Egils Levits
Valsts prezidents prasa novērst iespējas mīkstināt vai apiet totalitāro režīmu simbolu izmantošanas aizliegumu publiskos pasākumos
On 2 May, President of Latvia returned the amendments to the Law on Safety of Public Entertainment and Festivity Events adopted by the parliament on 23 April 2020 to the Saeima for reconsideration. Amendments adopted by the Saeima provided a detailed list of restrictions applicable under the existing ban on public display of totalitarian symbols (communist and Nazi symbols).

Amendments adopted by the parliament explicitly ban all public use of clothing (uniforms), elements of clothing or full attire (clothing, accessories, insignia, cockades, shoulder straps, apparel) of the armed forces, law enforcement agencies and security services (services of repressive regimes) of former Soviet Union, its republics and Nazi Germany bearing clear and distinct visual resemblance to attire used by these armed force units or services of repressive regimes.

President of Latvia Egils Levits welcomes the adoption of amendments by the parliament. These amendments will make application of the ban on use of symbols of both totalitarian regimes provided in the Law on Safety of Public Entertainment and Festivity Events more efficient and targeted. ‘Public display or use of symbols and insignia of both totalitarian regimes to glorify their ideology or evoke nostalgic sentiments about these regimes, and thus make these regimes relevant again, promote them among the masses, or reintroduce them into public discourse as ‘normal topics’, should not be acceptable or possible in a democratic society,’ said the President in his letter to Saeima.

In his letter to the parliament, Egils Levits also reminds that ‘Preamble of the Constitution of the Republic of Latvia clearly states that government and people should condemn totalitarian ideologies and crimes committed by Communist and Nazi regimes. One of the ways to condemn these regimes, their symbols and totalitarian and criminal nature, is to ban public use of any attributes of such regimes’.

In addition to returning the initiative to Saeima, President has also urged the parliament to clarify certain technical aspects of the proposal to avoid any possible confusion about the scope of application of the law.

Egils Levits underlines that legislature must use its discretion to define all cases when that ban imposed by law should not be applied. Current provisions of the law allow to use these symbols during public events that do not glorify either of totalitarian regimes or justify crimes committed by them. However, in addition to such exclusions, Saeima has also proposed to allow local governments authorise use of banned symbols. According to the President, that is not acceptable.

In his letter to the parliament, President of Latvia Egils Levits underlines that such provisions might lead to legal ambiguity and undermine the overall national policy and uniform interpretation of the ban on use of totalitarian symbols. Proposed text of the law might lead to different understanding and application of these provisions across various municipalities.

President Levits urges Saeima to revoke proposed provision entitling local governments to make exclusions in application of the ban. ‘The principle of good law requires legislature to clear any doubts about the scope of application in early stages of the drafting. Parliament should avoid creating any loopholes or possibility to render the ban useless,’ says the letter of the President.

Egils Levits also indicates that Law on Safety of Public Entertainment and Festivity Events should clearly specify the responsibility of event organisers and participants and visitors of public events for implementation of the ban imposed by the law, including ban on the use of symbols of both totalitarian regimes.

Bans imposed through the Law on Safety of Public Entertainment and Festivity Events are mandatory for organisers of public events and also their participants and guests. Law should clearly state that administrative penalties for breach of ban imposed by law will apply to both the organisers and participants and visitors of public events.