Probably there can be a couple of “puppet NGOs” paid down by regulators whoever agencies you’ll share with something such as this, but it is factually incorrect
3. 16 [See new part 31]: “However, in the view of the Russian-speaking political parties…”. In fact, as all surveys reveal, this view is shared by a large majority of both non-citizens and Russian-speaking citizens of Latvia – thus, this is not just an attitude of some politicians.
4. 17 [See new part 29]: “The integration policy the Latvian government has been pursuing for the past eleven years…” – in fact, the integration concept was officially adopted only in 1999, before that the official discourse was rather one of “de-colonization”. The very adoption of the citizenship law can hardly be regarded as a sign of the government’s goodwill – it was adopted after lengthy delays under the pressure of the Council of Europe: adoption of this law was an explicit precondition for the accession of Latvia to the Council of Europe, and exactly this delay was the reason why Latvia joined the Council of Europe almost two years later than its neighbours Estonia and Lithuania.
5. 18 [See new part thirty-two]: “In the opinion of the NGOs, including those representing the Russian-speaking community, young people are typically not interested in learning Latvian and make no effort even to acquire the rudiments, but at the same time hope for automatic naturalisation in the medium term” fling beoordelingen.
All the surveys show that the content off Latvian certainly one of younger Russian-audio system enjoys improved considerably, hence about 95-98% from mothers believe that experience with the newest Latvian words is important for their pupils, and you will encourage them to learn it really that you can. Additionally, it’s just impractical to scholar regarding actually pris with the Latvian each year. In fact, brand new statement over is nothing more nationalistic stereotype that’s obviously slanderous and you may insulting on the Russian-talking area and should not be reproduced inside a serious declaration. Whatever the case, which statement cannot be showed because highlighting the new feedback out-of also nearly serious a portion of the Russian-speaking NGOs. The prejudiced affairs of one’s form you will absolutely weaken the fresh trustworthiness of whole report.
Para poder
6. 19 [See new section 33]: it is not clear which “extremist Russian-speaking political parties” are meant (we do have some small parties of the kind, unfortunately, but meetings with them were not included into the Rapporteur’s programme, as far as I know). Besides, it is not clear what kind of “alarmist figures” is meant – in fact, these Russian nationalistic parties do not predict any large-scale (re-)emigration to Russia and put forward quite different slogans.
7. 32 [See new sentences 51-52]: It is not clear what 109 advisory boards are meant. At the national level, the Minority Consultative Council attached to the former President G. Ulmanis was functioning between 1996 and 1998 (I was a member of this council from its first till the last meeting), however, after the election of the current President V.Vike-Freiberga, it was abolished. Two specialised boards currently exist. The first one is on minority education issues at the Ministry of Education. Majority of its members represent the Ministry’ bureaucrats and school administrations, and only minority – relevant NGOs, besides, these NGOs are chosen by the Ministry itself, and often they do not represent the genuine views of the persons and groups affected. Under the previous minister Mrs Druviete, the board was not summoned for more than half a year. Most recent information on the board’s activity is available (in Russian) at .