Latvian Political Monitor

Why are New Unity, the Progressives and the centre “Marta” silent about the sexual harassment of a woman by two immigrants? #LatvijaLatviešiem

To more effectively stop illegal immigrants who try to break into Latvia, the government decided to intensify the border guard system's operational regime until December 31 of this year. The security situation on the Latvia–Belarus border remains serious, and attempts to illegally cross the border clearly show that the hybrid pressure exerted by aggressor states against Latvia's and the European Union's external border continues. State border security is not a negotiable issue – it is one of our absolute priorities. Therefore, the enhanced border guard regime will be maintained as long as the security situation requires, without any compromises at the expense of state security. Latvia is ready to react immediately and decisively to any threat, ensuring close coordinated action by the State Border Guard, State Police, National Armed Forces, and other involved institutions. ❗️During the regime, a significantly harsher punishment provided for in the Criminal Law is also in force for the illegal movement of a person across the state border and for deliberately providing a person with the opportunity to stay illegally in Latvia. Video: LTV

The President announces amendments to the State Civil Service Law

Amendments that will increase politicians' ability to exert pressure on officials they find undesirable. @Progresivie called for not promulgating these hasty and ill-considered amendments. In the conversation at Riga Castle, the promoters of the changes clearly lacked arguments as to why this is necessary. https://t.co/aLs2x4aSp1

Just now in the government we decided that from January 1 next year, families will be able to use the Honorary Family Certificate and its opportunities until the youngest child reaches adulthood or 24 years of age if they are in education, or until they perform 11 months of state defense service.

A person can be held liable for arbitrariness (Criminal Law §279) only if their actions caused substantial harm. In @Valsts_policija's communication there is not even a hint of how @elnormous's communication with hackers significantly endangered the interests of LVM. https://t.co/RdAisYAIzI

An explanation about one initially inaccurate tweet is certainly important to the minister, but it has little to do with the essence of the matter. I would still very much like an answer as to whether the process against the blogger was initiated on the initiative of @Valsts_policija or based on LVM's submission? https://t.co/deX8zlVfbB

The Minister of the Interior relies on information provided to him by officials of subordinate institutions, including officials of the State Police. In connection with the widely discussed case of a possible criminal proceeding against an IT blogger, I have established that a high-ranking State Police official initially provided the Minister of the Interior with inaccurate information about the absence of criminal proceedings against the specific person. I apologize to the public for having further disseminated the initially provided State Police information. It is essential that people in the internal affairs system can trust each other and rely on the truthfulness and accuracy of the information provided. This morning I had a conversation with the specific State Police official. I have issued a reprimand that such practice is not acceptable. I warned the State Police that this is the first and last reprimand. Regardless of the official's rank, disciplinary proceedings will be initiated in the future against officials for providing false or misleading information to the Minister of the Interior. I emphasize that the police have full rights to conduct justified investigations and procedural actions. At the same time, they must be able to justify the legality of their actions to the public. Currently, the primary task is to ensure a swift investigation of the crime committed against LVM.

@AnsisEgle @1comhunter @saliktengriba @Valsts_policija Please express your own opinions :) Video recordings can be used to uncover violations and prove that they were committed. The point is that the police have reason to know who sends them information, as well as to ascertain when/where the video was filmed.

@KasparsMelkis @janis_puja Criminal Law Article 183. If there is an organized group - then Article 184. And also Articles 241-244.1. https://t.co/5gaCgsKbhI

The police may have questions for @elnormous. However, asking them does not require another criminal process, especially with a not very clear qualification of the offense. The crime was committed by hackers, not Elvis, who managed to find them and contact them. https://t.co/lSTAakem5L