From@IeM_gov_lvStatement by Minister of the Interior Jānis Dombrava An assessment has been made of whether the activities of the association 'Gribu palīdzēt bēgļiem' are consistent with the Memorandum of Cooperation between the Ministry of the Interior and non-governmental organisations, approved on 27 October 2021. The purpose of the Memorandum is to promote cooperation between the Ministry of the Interior and non-governmental organisations in order to strengthen public security as a fundamental value of the State. 'In assessing the activities of the association, which actively promotes and creates favourable conditions for illegal migration and in other ways directly contradicts the principles of State integrity and sovereignty, and also taking into account that one of the members of the association's council, at a time when Belarus is organising and implementing illegal migration pressure and a hybrid threat against the Republic of Latvia and other European Union member states, has been convicted of supporting the illegal crossing of the border of the Republic of Latvia and Belarus, the activities of the association are incompatible with the purpose of the Memorandum. In view of the above, I am terminating cooperation with the association 'Gribu palīdzēt bēgļiem' under the Memorandum of Cooperation between the Ministry of the Interior and non-governmental organisations, removing the association from the Cooperation Council of the Memorandum of Cooperation between the Ministry of the Interior and non-governmental organisations, as well as from the composition of the Monitoring Committee of the Internal Security Fund, the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund and the Financial Support Instrument for Border Management and Visa Policy for the 2021–2027 programming period,' states @janisdombrava.
Open referenced post
Latest posts
16867From@PabriksI am glad that Ivars Ijabs (LA) stands for freedom and voted against chat control, under the guise of which our individual freedoms are being restricted and threatened. I wonder about our other deputies @ijabs
Open referenced post
From@janisdombravaI have broken the memorandums of cooperation of the Ministry of the Interior concluded by previous ministers with the associations 'Gribu palīdzēt bēgļiem' and 'Latvian Women's Non-Governmental Organizations Cooperation Network'. Both organizations have received hundreds of thousands of euros from the state budget and EU funds, for which checks are currently underway. The ministry has already found serious violations in the project 'Public diversity and intercultural communication for professionals working with third-country nationals'. Meanwhile, one of the members of the council of the organization 'Gribu palīdzēt bēgļiem' has been involved in Belarus's hybrid war activities, supporting persons who illegally cross the state border.
Open referenced post
From@ua_zinkoviy10.07.26. The Russian army shelled Kramatorsk again. Among the dead are two children https://t.co/2A146obbST
Open referenced post
A week in which society learned about the heavy legacy left by the previous period, the mirror of which is the new @Finmin macroeconomic forecasts. Currently, a lot of work must be invested so that Latvian society does not have huge problems in the future… https://t.co/tXKmu9Rzwp
From@IeM_gov_lvStatement by Interior Minister Jānis Dombrava. The compliance of the association “Gribu palīdzēt bēgļiem” with the cooperation memorandum between the Ministry of the Interior and non-governmental organisations, approved on 27 October 2021, has been assessed. The memorandum aims to promote cooperation between the Ministry of the Interior and NGOs to strengthen public security as a fundamental value of the state. “Having assessed the association’s activities, which actively promote and create favourable conditions for illegal migration and in other ways directly contradict the principles of state integrity and sovereignty, and taking into account that one of the members of the association’s board was convicted, at a time when Belarus organises and carries out illegal migration pressure and a hybrid threat against the Republic of Latvia and other Member States of the European Union, for supporting the illegal crossing of the border of the Republic of Latvia and Belarus, the association’s activities are incompatible with the memorandum’s objective. In view of the above, I am terminating cooperation with the association ‘Gribu palīdzēt bēgļiem’ within the framework of the cooperation memorandum between the Ministry of the Interior and non-governmental organisations, excluding the association from the composition of the Cooperation Council of the memorandum, as well as from the composition of the Monitoring Committee of the Internal Security Fund, the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, and the Financial Instrument for Border Management and Visa Policy for the 2021–2027 programming period,” notes @janisdombrava.
Open referenced post
European security begins with justice. Justice demands action. Together with Ukraine's Acting Minister of Justice Liudmyla Suhak, we have begun fundamentally rewriting the Latvian-Ukrainian memorandum of understanding, which has not been reviewed since 2019. We are adapting it to the reality of war and Ukraine's needs on its path to the European Union, strengthening cooperation in judicial reform and implementation of EU standards. 🇺🇦🇱🇻 At the same time, we are deepening cooperation to ensure international accountability for the crimes of Russia's aggression. Latvia, together with the Baltic and Nordic countries, must continue to drive this process forward. We will not allow the issue of justice to disappear from the international agenda.
