principle of gender equality.
In 2024, Latvia took a significant step forward in recognising diverse family forms by introducing civil partnership legislation. This legal framework allowed both same-sex and opposite-sex couples to register their partnership, granting them a range of rights and protections previously reserved for married couples. In 2021, the Latvian Parliament enacted amendments to the Criminal Law adding to the list of aggravating circumstances motivation based on “social hatred”, which covered hatred based on sexual orientation. Additionally, awareness-raising measures were continuously implemented, and investigators, prosecutors, and judges regularly attended trainings on the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert noted the various positive developments linked to civil and political rights, asking for additional information on the legal status of the Committee’s views in the national legal framework. What steps had Latvia taken to inform the public, including persons who did not read Latvian or English, about their rights under the Covenant and the possibility of submitting cases to the Committee under the Optional Protocol?
The Committee appreciated the rating of the Ombudsman and the increasing material and financial resources allocated to it, and the Expert asked for information on proposals to amend the Ombudsman’s enabling law. Regarding the implementation of the Corruption Prevention and Combating Action Plan, what mechanisms were in place to evaluate the effectiveness of anti-corruption measures? Regarding judicial integrity, were there plans to adopt additional safeguards to prevent undue political influence in the judiciary?
Another Expert commended the State party for the establishment of a special unit to investigate hate crimes and on changes in the criminal law, adding “social enmity” and “any other characteristic” to cover sexual orientation and gender identity, and asked how these changes were publicised. Incidents of violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons remained underreported, the Expert noted; how was law enforcement trained to facilitate reporting and to recognize and support victims?
Could the State party be more specific about the risks to national security posed by individuals with ties to the Russian Federation? How could fluency in the Latvian language prevent such risks? The Expert also asked for the number of persons deported so far, their background and to which countries they were deported. Had there been a state of emergency in parts of the country, in particular the Belarussian border from August 2021 to August 2023, and could the delegation confirm that Latvia did not derogate from its obligations under the Covenant during that period?
Regarding the equality of women, and efforts towards narrowing the gender pay gap, another Committee Expert asked what measures had been helpful so far, and what additional measures the government intended to introduce to narrow it further? Could the State party provide statistical data on gender-based violence and femicide from the last three years? What measures was the government preparing to improve prevention of the concerning occurrence of online violence against women, including against women journalists and women in politics and other leadership positions?
Regarding the right to life, a Committee Expert asked for disaggregated data on the high numbers of deaths in all places of detention, including psychiatric facilities. Was the definition of torture in line with that of international treaties, and what measures were in place to protect persons complaining of torture in places of detention?
Responses by the Delegation
Responding to the issues raised, the delegation said concerning the status of the Covenant and awareness-raising on submitting complaints, the Constitutional Court of Latvia had explained that the views of the Committee did not have the status of a legally binding instrument. While the Committee’s decisions did carry the weight of authoritative interpretation, they were not formally binding. The Committee’s views and opinions were soft-ball instruments, but had been taken into account by the courts over the years. Regarding awareness-raising on the United Nations human rights treaties, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had published informative material on its website in various languages, including guidance on submitting complaints to various treaty bodies, and ensuring accessible and transparent information for applicants. This was how Latvia ensured that society was informed about the Committee and the possibility of submitting complaints.
On training in the armed forces, the delegation said there were education programs which included human rights. The Ombudsman was appointed after approval by the Parliament. This aimed to strengthen human rights protection and ensure public awareness of the position. This approach aligned with the spirit of the Constitution and existing practice, whilst supporting the principles of democratic governance. On the Department of Discrimination, there was an Anti-Discrimination Unit, consisting of five people. There was a separation of the powers in Latvia, the delegation said, and there was currently a discussion on the procedure of nomination of the Ombudsman. There was no influence by political parties on the Ombudsman, and the election was entirely transparent.
