The Saeima Commission Supported the Ban on Speaking Russian in Stores in the Second Reading 0 8

As previously reported, Saeima deputy from the National Alliance, Nauris Puntulis, submitted an amendment to the Consumer Rights Protection Law, which imposes obligations on the buyer to communicate with the seller or service provider only in Latvian. In certain cases, if the buyer and the service provider are capable of it, the buyer is allowed to use another official language of an EU country or an EU candidate country. The first part of the amendment states: "The consumer's communication with the seller or service provider - providing, servicing information, and concluding a contract - shall be conducted in the state language." Today, this amendment was discussed in the Saeima Economic Committee. It was presented by deputy Janis Vitenbergs at the request of his party colleague Puntulis. According to Vitenbergs, the amendment aims to guarantee every consumer the opportunity to receive information and service in Latvian. At the same time, it provides service providers and sellers - mainly young people who, for example, do not speak Russian - the right not to respond in Russian.

Independent deputy Skaidrīte Abama inquired how this would look in practice: "So a buyer, for example, in 'Maxima' will not be able to speak Russian at the checkout? And what then?" "Yes, they simply will not be served in Russian," Janis Vitenbergs cut in, adding that it is unlikely that a Uzbek in France would be served in Uzbek. "Our compatriots in England, even at an advanced age, learn English to be able to receive service," explained deputy Vitenbergs. It should be noted that representatives from the Ministry of Economics, the Consumer Rights Protection Center, and parliamentary lawyers have emphasized several times that all legislation in Latvia regarding the protection of the state language has already been adopted, and there is no need to introduce any specific language norm into all other laws, especially considering that if the amendment prohibits something, the question immediately arises: who will control it? And another question: what administrative responsibility will be provided for this?

The head of the Saeima Economic Committee, Kaspars Briškens ("Progressives"), expressed the opinion after the discussion that if the deputies support Puntulis's amendment in the second reading, it will need to be revised and aligned with language norms in other laws by the third reading. As a result, the amendment was supported by the committee in the second reading with 6 votes in favor, 2 against, and 2 abstentions. A vote on this amendment is still pending at the plenary session of the Saeima, followed by discussion in the third (final) reading.