From@frontes_muzejs40 years ago, on 10 July 1986, the Latvian human rights defence group “Helsinki-86” was founded in Liepāja – the first openly organised resistance movement during the Soviet occupation in Latvia. It stood for human rights, democracy and Latvia's freedom. https://t.co/RmvynpzAeh
Open referenced post
⚖️ The future of Latvia's justice system is built by people. Therefore, investment in young lawyers is investment in a stronger state! Today concluded the second Summer School for Young Lawyers, where 28 law students spent a week learning how justice policy is made, how decisions are prepared, and how public administration works daily. It is important to me that young lawyers see not only laws but also the responsibility behind every decision. Professional, knowledgeable, and brave lawyers strengthen the rule of law, national security, and public trust in the state. I am especially pleased that one of last year's participants is now already our colleague at the Ministry of Justice. This shows that this initiative delivers real results – helping to discover talent and attract the next professionals to public administration. Thank you to all participants for their interest, questions, and desire to improve. I wish that this week becomes the start of a successful career in Latvia's justice system! 🇱🇻⚖️
I have broken the memorandums of cooperation of the Ministry of the Interior concluded by previous ministers with the associations 'Gribu palīdzēt bēgļiem' and 'Latvian Women's Non-Governmental Organizations Cooperation Network'. Both organizations have received hundreds of thousands of euros from the state budget and EU funds, for which checks are currently underway. The ministry has already found serious violations in the project 'Public diversity and intercultural communication for professionals working with third-country nationals'. Meanwhile, one of the members of the council of the organization 'Gribu palīdzēt bēgļiem' has been involved in Belarus's hybrid war activities, supporting persons who illegally cross the state border.
Today the Border Guard College graduated new border guard officers. Addressing them, I said: 'You are becoming border guards at a historic time. At a time when the old world order is changing and when the countries themselves often change beyond recognition. As a result of mass migration, many places in Western Europe no longer look like Europe. That has been the choice of these countries. Our country cannot afford that, because Latvia is too small and there are too few Latvians. It is precisely you, border guards, who, by protecting the state border, give the nation the opportunity to exist as a nation in the future.' Photo author: Ilmārs Znotiņš, Chancellery of the President.
From@AizsardzibasMin🇱🇻 @Latvijas_armija has been guarding our country's freedom and independence for more than a century. Minister of Defense Raivis Melnis thanks every soldier and National Guard member for choosing to serve our land, and families for their support. May strength, determination, and success accompany you in future service! #LatvijasArmijai107
Open referenced post
How are financial resources managed in Latvia, what is the progress in this area, and what still needs to be done, and, of course, how is the treasury filling up, where are funds taken for security, education, healthcare… Regular work together with the State Treasury manager Kaspars Āboliņš. https://t.co/6saMu7ZTKf
@LabaisKrabis @BookieDew @AndrisVelps @poznaks https://t.co/vYTLH1A59H
From@RihardsKolsToday and yesterday I am receiving more questions and comments on one topic than ever before – about the Chat Control regulation. And, frankly, the confusion in your replies and questions reflects the same confusion that ruled the plenary hall yesterday. There they were fighting not about the essence of the topic, but about what exactly is happening in procedural terms. I will also try to explain that. First – about my vote. At the moment it is hard to say whether it happened due to the general chaos (quite clearly visible in the video) or my own mistake when pressing the voting buttons, but my intention was (and previous votes on this issue confirm it) to vote for rejecting the position, i.e., against this Chat Control regulation. I have applied to the EP administration to change my vote to the appropriate one, i.e., FOR rejecting the Council's position. As for the rest. What exactly happened – step by step: At the end of March (26 March) Parliament already rejected this extension of the Chat Control 1.0 regulation – 311 against 228. A clear, unambiguous vote. The regulation's effect ended in April. Then Roberta Metsola (EP President/Speaker, EPP) in mid-June herself called on member states to 'bring this matter back to the agenda' – the same matter that Parliament had rejected. On 2 July the Council adopted a 'new' text – practically identical to what Parliament had already rejected in March. And then – the trick: this text came to Parliament not as a new proposal (where a simple majority of votes would suffice to reject), but under urgency in second reading immediately. In second reading, rejecting the regulation requires an absolute majority – 361 of 720 MEPs, not of those present. Important not to confuse two things. Yesterday we voted on Chat Control 1.0 – a temporary, voluntary regime that allows platforms (Meta, Google, Microsoft) to scan private messages at their discretion to detect child exploitation material. Chat Control 2.0 – the permanent regulation that would mandate scanning and potentially also apply to encrypted communication (WhatsApp, Signal) – is still in negotiation, not adopted, and talks about it may resume in September. This regulation has been stuck for a very long time precisely because mandatory scanning is unacceptable. Returning to yesterday's vote – the timing of the vote was not chosen by chance. EPP on Tuesday requested the urgency procedure to squeeze the decisive vote exactly on Thursday, on the last day of the last summer session – a time when the plenary hall is always the emptiest and when, as all MEPs know well, one practically cannot count on maximum attendance and a majority. I voted against this urgency procedure because it itself is a circumvention of procedure. The overall result – 314 against, 276 for. The majority of those present was AGAINST extending Chat Control 1.0. But 314 is fewer than 361. The regulation is automatically supported – without majority support. As you can see in the video, during the vote MEPs, including group coordinators (those who usually still know what is happening), asked what exactly was being voted on. Which is understandable. It was a complicated – deliberately complicated – procedure. I have been and still am against this regulation. Not against child protection – against the idea that privacy can be taken away through procedural tricks when it fails in a direct and democratic vote the first time. We will likely return to this. P.S. One good thing in the bad news – Parliament did not limit itself to 'adopt or reject'. MEPs achieved an important amendment – to exclude encrypted communication (WhatsApp, Signal, iMessage) from the scope of scanning entirely. This amendment was supported by 369 votes – meaning platforms with full encryption will no longer be allowed to use this derogation for scanning.