Regarding anti-corruption measures, the Anti-Corruption Action Plan was in place since 2023, and the main reason for lack of fulfilment of its tasks was the lack of funding. The effectiveness of the Plan itself was usually measured by assessing the percentage of accomplished tasks, as well as feedback from institutions involved in its implementation. In 2025, six persons were fined in cases relating to corruption, and 2024 data showed that corruption was effectively investigated and sent to prosecution. On the independence of investigations conducted by the Internal Security Bureau, pre-trial detentions were supervised by a prosecutor. In accordance with the law, the Minister of the Interior could only supervise the legality and justification of the Bureau’s decisions, and could revoke them if necessary. On transparency of lobbying, work continued on effective implementation of legislation in this regard, and there was no Transparency Register yet.
The delegation said work had been done to raise the awareness of those individuals in charge of prosecuting hate crimes, addressing victim’s rights from a broader, human rights-focused framework. A specific hate speech conference event had been held in October 2024, with twenty-two participants who worked on such violations. A training session was also held for judges, prosecutors and investigators, focusing on a victim-centred approach to the justice system. For the general public, there were two specific web platforms with information about hate speech, hate crime, and related issues, and these were supported by the Ministries of Culture and Education, and the Ombudsman’s Bureau. The Ministry of Justice had also disseminated a circular on the interpretation of existing legal frameworks on hate crime and targeting the members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex community. As this was a very hot topic for Latvian society, the public broadcaster had also addressed the issue. The legal framework, which prescribed criminal liability for social, national and ethnic hatred as an aggravating circumstance was sufficient and proportionate to existing needs.
Numbers of hate speech and hate crimes were not so large, usually fewer than 10 criminal cases per year, the delegation said, but this did not reflect the priority of the topic, as the Government was working on the issue. With regard to ethnic tensions, it was important to look at the information space, and how people used and consumed information inside the country. According to research and statistics, minorities, as well as the general population, found news and entertainment important, and consumed it at the same rates, showing that society was living in the same space. There were differences of opinion in society, as should be the case in any healthy society. Latvian society had gone through traumas, and was dealing with them, including by taking care of minorities, legally, but also practically, including through an annual festival celebrating cultural minorities.
Latvia saw its society as one which facilitated civic participation, and was working to strengthen this. Even Roma representatives and organisations were finally putting their projects forward, and they were being supported. Work was also being done on media literacy, as the current greatest threat to human rights was the great mass of information that was available, meaning critical thinking was a critical tool for building a cohesive society. Latvia had acquired a large number of refugees, including those fleeing from Ukraine, and was providing measures and support for their language acquisition and cultural and societal integration.
Latvia was working with the Roma strategy at the European Union level and had its own strategic plan for Roma integration. Unfortunately, the community was one of the most stigmatised, as it was across Europe. It was important for this stigmatisation to be approached and that communities were approached, with Roma mediators involved in the efforts to end the stigma. Hate speech had increased in the digital environment, and a plan was being put together to address it.
The delegation said the issue of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was not an ethnic issue: it was an issue of international law, colonialism, and history. This was how society and the government had treated it. The government had been very clear that this was an issue that had to unite everybody within the country, no matter the language and ethnicity of the individual. Research showed that there was an increase of differences of opinion on the issue within the country, but these were not aligned with ethnicity. The Russian minority was very vocal in its lack of support for the actions of Russia. On the declaration of a State emergency at the border, there had been a deliberate attempt by Belarus to destabilise European countries, including Latvia, in response to the imposition of sanctions on the Belarus regime. Actions to protect the external borders must be interpreted in the light of the broader geo-political context and the will to protect the system against abuse, including the instrumentalisation of migrants and refugees.
The gender pay gap had reduced further in Latvia, the delegation said, and female employment rates were relatively high, but the government needed to look into employment equality further, including encouraging women’s participation in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Latvia was one of the rare countries that admitted to having problems in its prisons, and the government had approved an action plan to implement the Committee’s recommendations in this regard, showing its determination to tackle the issue. Prison staff were instructed and trained on sensitive periods in the life of a prisoner, aiming to limit incidents of self-harm and suicide.
