DOCSLIB.ORG

Challenging Ethnic Democracy: Implementation of the Recommendations of the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minori- Ties to Latvia, 1993-2001

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg Wolfgang Zellner/Randolf Oberschmidt/Claus Neukirch/Katri Kemppainen (Eds.) Comparative Case Studies on the Effectiveness of the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities Jekaterina Dorodnova Challenging Ethnic Democracy: Implementation of the Recommendations of the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minori- ties to Latvia, 1993-2001 Working Paper 10 Wolfgang Zellner/Randolf Oberschmidt/Claus Neukirch/Katri Tuulia Kemppainen (Eds.) Comparative Case Studies on the Effectiveness of the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities Jekaterina Dorodnova Challenging Ethnic Democracy: Implementation of the Recommendations of the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities to Latvia, 1993-2001 CORE Working Paper 9 Hamburg 2003 2 Contents List of Abbreviations 7 Editor´s Preface 8 Preface and Acknowledgements 9 Chapter 1. Historical and Political Background of the HCNM’s Involvement 13 1.1 Independence and Annexation 13 1.2 The Post-Stalin Era 15 1.3 Language and Education in Soviet Latvia 16 1.4 The Independence Movement 17 1.5 The Post-Independence Political Context in Latvia 19 1.6 The Identity of Russian-speakers in Latvia 22 1.7 Latvian-Russian Interstate Relations 23 Chapter 2. The Adoption of the Latvian Citizenship Law, 1993-1994 25 2.1 Background to the Latvian Citizenship Law 25 2.1.1 The Inter-war Period 25 2.1.2 The Modern Citizenship Debate, 1980s – 1990s 26 2.1.3 The Draft Citizenship Law, 1989 26 2.1.4 The Draft Citizenship Law, 1991 27 2.1.5 The Supreme Council Resolution of October 15, 1991 27 2.1.6 Reactions to the Resolution of October 15, 1991 28 2.2. The Adoption Process of the Citizenship Law and the HCNM’s Involvement 29 2.2.1 The HCNM’s Initial Involvement in Latvia, 1993 29 2.2.2 The Media’s Treatment of the HCNM’s Initial Involvement in Latvia 31 2.2.3 The High Commissioner’s Position regarding the Legal Continuity Approach, 1991-1993 31 2.2.4 Debating the Citizenship Law in the Fifth Saeima: A General Overview, 1993- 1994 32 2.2.5 The HCNM’s and the CoE’s Joint Involvement in the Drafting of the Citizenship Law 33 2.2.6 The Passing of the Draft Citizenship Law on June 21, 1994 34 2.2.7 President Ulmanis’s Veto 34 2.2.8 The Repeated Consideration of the Citizenship Law 35 2.2.9 Assessment 35 2.3 Specific Recommendations of the High Commissioner Regarding the Quota Sys- tem for Naturalisation and the Saeima’s Response, 1993-1994 36 2.3.1 The "Radical" and the "Liberal" Approaches to Quotas 36 2.3.2 Naturalisation Quotas in the draft Citizenship Law 37 2.3.3 The HCNM’s Recommendations on the Draft Law 37 2.3.4 Reactions to the High Commissioner’s Recommendations 38 2.3.5 The Reconsideration of the Citizenship Law and Article 14 39 3 2.3.6 Reactions to the Adoption of the Citizenship Law 41 Chapter 3. Abolishing the "Windows" System 43 3.1 The Problem of Naturalisation, 1995-1997 43 3.1.1 Stagnation of the Naturalisation Process and the Coalition Agreement 43 3.1.2 Reasons for the Slow Naturalisation Pace 44 3.1.3 The HCNM’s Recommendation to Abolish the "Windows" System in the 1996- 1997 Latvian Political Context 45 3.2 Revived Debate on the "Windows" System, 1997-1998 47 3.2.1 A Season for Extremism 47 3.2.2 The Crisis of March-April 1998 48 3.2.3 International Response to the Conflict 49 3.2.4 Reactions to the HCNM’s Recommendation on Abolishing the "Windows" 50 3.3 The Process of Amending the Citizenship Law, 1998 51 3.3.1 The Request for a National Referendum 52 3.3.2 Support for the HCNM’s Recommendations on the Citizenship Law 52 3.3.3 The Success of the Referendum Initiative 53 3.3.4 The Result of the National Referendum 54 3.3.5 Assessment of the Influence of the High Commissioner on the Political Process 54 Chapter 4. The Issue of Stateless Children Born in Latvia 57 4.1 Background 57 4.1.1 Compliance with Article 24, Paragraph 3, of the International Covenant On Civil And Political Rights, 1993-1994 57 4.1.2 Compliance with Article 7, Paragraph 1, of The Convention On The Reduction of Statelessness 59 4.2 Recommendations Concerning the Granting of Citizenship to Children Born in Latvia to Stateless Persons or Non-Citizens, 1997-1998 60 4.2.1 The 1998 Negotiations over the Provision on Stateless Children 62 4.2.2 Adoption of the Provision on Stateless Children 65 4.3 Summary and Conclusions 66 Chapter 5. Naturalisation Procedures 71 5.1. The Term of Residence Required for Naturalisation 71 5.2 Restrictions from Naturalisation by a Court Degree 72 5.3 The Budget of the Naturalisation Board 74 5.4 The State Fee for Naturalisation 75 5.5 The Requirement to Have a Legal Source of Income 77 5.6 The Waiting Period for Naturalisation and the Appeals Procedure 78 5.7 Granting Citizenship for Outstanding Accomplishments 80 5.8 Language Requirements for Naturalisation 81 5.8.1 Language Knowledge and Exemptions from the Language Test, 1993-1994 81 5.8.2 The 1995 Amendments 83 4 5.8.3 The Issue of Exempting the Elderly and the Disabled from the Language