Dear Mr Buzek,
Latvian media widely covered your statement made in connection with the forthcoming referendum on the status of Russian as the second state language in Latvia.

I highly appreciate your interest towards this most sensitive and controversial issue, and fully share your points about the respect of diversity as one of the core values of the European Union.

In the meantime, it is deeply regrettable that your conclusions about the situation in Latvia are based on obviously false information probably provided by some of your Latvian colleagues.

In particular, the text of your statement (as circulated by MEP I.Vaidere) contains the point that Latvia is, inter alia, a state party to the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. In reality, Latvia has not even signed this important instrument, and the parties of the current coalition on several occasions clearly expressed their position that Latvia should not accede to this Charter in a foreseeable future. Therefore, your reference to the preamble of the Charter (what I wholeheartedly support) should be addressed to the Latvian colleagues in your political group rather than to the supporters of official bilingualism.

Moreover, the aforementioned statement goes on to maintain that the “Russian-speaking minority in Latvia… is able to use Russian language in relations with administrative authorities”. Sorry to say, this is not true either. Ratification of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities by Latvia in 2005 was accompanied by several declarations. One of them (which is, in essence, a reservation) directly refers to the right to use minority languages before public authorities in areas populated by minorities historically or in substantial numbers. This declaration states that “The Republic of Latvia declares that it will apply the provisions of Article 10, paragraph 2, of the Framework Convention without prejudice to the Satversme (Constitution) of the Republic of Latvia and the legislative acts governing the use of the State language that are currently into force”. In the meantime, the State language law currently in force explicitly prohibits state or municipal institutions to accept and consider any applications or complaints from private persons unless they are written in the state language or supplied with the duly certified translation into the state language. Exception is envisaged only for some emergency situations (e.g. calls to firefighters or reporting to police about ongoing crime). This provision is in force also in the areas of Latvia where persons belonging to minorities historically constitute an overwhelming majority of the population (I mean exactly historically, i.e. for several centuries, not as a result of migration in Soviet times).

Generally, the conclusions of the monitoring of Latvia’s fulfilment of its obligations and commitments under the Framework Convention are made by the competent bodies, i.e. the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers and Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention. These conclusions are publicly available and contain a number of serious criticisms. Therefore, it would be at least premature to claim that Latvia has successfully resolved all issues related to minority protection in accordance with the modern European standards.

Dear Mr Buzek,
The opinion expressed by such a prominent European politician like you is of great importance for all people in Latvia, regardless of their political convictions or attitudes towards official mono- or multilingualism. It is a great pity indeed that you seem to have been misinformed and manipulated by some unscrupulous Latvian politicians in pursuit of their narrow party interest.

As to me personally, I am not at all a supporter of the idea of two state languages. I do strongly believe in potential effectiveness of the European system of minority protection – which, in my view, must be applied fairly, diligently and in good faith in all the states of Europe. For many years I was closely involved in minority protection, both as NGO activist, Latvian parliamentarian and rapporteur of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly on minority issues. Let me be frank with you - I am seriously concerned that superficial statements made on the basis of false information may discredit the European values and ideas of equality and diversity in the eyes of Europeans, both belonging to majorities and minorities.

Yours sincerely,
Boriss Cilevičs
MP, Latvia
Vice-Chair of the Saeima Committee on Human Rights and Public Affairs
Vice-Chair of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
Former Chair of the Sub-Committee on Rights of Minorities, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (2005-2007, 2010-2011)

16 February 2012