Questions by Committee Experts
In follow-up questions, Experts asked for figures on deaths in prisons, and the reconciliation between self-administration prisons and the official system, and whether the former was to the detriment of detainees. Did psychiatric facilities offer education and therapeutic facilities, and was there sufficient staff? Another Expert asked for clarification on training in hate crimes and hate speech, asking whether it was mandatory and country-wide, or whether people could opt out. How was disaggregated data and statistics gathered on hate speech and hate crimes? There appeared to be a tension between language groups, and the Expert wondered how promoting a culture of human rights education and speech could be of help in resolving these matters.
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the Ministry of Justice had prepared a general policy planning document to combat and reduce the effects of informal prison hierarchies in Latvian prisons. This included building a new prison, and the education of prison guards and administration, including a new education centre, among others. One of the biggest problems in Latvian prisons was the outdated prison infrastructures, and the construction of the new prison to remedy this would be concluded in September 2025, with prisoners to be relocated in 2026.
There were 26,132 persons with mental disabilities in the country in 2019, and the situation was roughly the same now. It was very important today for persons with mental disabilities to have access to independent living, and Latvia had 12 social service homes, with between 50 and 150 places to which persons could be admitted voluntarily and could leave freely. There was only one long-term facility, with approximately 200 beds, meant for persons with severe mental disorders, and this hospital was also only for voluntary treatment. Regarding treatment and rehabilitation, nowadays in all treatment centres there were muti-professional teams, and staff workers ensuring integrated healthcare. Great efforts were made to ensure there were recreational facilities at all hospitals.
There was no mandatory training for judges, except on children’s rights, and training on hate speech and hate crimes were mostly linked to the specialisation of judges. In Latvia, the media enjoyed independence, and investigative journalism thrived, holding the government and the judiciary to account. The most common form of corruption involved the use of administrative resources, the delegation said.
The delegation said amendments had been made to the Criminal Code in 2024, establishing accountability for acts of violence against immediate family or in partner relationships. The amendments introduced the punishment of imprisonment for up to three years if the perpetrator committed a violent act against a family member, spouse or former spouse. Cases of spousal rape were considered rape under the Criminal Code, and sanctions were higher if there were aggravating circumstances. It was ensured that these crimes were reviewed by the courts in a timely manner. More than 13 trainings had been conducted for judges, investigators, prosecutors and those who worked on family violence cases. Every year, at least 20 women were killed by their partner in Latvia. The State believed that, in many instances, these deaths were preventable. From 1 July, electronic monitoring of offenders could be applied in criminal proceedings, providing an opportunity to prevent both femicides and homicides.
The ratification of the Istanbul Convention was a significant step in Latvia and was a cornerstone policy for the country. Changing societal attitudes towards women and violence and shifting deeply ingrained cultural norms and stereotypes required public awareness campaigns, which took time to yield results. Real-life stories of survivors had been made accessible to the public to raise awareness of the issue and encourage others to come forward. Services were accessible and no proof was required to receive help.
In December 2023, preventive visits had been carried out to two prisons, to assess potential risks of violent behaviour. Conferences had been held in cooperation with the Ombudsman’s office and non-governmental organizations dedicated to the prevention of violent conduct, attended by representatives of the prison administration. There had been an increase in crimes committed by prison administration officials in 2025, but this was due to the mandate to increasingly investigate these kinds of crimes.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert asked why Latvia did not systematically collect and publish data on the length and frequency of pretrial detention. What steps would be taken to address this gap? Could data be provided on the use of non-custodial alternatives to detention? How was it ensued that all detainees were fully informed of their rights and access to a lawyer from the outset of detention? Would the State implement mandatory audiovisual recording of all police interviews with detained persons? How was it ensured that detainees received timely and effective assistance from qualified lawyers, including during the initial critical hours of detention?
What specific safeguards existed to prevent undue political influence in the appointment of Supreme Court judges? How did the State party address reports of politicisation and corruption in the judicial system? What measures were taken to improve trust in the justice system? What was the current operational status of the academy of justice? What specific training programmes had been implemented for judges and prosecutors since it opened? What steps had been taken to ensure timely issuance of judgements? Could information be provided on the types and lengths of sentences provided to minors? How was it ensured the detention of minors was used only as a last resort and for the shortest possible time?