Test Back on the Agenda, 1996-1998 83 5.8.4 Lowering the General Language Requirements, 1996-1998 85 5.8.5 Summary and Assessment 87 5.9 The Test of Latvian History and Constitution 88 5.9.1 Recommendations on the Test of the Latvian History and Constitution 90 5.9.2 Assessment 92 5.10 Public Information on Naturalisation 93 Chapter 6 . The Law on the State Language 96 6.1 Background 96 6.2 Language Examinations 97 6.3 Language and Schools 98 6.4 The State Language Inspectorate 99 6.5 The Adoption Process of the New State Language Law, 1994-1999 100 6.5.1 The Second Reading of the Draft Law, March 1998 100 6.5.2 The High Commissioner’s Involvement, March-April 1998 101 6.5.3 The Second Reading of the Draft Law, April 1998 and the HCNM, August– September 1998 102 6.5.4 The Third Reading of the Draft Law, September-October 1998 102 6.5.5 The Draft Law in the Seventh Saeima and the HCNM 103 6.5.6 The Second Reading of the Draft Law in the Seventh Saeima, March 1999 103 6.5.7 The High Commissioner’s Involvement, March-July 1999 104 6.5.8 The Third Reading of the State Language Law, July 8, 1999 106 6.6 Reactions to the Adoption of the Law 106 6.6.1 The High Commissioner’s Reaction and the President’s Veto 107 6.6.2 The State Language Law in the Context of EU Accession 107 6.7 The Cabinet of Ministers’ Language Regulations and International Involvement 108 6.8 Specific Recommendations Made by the High Commissioner on the State Lan- guage Law 110 6.8.1 The General Scope of Language Regulation in the Private Sphere and the "Legiti- mate Public Interest" Clause 111 6.8.2 Language Proficiency Degrees 113 6.8.3 The Language of Addressing Public and Private Authorities 115 6.8.4 The Use of Language in Personal Names 116 6.9 Use of Language in Education 118 6.10 Other Recommendations Made by the HCNM to the Draft Law on the State Lan- guage 120 6.10.1 Record-Keeping (Article 8) 121 6.10.2 Stamps, Seals and Letterheads (Article 20) 121 6.10.3 Names of Institutions, Enterprises and Organisations (Article 18) 121 6.10.4 Place Names (Article 18) 122 6.10.5 Formal Meetings (Article 7) 122 6.10.6 Broadcasting and Films (Article 17) 122 6.10.7 Public Information (Article 21) 122 6.10.8 Public Events (Article 11) 123 6.11 Language Training 125 6.12 Assessment 127 5 Chapter 7. Integration, the Minority Ombudsman and the Ethnicity Entry 129 7.1 The Integration Programme 129 7.2 Subsequent Integration-related Developments 130 7.3 The Idea of a National Commissioner on Ethnic and Language Questions 131 7.4 The Latvian National Human Rights Office 131 7.5 The Ethnicity Entry in Passports 133 Chapter 8. Conclusion - Challenging Ethnic Democracy: An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the HCNM in Latvia, 1993-2001 135 8.1 Operational, Normative and Substantive Effectiveness 136 8.1.1 Operational Effectiveness of the High Commissioner - the HCNM’s Recommendations and Latvia’s Foreign Policy Priorities - Distribution of Involvement - Fostering Dialogue 136 8.1.2 Normative Effectiveness of the High Commissioner 141 8.1.3 Substantive Effectiveness of the High Commissioner 146 8.2 Overall Assessment 150 List of References 153 Bibliography 160 6 List of Abbreviations International CBSS Council of Baltic Sea States CoE Council of Europe CSCE Conference for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) CSO Committee of Senior Officials (OSCE) EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development ECMI European Centre for Minority Issues ECHR European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms EU European Union FCPNM Framework Convention on the Protection of National Minorities FIER Foundation on Inter-Ethnic Relations HCNM High Commissioner on National Minorities (OSCE) ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights IFSH Institut für Friedensforschung und Sicherheitspolitik Hamburg NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization NGO Non-governmental Organization ODIHR Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE) OSCE Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe PHARE Poland and Hungary Action for the Reconstruction of the Economy (EU) RFE/RL Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty SSR Soviet Socialist Republic UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Programme US United States USA United States of America USD United States Dollar USSR Union of Soviet Socialist Republics WWII World War Two Republic of Latvia FHRUL For Human Rights in the United Latvia LNHRO Latvian National Human Rights Office LVL Latvijas lats [Latvian Lat] MFA Ministry of Foreign Affairs MK Ministru Kabinets (Cabinet of Ministers) MNIL Movement for the National Independence of Latvia MP Member of Parliament NPLLT National Programme for Latvian Language Training RL Republic of Latvia SIF Society Integration Foundation 7 Editor´s Preface With the present series "Comparative Case Studies on the Effectiveness of the OSCE High Com- missioner on National Minorities," we are publishing the results of five country studies on Estonia, Latvia, Ukraine, Macedonia and Romania of the project "On the Effectiveness of the OSCE Minor- ity Regime.
Recommended publications
  • Helsinki Summit, July 20–August 8, 1975

