• Special Assignments Minister for Social Integration Oskars Kastens: naturalisation rate will grow as soon as the prestige of Latvian citizenship is raised
• Several newspapers continue to report on recent court decisions concerning incitement of ethnic hatred
• Saeima’s Defence, Internal Affairs and Corruption Prevention Committee has discussed possible ways to curtail the circulation of information prohibited by law on the Internet

In an interview with Telegraf, the Special Assignments Minister for Social Integration Oskars Kastens, has stated that the Secretariat jointly with the Naturalisation Board is conducting a study which analyses reasons for decline of naturalisation rate. The Minister believes that naturalisation rate will grow as soon as the prestige of Latvian citizenship is raised. In the meantime, the MP Boriss Cilevics in an interview with the newspaper has stated that there are three groups of non-citizens who do not naturalise:  elder people with low education level who are afraid of any kind of examinations; those who are not sure whether Latvian legislation entitles them to naturalise; and those who believe that naturalisation process is unfair. 

Several newspapers continue to report on recent court decisions concerning incitement of ethnic hatred. Columnist of Chas believes that ruling in the case of neo-Nazi Andris Jordans (sentenced to 1 year and six months of imprisonment for statements inciting to ethnic hatred) in many aspects is a political decision, because he was sentenced on the eve of 16 March. Latvia will probably be reproached again for commemorative events in honour of Latvian Waffen SS legionaries, but now the authorities will be able to point at the Jordans’ case as an example that the state is combating extremist expressions. In the meantime, Latvijas Avize reports that the girl sentenced to 120 hours of community service (for insulting statement towards Latvia and Latvians) has already served a quarter of imposed penalty.

Newspapers report that the Saeima’s Defence, Internal Affairs and Corruption Prevention Committee has discussed possible ways to curtail the circulation of information prohibited by law on the Internet.  According to a representative of the Security Police, gaps in Latvian legal acts hinder control of information on the Internet: the Internet is not defined as mass media, therefore, editors of internet portals are not responsible for content placed by portal’s users; besides, Latvian legislation has a very narrow perspective of hate speech, because article 78 of the Criminal Code envisages criminal liability only for instigation of ethnic, racial and religious hatred. Diena