Regulation on public media content in minority languages is unconstitutional

RIGA - The regulation on the production of public media content in minority languages is unconstitutional, the Constitutional Court has ruled.

As the court stressed to LETA, it is the legislator, while respecting the independence and editorial freedom of public media, who must ensure that the Latvian language, the rights of persons belonging to national minorities, and national security are protected in a balanced way when creating public media content.

The court noted that the foundations of the Latvian state and its national-cultural identity are determined by the Latvian language as the only official language, without which the existence of the state as enshrined in the Constitution is impossible. "Latvia is the only place in the world where the existence and development of the Latvian language, and thus of the fundamental nation, can be guaranteed throughout the ages," the Constitutional Court emphasized.

The constitutional mission of the public media is to strengthen the values inherent in a democratic state, including the Latvian language, by fostering a sense of belonging to the Latvian state, the court said.

The court added that the constitutional identity of the Latvian state implies the principle that the content of public service media must be essentially in Latvian, so that it truly serves as the common language of communication and democratic participation of the whole society, including minorities. However, derogation from this principle is permissible only in order to fulfil other obligations of the state under the Constitution and only to the extent that it does not undermine the status and functions of the official language.

At the same time, as the court emphasized, Latvia as a democratic state governed by the rule of law respects national minorities and their right to preserve and develop their language and culture, which is enshrined in the Constitution.

The court noted that the state must take appropriate measures to ensure access of national minorities to the media and to promote tolerance and cultural diversity. However, the extent of the state's obligations to ensure the rights of national minorities depends on the actual situation of a given national minority in the country, such as its numerical composition, language distribution, access to media, willingness and ability to independently provide access to information in its own language, and other circumstances, the court explained.

In the present case, the Constitutional Court found that the Russian language is self-sufficient in the Latvian media - commercial media in Russian are still widely available. In addition, there are print, audiovisual and digital media, as well as dozens of programs produced by electronic media from other countries, which offer content in Russian.

"Consequently, the existence of the language of the national minority and the preservation and development of national identity are not threatened and persons belonging to the Russian minority are able to effectively exercise their rights in the media space without special state support," the court concluded.

In assessing the contested provisions, the court emphasized that the state’s constitutional duty to ensure its own security must also be taken into account, as this is the only way to guarantee the continued existence of the Latvian state and its democratic system. "Every person’s awareness of significant issues in the life of the state is the foundation of national security and is aimed at building a cohesive society," the Constitutional Court noted, adding that public media play a significant role in the context of national security, which includes the obligation to provide objective and independent information in minority languages regarding essential matters of national life.

Furthermore, this also applies to minorities whose language is sufficiently represented in the media in Latvia, namely the Russian language, the Constitutional Court acknowledged.

The court also stressed that the implementation of aggressive and hostile war propaganda and disinformation measures is one of the main directions of Russia's activities against Latvia and the Baltic states. Russia is forecast to continue such measures. "Therefore, in cases where, for example, it is necessary to protect the public against propaganda and disinformation, it is the public service media which have the task to provide objective information based on facts and to explain its political, legal and social context," the court said.

In the interests of national security, the provision of information in minority languages, including Russian, must be proportionate to the threat to national security, targeted, and justified by an objective necessity; furthermore, it must not jeopardize the status and functions of the Latvian language, the Constitutional Court concluded.

The court also concluded that the content of the contested provisions is too broad. They allow for the possibility that, through Latvian public media, the rights of those minority groups whose language is not self-sufficient in the media and which require special protection may, in essence, not be ensured. Conversely, regarding the rights of those minority groups whose language is self-sufficient in the media in Latvia, the contested provisions allow for an unjustified deviation from the principle that the content of Latvian Public Media must primarily be produced in the Latvian language.

"It is unacceptable for the rights of persons belonging to minority groups to be exercised at the expense of the official language," the Constitutional Court noted.

The contested regulation has been declared invalid as of May 1, 2027, giving the Saeima reasonable time to assess what legal framework would best balance these state obligations in the process of public media content creation.

The judgment of the Constitutional Court has entered into force and is final.

As reported, this case was initiated following an application by members of the National Alliance and United List factions of the Saeima on the provisions of the Law on Public Electronic Media and its Governance on the use of minority languages in public service media.

According to the applicants, the obligation imposed on the public electronic media by the contested norms to produce a certain amount of radio and television programs in minority languages undermines the value of the Latvian language as the only official language in a democratic society and threatens national security. Therefore, the contested norms are incompatible with the words "the Latvian language as the only official language" included in the Introduction to the Constitution and Article 4 of the Constitution.