    Helsinki Summit, July 20–August 8, 1975

    1370_A62-A65.qxd 12/7/07 8:16 AM Page 921 320-672/B428-S/40001 Helsinki Summit, July 20–August 8, 1975 319. Editorial Note Throughout July 1975, President Ford and Secretary of State Kiss- inger discussed preparations for the President’s trip to Helsinki for the final stage of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, which would include meetings with individual European leaders in Helsinki and stops in Europe before and after the conference. During their conversations, the issue arose of whether Ford should meet with Soviet dissident writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn, whom the Soviets had permitted to emigrate to the United States, before the Helsinki conference. Kissinger wrote in his memoirs: “Solzhenitsyn was expelled from the Soviet Union on February 13, 1974, and came to the United States some months later. The AFL–CIO, under the leader- ship of its strongly anti-Communist president, George Meany, invited him to address a dinner in Washington on June 30, 1975, not long be- fore Ford’s departure to sign the Final Act of the European Security Conference. The date had been carefully chosen; if Solzhenitsyn ex- pressed anything like his well-known views, he would supply plenty of material for the opponents of CSCE. Solzhenitsyn did not disappoint his sponsors. [. .] Solzhenitsyn urged the United States to lead a cru- sade against Communism even inside the Soviet Union and disdained the argument that such a course represented interference in Soviet do- mestic affairs: ‘Interfere more and more,’ Solzhenitsyn implored. ‘In- terfere as much as you can. We beg you to come and interfere.’ [.
  • Speaker of the Saeima, Two Deputy Speakers, a Secretary and a Deputy Secretary

