Regulation concerning the creation of content for public media in national minority languages does not comply with the Constitution (Satversme), the Constitutional Court of Latvia (Satversmes tiesa) has ruled, reports LETA.
As emphasized by the court, it is the legislator's responsibility, with respect for the independence of public media and editorial freedom, to ensure a balanced protection of the Latvian language, the rights of persons belonging to national minorities, as well as state security.
The court noted that the foundations of the Latvian state and national-cultural identity are defined by the Latvian language as the only state language, without which the existence of the state, as enshrined in the Constitution, is impossible.
"Latvia is the only place in the world where the existence and development of the Latvian language, and consequently the main nation, can be guaranteed," the court emphasized.
The constitutional mission of public media is to strengthen the values of a democratic state, including caring for the Latvian language and promoting a sense of belonging to Latvia.
The court added that from the essence of the constitutional identity of the state follows the principle that the content of public media should primarily be formed in the Latvian language, so that it serves as a common language of communication and democratic participation for the entire society, including national minorities. Deviations from this principle are permissible only to fulfill other state obligations arising from the Satversme, and only to the extent that does not threaten the status and functions of the state language.
At the same time, the court emphasized that Latvia, as a democratic rule of law state, respects national minorities and their right to preserve and develop their language and culture, as enshrined in the Constitution.
The court indicated that the state must take appropriate measures to ensure access of national minorities to media, promote tolerance, and cultural diversity. However, the scope of these obligations depends on the actual situation of the specific minority — its size, the prevalence of the language, media accessibility, and the ability to independently ensure access to information in their language.
In the case under consideration, the court established that the Russian language in the Latvian media space is self-sufficient — commercial media, as well as print, audiovisual, and digital resources, including programs from foreign media, are available.
"Therefore, the existence of the language and the preservation of the national identity of this group are not under threat, and its representatives can effectively exercise their rights without special state support," the court stated.
At the same time, the court noted that there are minorities whose languages are not self-sufficient, and the state is obliged to facilitate their access to public media, especially when it comes to small groups.
In this regard, the interest of the minorities themselves in preserving their culture and participating in this process is also important, the court emphasized.
Evaluating the contested norms, the court also pointed to the state's obligation to ensure security, as public awareness is its foundation. Public media play an important role in this context, providing objective and independent information, including in minority languages.
This also applies to the Russian language, despite its self-sufficiency in the media environment.
The court separately emphasized that Russia actively uses propaganda and disinformation against Latvia and the Baltic States, and such actions are likely to continue. In these conditions, it is precisely public media that must provide verified information and clarify its context.
At the same time, the provision of information in minority languages must be proportionate to security threats, targeted, and justified, without undermining the status of the Latvian language.
The court concluded that the contested norms are too broad. They allow for both insufficient protection of those minorities whose languages are not self-sufficient and unjustified deviations from the principle of prioritizing the Latvian language.
"It is unacceptable for the rights of persons belonging to national minorities to be realized at the expense of the state language," the court emphasized.
As a result, the court recognized that the norms do not provide the necessary balance between the protection of the Latvian language, the rights of minorities, and state security.
The contested regulation is declared invalid as of May 1, 2027, giving the Saeima time to develop new balanced regulations.
The decision of the Constitutional Court of Latvia has come into force, is final, and is not subject to appeal.
The case was initiated at the request of deputies from the National Alliance and the "United List" factions, who believed that the obligation to create a certain volume of programs in minority languages diminishes the significance of the Latvian language as the only state language and threatens state security.
