Also data stated if your write at issue refuse the belief one to younger Russians don’t see Latvian

Also data stated if your write at issue refuse the belief one to younger Russians don’t see Latvian

Most likely there was several “puppet NGOs” reduced by the regulators whose representatives you are going to give something such as which, however ferzu Zaloguj siД™, this really is factually incorrect

3. 16 [See new part 30]: “However, in the view of the Russian-speaking political parties…”. In fact, as all surveys reveal, this view is shared by a large majority of both non-citizens and Russian-speaking citizens of Latvia – thus, this is not just an attitude of some politicians.

4. 17 [See new part 29]: “The integration policy the Latvian government has been pursuing for the past eleven years…” – in fact, the integration concept was officially adopted only in 1999, before that the official discourse was rather one of “de-colonization”. The very adoption of the citizenship law can hardly be regarded as a sign of the government’s goodwill – it was adopted after lengthy delays under the pressure of the Council of Europe: adoption of this law was an explicit precondition for the accession of Latvia to the Council of Europe, and exactly this delay was the reason why Latvia joined the Council of Europe almost two years later than its neighbours Estonia and Lithuania.

5. 18 [See new paragraph thirty two]: “In the opinion of the NGOs, including those representing the Russian-speaking community, young people are typically not interested in learning Latvian and make no effort even to acquire the rudiments, but at the same time hope for automatic naturalisation in the medium term”.

All of the surveys reveal that the information away from Latvian certainly one of young Russian-speakers keeps improved significantly, and therefore from the 95-98% away from moms and dads imagine that experience with the Latvian vocabulary is important for their students, and you can cause them to become learn it really as you are able to. More over, it’s simply impractical to graduate out-of actually pris toward Latvian each year. Indeed, the statement above is nothing more nationalistic label that is obviously slanderous and insulting towards the Russian-talking people and cannot be reproduced from inside the a critical report. Whatever the case, that it declaration can’t be demonstrated given that showing the new feedback of also essentially significant part of the Russian-talking NGOs. The new prejudiced items of the kind you are going to seriously weaken the newest dependability of entire declaration.

Para poder

6. 19 [See new section 33]: it is not clear which “extremist Russian-speaking political parties” are meant (we do have some small parties of the kind, unfortunately, but meetings with them were not included into the Rapporteur’s programme, as far as I know). Besides, it is not clear what kind of “alarmist figures” is meant – in fact, these Russian nationalistic parties do not predict any large-scale (re-)emigration to Russia and put forward quite different slogans.

7. 32 [See new paragraphs 51-52]: It is not clear what 109 advisory boards are meant. At the national level, the Minority Consultative Council attached to the former President G. Ulmanis was functioning between 1996 and 1998 (I was a member of this council from its first till the last meeting), however, after the election of the current President V.Vike-Freiberga, it was abolished. Two specialised boards currently exist. The first one is on minority education issues at the Ministry of Education. Majority of its members represent the Ministry’ bureaucrats and school administrations, and only minority – relevant NGOs, besides, these NGOs are chosen by the Ministry itself, and often they do not represent the genuine views of the persons and groups affected. Under the previous minister Mrs Druviete, the board was not summoned for more than half a year. Most recent information on the board’s activity is available (in Russian) at .