    Speaker of the Saeima, Two Deputy Speakers, a Secretary and a Deputy Secretary

    The Presidium of the Saeima The work of the Saeima is managed by the Presidium, which is elected by the Saeima at the beginning of its term of office. The Presidium of the Saeima consists of five members of the Saeima – the Speaker of the Saeima, two Deputy Speakers, a Secretary and a Deputy Secretary. Nominations for the positions in the Saeima Presidium are submitted by Saeima members in writing, and voting on the nominees for each position is held simultaneously by secret ballot and by using ballot papers. The nominee who receives the most votes is deemed elected; however, the number of votes should not be less than the absolute majority of votes of the members present. Members of the Presidium are usually elected from the ru- ling parties represented in the Saeima; however, the Speaker In order to coordinate the activities of parliamentary of the Saeima may also be elected from the party which has groups and political blocs, as well as to settle matters not gained the largest number of seats in the Saeima. which are not covered by the Rules of Procedure, the The Presidium of the Saeima determines the internal ru- Council of Parliamentary Groups is formed. It consists les of the Saeima, gives opinions on the documents sub- of the Saeima Presidium and one Saeima member from mitted and forwards these documents as prescribed by each parliamentary group and political bloc. Decisions of the Rules of Procedure, prepares the agenda of Saeima the Council of Parliamentary Groups are only advisory. sittings, as well as confirms planned business trips.
  • English Version Remains the Only Official Document Republic of Latvia Page: 2 Parliamentary Elections, 7 October 2006 OSCE/ODIHR Final Report

    English Version Remains the Only Official Document Republic of Latvia Page: 2 Parliamentary Elections, 7 October 2006 OSCE/ODIHR Final Report

    Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights REPUBLIC OF LATVIA PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 7 October 2006 OSCE/ODIHR Limited Election Observation Mission Final Report Warsaw 8 February 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 1 II. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 2 III. POLITICAL BACKGROUND................................................................................................................... 3 IV. ELECTION SYSTEM................................................................................................................................. 3 V. LEGAL FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................................................ 4 A. OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................... 4 B. CANDIDACY RIGHTS ................................................................................................................................ 4 1. Lustration Provisions........................................................................................................................... 4 2. Limitation on the Right of Individuals to Be Elected ........................................................................... 6 C. CITIZENSHIP
  • Human Rights Diplomacy

    Human Rights Diplomacy

    History 282 US Diplomatic Discussion Transcript for November 10, 2020 Human Rights Diplomacy Main Reading: Chapter 18 Herring The 1970s were a difficult time for the US in the world, but it was still a period of occasional triumph and flashes of vision for the post-Cold War world. Yet the fundamental challenge for partisan officials was to navigate the issue of human rights and US interests. This was a particular challenge for both Presidents Ford and Carter, though in much different ways. Here is a selection of student comments: HELSINKI ACCORDS (1975) STUDENT COMMENT: “In July 1975, President Gerald Ford traveled to Helinski for a three day summit with thirty-five nations including the Soviet Union (USSR). Establishing three sets of agreements during the summit, the USSR and Western European nations were pleased with the outcome, while the agreements provoked the opposite response in the United States. People saw it as another “Yalta-like ‘betrayal of Eastern Europe’” (827) according to Herring, and the humanitarian agreements were also critiqued for the lack of enforceability of the promised “freer flow of information, ideas, and people through travel, better access to media information, and reunification of families separated by the Cold War.” Herring describes the critiques of Helinski as “politically charged,” making the short-term predictions of the effects of Helinski contradictory to the long-term effects. Herring says that, rather than appeasing the USSR and allowing for control over the rest of Eastern Europe, the agreements “helped to undermine it and indeed eventually to bring about the fall of the USSR” (827).
  • Factsheet: the Saeima of the Latvian Republic