Another Committee Expert said the overall national referral mechanism had not yet been established; why was this? How would the State implement the relevant European Parliament directive in time? How did the conflict in Ukraine impact trafficking in Latvia and different categories of victims, including victims of sexual exploitation and child trafficking? Were training activities organised for law enforcement in this regard? How did Latvia’s transition from a country of origin to country of transit and destination impact Government prevention efforts? What measures were being taken to promptly investigate, prosecute and punish all cases of trafficking? What remedies were provided to victims? How many cases had been raised against persons involved in human trafficking?
In mid-2024, the Ministry of Culture launched a study to ensure the safety of journalists in Latvia. What was its progress thus far? How were its recommendations being implemented? The Government informed the Committee that the criminal proceedings concerning serious bodily injuries inflicted to the journalist and publisher Leonids Jākobsons were terminated on 19 February 2025, as the authorities were unable to find the perpetrators. How often were similar cases involving infliction of serious bodily injuries terminated because of lack of success in finding perpetrators? How would the State ensure that similar incidents did not repeat, and that there was no impunity for perpetrators?
Could the delegation elaborate on the legal basis for the drastic revocation of TV Rain’s broadcasting licence on 6 December 2022, that was challenged before the Administrative Regional Court? The National Security Concept of 28 September 2023 served to prohibit the production of public television and radio content in Russian. What was the legal basis for this policy, and had there been any legal and administrative actions taken to implement it thus far?
Another Committee Expert said that in June 2023, Latvia established an enhanced border regime with restrictive measures, which had been extended to the end of 2025. Could the delegation confirm this? How did the State party justify prolonging these restrictions long after the formal state of emergency had ended? Credible reports indicated that from 2021 to 2025, the State border guard had engaged in 28,000 pushbacks to Belarus and other countries, without assessing the risks individuals would face. How did these pushbacks comply with the principle of non-refoulment? Refugees at the border were reportedly subjected to violence and abuse and left without water and food. What concrete actions had the State party taken to monitor the State border guard? How were the border guards trained to prevent ill-treatment of migrants?
How many official border crossing points were operating today? What steps were being taken to facilitate applications for persons seeking protection? What percentage of asylum seekers were detained and for how long? The Committee was concerned about the detention of children who sought asylum; would Latvia consider a policy of never detaining children for immigration reasons? The State had a good practice of providing free legal aid to refugees challenging asylum decisions, however reports stated it was not respected in practice. How did the State party uphold this commitment in practice?
The Committee welcomed the adoption of a 2020 law which automatically granted Latvian citizenship to children of non-citizens who were not nationals of another State. The Committee also welcomed the reduction in the number of non-citizens. Would the State party consider amending its citizenship law to grant nationality to all children born in Latvia who would otherwise be stateless? Was the State party considering extending political rights to non-citizens?
The Committee appreciated the measures adopted to safeguard the rights of conscientious objectors following the re-introduction of compulsory military service for men under Law 75 on the State Defence Service. The Committee also noted that the term of Alternative Civil Service was equal in length to military service, which was an improvement. Would the State consider allowing the Conscription Control Commission to operate independently of the miliary? Were conscientious objectors assigned responsibilities in alternative civil services, as opposed to non-combat roles within the military? How would the State party respect the rights of conscientious objectors during emergencies and armed conflicts?
A Committee Expert said the Committee understood that the Pre-Election Campaign Law prohibited pre-election campaign materials in any language other than Latvian, except for European Parliament elections. How did the State party ensure that this prohibition did not unduly restrict accessibility and the participation of minorities in elections?
Could the State party explain why non-citizen residents, including long-term residents, were excluded from elections? Would the State party be willing to permit their participation in elections? Where did the State party see the most need for further improvement regarding accessibility for persons with disabilities in elections? What measures had the State party taken to follow up on treaty body recommendations, including those calling on political parties to introduce quotas to promote women’s representation in political life?
