RUSSIAN MFA INFORMATION AND PRESS DEPARTMENT COMMENTARY REGARDING LATVIA'S REFUSAL TO RATIFY THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE'S FRAMEWORK CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES
Unofficial translation from Russian
On May 6, 2004, the Saeima of Latvia again refused to ratify the Framework Convention of the Council of Europe for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM). The decision of the parliament is an eloquent answer to the repeated appeals by international organizations to Latvia to ratify this convention and bring the laws of the country into conformity with it. As is known, this had been one of the main recommendations given to Latvia by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) in January 2001 after the completion of the monitoring procedure of the fulfillment by the country of the obligations assumed upon entry into the Council of Europe. In October of last year PACE had again urgently recalled this recommendation, but, as we see, without result. Rolf Ekeus, OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities, and Alvaro Gil-Robles, CE Commissioner for Human Rights, had addressed similar recommendations to Latvia. In March 2004 the European Parliament had joined its voice to them, but its opinion was not heeded.
As a pretext for refusal to ratify the Convention and implement its provisions, official Riga has again argued about "special historical circumstances." The question whether it is permissible to refuse persons belonging to national minorities the rights embodied in the convention on such a basis is clearly answered by international documents, in the first place the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, prohibiting discrimination on any grounds.
It is not surprising that that policy on the national question meets with the increasing protest of the Russian-speaking community, taking expression in the unceasing mass demonstrations that have been going on for a year now. Under these conditions, the refusal to ratify the FCNM and the stubborn reluctance of the authorities to start a dialogue with the representatives of the national minorities, which form nearly 40 percent of the population, on the possibility to get education in the native language and its official use in their places of compact settlement - and these are exactly the rights indicated in the FCNM - only aggravate the situation. This cannot but be disturbing, especially if one takes into account the increased administrative and moral pressure being put on activists of the movement in protection of national minority rights.
May 14, 2004