    Factsheet: the Saeima of the Latvian Republic

    Directorate-General for the Presidency Directorate for Relations with National Parliaments Factsheet: The Saeima of the Latvian Republic 1.At a glance Latvia is a republic and a parliamentary democracy. Its Parliament, the Saeima, is a unicameral Parliament composed of 100 Members, elected for a maximum term of 4 years. All citizens of Latvia who enjoy full rights of citizenship and who on election day have attained 18 years of age are entitled to vote. The main function of the Saeima is law-making and adopting the state budget, but it also elects the President of the Republic, the State Auditor, and the Central Election Commission, and ratifies international agreements. The work of the Saeima is supervised by its Presidium, which consists of five MPs: the Speaker, two Deputy Speakers, the Secretary and the Deputy Secretary. The Saeima may give a vote of confidence or no confidence in the government. On the motion of not less than one-half of the Members of the Saeima, the Saeima may at a secret sitting decide by a two-thirds majority to dismiss the President and immediately appoint a successor. Draft laws may be presented to the Saeima by the President of State, the Cabinet, and the Committees of the Saeima, no less than five individual Members of the Saeima or, in cases and in a manner provided for in the Constitution, by one-tenth of the electorate. On 3 June 2015, the Saeima elected Mr Raimonds Vejonis President of the Republic. 2. Composition Results of the general elections on 4 October 2014 Party EP affiliation % Seats Saskaņas Centrs (SC) 23% 24 Harmony Ccentre Vienotība (V) 21,87% 23 Unity Zaļo un Zemnieku savienīb (ZZS) 19,53% 21 Union of Greens and Farmers Nacionālās apvienības "Visu Latvijai!" VL-TB/LNNK 16,61 17 Nacional Alliance "All for Latvia!" Latvijas Re´gionu Apvieniba 6,66% 8 Alliance Of regions of Latvia No sirds Latvijai 6,85 7 For Latvia from the Heart 100% 100 Turnout : 58,85% The next election will take place in 2018.
  • CSCE Testimonies Jaakko Iloniemi / Finland Jiří Opršal / Czechoslovakia Jacques Andreani / France

    CSCE Testimonies Jaakko Iloniemi / Finland Jiří Opršal / Czechoslovakia Jacques Andreani / France

    CSCE Testimonies Jaakko Iloniemi / Finland Jiří Opršal / Czechoslovakia Jacques Andreani / France Edouard Brunner / Switzerland Peter Steglich / GDR Mario Michele Alessi / Italy 1972–1989 CSCE Oral History Project / Occasional Paper – 2013 Evarist Saliba / Malta Yuri V. Dubinin / Soviet Union Spencer Oliver / USA CSCE Testimonies Time line 1990–2012 Organization for Security and 1972–1989 CSCE Oral History Project Time line 1972 –1991 Q Bodies no longer in existence Co-operation in Europe Causes and Consequences of the Helsinki Final Act QThe “Helsinki process” Qx CSCE/OSCE Institutions QPreparatory Meetings to Follow-up Qx Follow-up meetings 1972–1989 Meetings Q Summit meetings QFollow-up Meetings Q Ministerial Councils QVenues of a politico-military nature Q Economic and Environmental Forum QVenues concerning economic and environmental issues Q Permanent Council Venues concerning Human Dimension discussions Q Q humanitarian issues Politico-Militray negotiations Q Venues concerning the CSCE Q Q Activites with Mediterranean Mediterranean region and Asian Partners for cooperation OSCE Prague Office Archives CSCE OralCSCE History Oral Project History / Occasional Project 2013 Paper – 2013 CSCE Testimonies Causes and Consequences of the Helsinki Final Act 1972–1989 Published by the Prague Offi ce of the OSCE Secretariat náměstí Pod Kaštany 2 160 00 Prague, Czech Republic Compiled by Alice Němcová © OSCE 2013 All rights reserved. Written contents of this publication may be used freely and copied for educational and other non-commercial purposes provided that such usage and reproduction is accompanied by an acknowledgement of the OSCE Prague Offi ce Archives as the source ISBN 978-92-9235-018-5 Design & Layout: © Jan Dvořák/HQ Kontakt Ltd.
  • NATO and the European Union