The Committee had questions regarding the transition to Latvian as the exclusive language of instruction, eliminating Russian as a second language in schools and preschools. While this transition was envisaged a long time ago, its implementation had been rushed. How does the State party ensure that schools were ready within the limited timeframe, especially schools where many teachers lacked sufficient proficiency in Latvian? There were serious concerns about the lack of meaningful minority community consultation and participation during the law’s adoption. How many stakeholders were involved and how was active participation and meaningful dialogue ensured? The Committee was informed that national minority pupils at pre-school and primary education levels had a right to request education programmes on their language and cultural history. Did communities have to fund these programmes themselves? How were people made aware of these programmes and how easy was it to apply for them?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said that while not all police interviews were recorded, this did not affect police investigations. All interviews with children were recorded. All interviews were documented in written form.
Legal aid was provided by the court administration. There had been just one case where a higher court judge had not been appointed by the parliament. Reports of corruption in the court system were legally investigated. The parliament adopted a law establishing a new judicial academy in 2024. In January this year, the newly established institution officially commenced its operations. The academy had been admitted as a member of the European Judicial Network. During this year, 106 events and trainings had already been held at the academy.
Latvia remained susceptible to labour exploitation, sham marriages, forced begging, as well as sexual exploitation. This year, just one criminal investigation had been launched so far in this regard. At the beginning of the Ukrainian refugee crisis, a programme was established that strengthened the capacity of State border guards to identify possible victims of human trafficking. All unaccompanied minors had been given legal assistance. Since 2022, there had been one case of sexual exploitation of a Ukrainian woman.
Regarding the case of the grievous bodily harm reflected on the journalist Leonids Jākobsons, despite its best efforts, the State had been unable to identify the perpetrator, and the proceedings had been closed. However, should new information emerge, the criminal proceedings could be reopened, and investigations could resume. In a 2019 case involving a journalist who had been persecuted and harassed for over a year, the perpetrator was identified and sentenced to prison for two years. This emphasised that the State recognised the importance of journalists and were committed to ensuring their safety and security.
A study had been launched which looked at updating the legal definition of “the media”. Seminars were provided for journalists that helped them to protect themselves. Meetings were held with the police once a year, to help them support journalists. Materials were envisaged for judges to help them on cases involving journalists.
Latvia was a democratic State that promoted the right to a fair trial and access to justice. A case was ongoing regarding Russian propaganda channels spreading hate speech in Latvia. The Government could not assess the outcome of the case at this point.
No languages had been prohibited in Latvia. Statistics showed that only 54 per cent of Latvian youth knew Russian language. The official State language was the Latvian language.
Around 47 to 50 per cent of television programmes and 35 percent of radio programmes were available in Russian language, and 13 per cent of the printed press was in Russian language. A law was in place which obligated the public broadcaster to broadcast in minority languages. The public broadcaster independently decided on media content and in which languages it should be broadcast. Work was being done to promote the inclusion of more minorities.
The state of emergency situation at the border with Belarus had been ended, but a new “enhanced border protection regime” had been introduced and would be in force until the end of the year. During legislative amendments, the State had assessed a proportional and law-based solution, considering European Union court rulings in this field. A lot of work had been done to comply with international obligations and the principle of non-refoulment. A document had been developed to instruct personnel at the border on how to deal with these cases.
Significant training had been provided to border staff, with more than 1,000 border guards trained in 2024 on asylum rights. The State did not have information on 20 deaths registered at the border with Belarus. There had been a case in 2024 in which a dead body was found on the Latvian border. This year, there had been 63 applications for asylum so far. As a rule, asylum seekers were not detained in Latvia and were accommodated in open space centres. However, due to several circumstances, the law on asylum permitted the detention of asylum seekers, such as in the case of security threats. Each case was individually and thoroughly assessed. Minors under 14 years old were not detained; they were placed in different facilities. Efforts were taken to accommodate minors with their families when possible. State-provided legal assistance could be accessed once an asylum decision had been appealed.