Open referenced post
This year party tents are banned at Lampa. About JV, Progresīvie, ZZS and the desire for such is now evidenced only by barely visible letters under the sticker.
Interesting and valuable conversation about EU structural funds and their planning for the next period, as well as the municipal funding equalization system and other important issues with former colleagues – representatives of @LLPAsoc. https://t.co/KlFpmeYrMc
From@robertszileMust admit that this time the #EUMatrix methodology for the most influential MEPs is very detailed. I found it interesting myself. https://t.co/Vz5tCmrEHm But great joy about the assessment 🇱🇻#10 💪 https://t.co/WlG5KVcsGe
Open referenced post
We can congratulate the party 'Stabilitātei!' for its openness - while some other parties are shy about admitting that they would gladly move closer to Russia and Belarus, 'Stabilitātei!' does not hide it. https://t.co/TaDbegzVmV
@AndrisVelps @Kalniete @IneseVaidere @poznaks @robertszile Here is the answer and explanation: https://t.co/vYTLH1A59H
From@RihardsKolsToday and yesterday I have received more questions and comments on one topic than ever before – the Chat Control regulation. And honestly, the confusion in your replies and questions reflects the same confusion that prevailed in the plenary hall yesterday. There, the fight was not about the substance of the issue, but about what exactly was happening procedurally. I will also try to explain that. First – about my vote. Right now it is hard to say whether it happened as a result of general chaos (quite visible in the video) or my own mistake when pressing the voting buttons, but my intention was (and my previous votes on this matter confirm it) to vote for rejection of the position, i.e., against this Chat Control regulation. I have submitted a request to the EP administration to change my vote to the appropriate one, i.e., FOR rejection of the Council's position. As for the rest. What actually happened – step by step: At the end of March (26 March) Parliament already rejected this extension of the Chat Control 1.0 regulation – 311 to 228. A clear, unambiguous vote. The regulation lapsed in April. Then Roberta Metsola (EP President/Speaker, EPP) herself, in mid-June, called on member states to “put this matter back on the agenda” – the same matter that Parliament had rejected. On 2 July the Council adopted a “new” text – practically identical to what Parliament had already rejected in March. And then – the trick: this text came to Parliament not as a new proposal (where a simple majority of votes would suffice to reject), but under urgency procedure directly in second reading. In second reading, rejection requires an absolute majority – 361 out of 720 MEPs, not of those present. It is important not to confuse two things. Yesterday we voted on Chat Control 1.0 – a temporary, voluntary regime that allows platforms (Meta, Google, Microsoft) to scan private messages at their own choice to detect child exploitation material. Chat Control 2.0 – the permanent regulation that would provide for obligatory scanning and potentially also apply to encrypted communications (WhatsApp, Signal) – is still in the negotiation phase, has not been adopted, and talks might resume in September. This regulation has been stalled for a very long time precisely because obligatory scanning is unacceptable. Returning to yesterday's vote – the timing of the vote was not accidental. EPP on Tuesday requested urgency procedure to push the decisive vote to Thursday, the last day of the last summer session – when the plenary hall is always emptiest and when, as all MEPs know, one practically cannot count on maximum attendance and a majority. I voted against this urgency procedure because it is itself a circumvention of procedure. The overall result – 314 against, 276 for. A majority of those present were AGAINST extending Chat Control 1.0. But 314 is less than 361. The regulation is automatically supported – without majority support. As you can see from the video, during the vote MEPs, including group coordinators (those who usually nonetheless know what is going on), asked what exactly was being voted on. That is understandable. It was a complex – deliberately complex – procedure. I have been and remain against this regulation. Not against child protection – against the idea that privacy can be taken away by procedural tricks when direct and democratic voting fails the first time. We will probably return to this. P.S. One good thing in the bad news – Parliament did not limit itself to “adopt or reject”. MEPs achieved an important amendment – encrypted communications (WhatsApp, Signal, iMessage) are completely excluded from the scanning scope. This amendment was supported by 369 votes – meaning platforms with full encryption will no longer be allowed to use this derogation for scanning.
Open referenced post
From@PeterisJurDone ✅ All 14 list programs for the 2026 Saeima elections - rewritten in plain language. Short sentences, understandable words, original in a separate tab. So that no one votes 'on good looks' because they cannot read the programs. https://t.co/WhDceIL2Sd https://t.co/xkZoTiWT6p
Open referenced post