    NATO and the European Union

    Order Code RL32342 NATO and the European Union Updated January 29, 2008 Kristin Archick Specialist in European Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Paul Gallis Specialist in European Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division NATO and the European Union Summary Since the end of the Cold War, both NATO and the European Union (EU) have evolved along with Europe’s changed strategic landscape. While NATO’s collective defense guarantee remains at the core of the alliance, members have also sought to redefine its mission as new security challenges have emerged on Europe’s periphery and beyond. At the same time, EU members have taken steps toward political integration with decisions to develop a common foreign policy and a defense arm to improve EU member states’ abilities to manage security crises, such as those that engulfed the Balkans in the 1990s. The evolution of NATO and the EU, however, has generated some friction between the United States and several of its allies over the security responsibilities of the two organizations. U.S.-European differences center around threat assessment, defense institutions, and military capabilities. Successive U.S. administrations and the U.S. Congress have called for enhanced European defense capabilities to enable the allies to better share the security burden, and to ensure that NATO’s post-Cold War mission embraces combating terrorism and countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. U.S. policymakers, backed by Congress, support EU efforts to develop a European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) provided that it remains tied to NATO and does not threaten the transatlantic relationship.
  • The CSCE up to the End of the Cold War: What It Achieved and Where It Failed

    The CSCE up to the End of the Cold War: What It Achieved and Where It Failed

    In: IFSH (ed.), OSCE Yearbook 2015, Baden-Baden 2016, pp. 35-53. Reinhard Mutz The CSCE up to the End of the Cold War: What It Achieved and Where It Failed The defining feature of post-War Europe was its division into two political- ideological camps. Each bloc contained exclusive subsystems: The European Community in the West, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (Comecon) in the East; NATO here, and the Warsaw Treaty Organization there. They provided their members with a framework for mutual support and collective development in competition with the rival system of powers. They not only derived from the political division of Europe but were its most evi- dent manifestation. They also contributed to the hardening of this division. With the end of the confrontation between blocs, the Eastern organizations disappeared without a trace. Their Western counterparts continue to exist, and though their goals have changed, they remain as exclusive as ever. Among forums for international co-operation, the Conference on Secur- ity and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) had a special place. It also owed its existence to the Cold War, and in many of its aspects and for much of the time, it was a specific form of the conflict’s manifestation. However, the fact that it sought not to separate the two sides in the conflict but to bring them together distinguishes it fundamentally from the supranational institutions born of the Cold War. The CSCE was always a pan-European arrangement that was open to every country that wished to participate in it. After 1989, the CSCE seemed the institution most likely to provide a framework for political continuity to the new Europe, which was striving for closer ties and greater cohesion.
  • OSCE Yearbook 2019

    OSCE Yearbook 2019

    Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg / IFSH (ed.) OSCE Yearbook 2019 Yearbook on the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Edited by the IFSH in co-operation with Pál Dunay, George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies, Garmisch-Partenkirchen P. Terrence Hopmann, Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, Washington Adam Daniel Rotfeld, Member of the Executive Board of the European Leadership Network, Warsaw Andrei Zagorski, Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Moscow Editor-in-Chief: Ursel Schlichting, Hamburg Translator/Editor: Caroline Taylor, Hamburg Nomos BUT_OSCE_2019_6500-3_HC.indd 3 11.05.20 09:52 Articles of the OSCE Yearbook are indexed in World Affairs Online (WAO), accessible via the IREON portal. Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de ISBN 978-3-8487-6500-3 (Print) 978-3-7489-0642-1 (ePDF) British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 978-3-8487-6500-3 (Print) 978-3-7489-0642-1 (ePDF) Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg/IFSH (ed.) OSCE Yearbook 2019 Yearbook on the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) IFSH 346 pp. Includes bibliographic references. ISBN 978-3-8487-6500-3 (Print) 978-3-7489-0642-1 (ePDF) Onlineversion 1. Edition 2020 © Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, Baden-Baden, Germany 2020. Printed and bound in Germany.
  • 2006 Parliamentary (Saeima) Election

    2006 Parliamentary (Saeima) Election

    Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights REPUBLIC OF LATVIA PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 7 October 2006 OSCE/ODIHR Limited Election Observation Mission Final Report Warsaw 8 February 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 1 II. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 2 III. POLITICAL BACKGROUND................................................................................................................... 3 IV. ELECTION SYSTEM................................................................................................................................. 3 V. LEGAL FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................................................ 4 A. OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................... 4 B. CANDIDACY RIGHTS ................................................................................................................................ 4 1. Lustration Provisions........................................................................................................................... 4 2. Limitation on the Right of Individuals to Be Elected ........................................................................... 6 C. CITIZENSHIP
  • Janvāra Hronika