Regarding conscientious objection, no one from the Ministry of Defence had interfered with the Conscription Control Commission, and changes were not considered. The State defence service law set basic criteria for alternative service. So far, just three applications had been received, including for religious and health reasons. Military service was for a fixed period and a solider could choose whether to extend their contract or not. International regulations set a two-month resignation notice for military service, which the State believed was a reasonable amount of time. A reserve solider who could not perform military service due to their beliefs could be enrolled in the national armed force reserves. The State was not considering amending paragraph five of the military law.
Latvia did not consider “non-citizens” to be stateless persons. All non-citizens had the right to naturalise. The number of Latvian non-citizens had decreased by around 77 per cent in recent years. After a change in regulations in 2020, more than 500 children had been automatically registered after birth. Several campaigns had been carried out on the possibility of acquiring Latvian citizenship.
If someone wanted to be elected or vote in Latvia, they needed to obtain citizenship. A Constitutional Court decision issued at the beginning of the year stated that the contested legal provisions did not impose a complete ban on the use of foreign languages, and only applied to individual campaigning with voters, hence they were in conformity with the Constitution. The Court decided that restrictions on fundamental rights were proportional. Russian language was still widespread in Latvia, justifying the need to strengthen the use of Latvian as the official State language. The Constitutional Court had taken article 27 of the Covenant into account, which recognised the obligation to ensure minority groups could use their mother tongue. It found amendments in the law complied with article 27.
The naturalisation procedure was fairly easy. The path for non-citizens was wide, short and easy to walk.
Follow-Up Questions by Committee Experts
The Committee asked follow-up questions regarding actions taken to implement the national security policy before the Constitutional Court; the permanence of the enhanced border regime; ill-treatment of migrants crossing the Belarus/Latvia border between 2021 and 2022; granting citizenship to children born in Latvia who would otherwise be stateless; providing for honourable discharges from military service; the exclusion of non-citizens from all elections; alternative programmes for minority languages in schools; and measures in place to ensure detention of minors was only implemented as a measure of last resort.
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the public broadcaster was bound by media laws. Currently Belarussian authorities at the border were refusing to cooperate with Latvian authorities. These non-cooperation issues had brought about an increase in criminal activities across the border, including organised crime. This year, there had been 186 irregular migration cases across the border. An investigation had been launched in 2021 and 2022 regarding individuals who had attempted to cross the Belarussian border, which had analysed a significant amount of information. During the investigation, it was determined that injuries to migrants were not caused by the actions of border officials, but were likely obtained during the journey to cross the border.
Reasons for terminating a military contract prior to its conclusion were not specified in national laws. An agreement simply needed to be reached.
Only persons with Latvian citizenship had the right to vote. Using languages other than Latvian during political campaigning in the election period was not prohibited. The provision about using just the official language applied only to the pre-election period. Non-citizens who chose to keep their status still had the right to receive healthcare and work in the country.
Teachers were instructed on teaching methodologies in a linguistically diverse environment, and on how to teach students whose native language was not Latvian. There were targeted grants supporting minority languages and cultures.
As of 25 June this year, there were 27 inmates who were children. Four of these children were detained, with the rest serving their sentences on probation. This illustrated that incarceration of children in Latvia was a last resort.
Closing Statements
HOSAMS ABU MERI, Minister for Health of the Republic of Latvia, expressed gratitude for the open and constructive dialogue. A wide range of topics had been addressed, including efforts to combat hate crimes, gender equality, and matters of national security. Latvia’s experience during these challenging times, as its neighbours Russia and Belarus deployed the full arsenal of hybrid warfare, had a broader relevance. Latvia would not only withstand these threats but remain steadfast in the rule of law, the principles of human rights and a rule-based law and order. These circumstances reaffirmed Latvia’s commitment to uphold the rights enshrined in the Covenant. Latvia appreciated the engagement and interest of the Committee.
CHANGROK SOH, Committee Chairperson, expressed gratitude to all who had contributed to the dialogue. The Committee commended the State party for progress in several areas, including access to justice and gender equality, however remained concerned about the treatment of asylum seekers and non-residents, among other issues. Mr. Soh thanked all involved in the dialogue for their engagement and commitment.
___________
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
CCPR25.013E