    Janvāra Hronika

    1991. gada janvāra barikāžu laiks, kura 25. gadskārtu šogad atzīmējam, līdztekus HRONIKA JANVĀRA Brīvības cīņām par neatkarīgu Latvijas valsti pieder pie tiem vissvētākajiem mūsu valsts vēstures notikumiem, kuros Latvijas tauta apliecināja nelokāmu gribu nodibināt neatkarīgu Latvijas valsti un atjaunot Latvijas Republikas neatkarību. JANVĀRA Alongside the initial freedom struggle for an independent Latvia, the 1991 barricades, the 25th anniversary of which we commemorate this year, are among the most sacred events in our history, when the Latvian people demonstrated an unwavering desire to establish an independent state of Latvia and restore the independence of the Republic of Latvia. HRONIKA January Chronicles Līdz ar valsts atjaunotās neatkarības aizstāvēšanu vēl viens būtisks janvāra barikāžu uzdevums bija parādīt pasaulei, ka neatkarība ir Latvijas tautas neapšaubāma griba un tās tiesības, ka tieši Maskava un PSRS centrālā vara bremzē un kavē valsts demokratizāciju un šauj uz saviem pilsoņiem. 1991. gada janvārī Latvijas Augstākās padomes Preses centrā bija akreditējušies gandrīz tūkstoš žurnālistu, 20. un 21. janvārī vien akreditējās 434 ārvalstu žurnālisti. Janvārī Rietumu medijiem un valdību pārstāvniecībām angliski tika izplatīti vairāki simti preses relīžu. Šajā izdevumā apkopotas 129 preses relīzes, kas aptver laika posmu no 1991. gada janvāra līdz 4. maijam, un to tulkojums latviski. Grāmata laista klajā, atzīmējot janvāra • barikāžu 25. gadadienu. January Chronicles Alongside defending the restored independence of the state, another important task of the January barricades was to show the world that independence was a steadfast desire and right of the Latvian people; that it was Moscow and the central government of the USSR that was hindering and obstructing democratisation, whilst shooting at their own citizens.
  • The Centenary of Latvia's Foreign Affairs

    The Centenary of Latvia's Foreign Affairs

    THE CENTENARY OF LATVIA’S FOREIGN AFFAIRS IDEAS AND PERSONALITIES THE CENTENARY OF LATVIA’S FOREIGN AFFAIRS IDEAS AND PERSONALITIES THE CENTENARY OF LATVIA’S FOREIGN AFFAIRS IDEAS AND PERSONALITIES The upcoming centennial of Latvia’s statehood provides an important occasion to reflect on the country’s international achievements and offer a self-critical look at what remains to be done. This publication identifies main currents in Latvia’s foreign policy thinking and the most remarkable individuals that contributed to shaping them. A team of local and foreign experts reviews key ideational trends in Latvia’s foreign policy during the Interwar period and today, as well as assesses the trajectories of thinking during the periods of exile and regaining independence. Authors: Aldis Austers, Edijs Bošs, Raimonds Cerūzis, Mārtiņš Daugulis, Martyn Housden, Ivars Ījabs, Didzis Kļaviņš, Jordan T. Kuck, Andis Kudors, Andrejs Plakans, Diāna Potjomkina, Gunda Reire, Andris Sprūds, Valters Ščerbinskis, Jānis Taurēns Editors: Diāna Potjomkina, Andris Sprūds, Valters Ščerbinskis Scientific reviewers: Ainārs Lerhis, Toms Rostoks This project was made possible thanks to support from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Latvia and the Saeima of the Republic of Latvia The project was completed in cooperation with National Information Agency LETA The respective authors are accountable for the content of individual articles. The opinions expressed by the authors should not be construed as representing those of the Latvian Institute of International Affairs, project supporters or partners, other government institutions or entities. Cover design: Līga Rozentāle Layout: Oskars Stalidzāns Translations from Latvian: Alise Krapāne, Jurijs Saveļjevs, Pāvels Smišļājevs English language editor (select chapters): Dillon J.