Horizontal Accountability
#13Key Findings
In the category of horizontal accountability, Latvia falls into the sample’s middle ranks (rank 13).
The State Audit operates independently, conducting financial, compliance and performance audits of executive and local authorities. The Data State Inspectorate is independent, and is tasked with protecting fundamental human rights and freedoms in the area of data protection.
The judiciary is regarded as independent. The government usually complies with its rulings. The country generally upholds civil rights. Prison conditions are a source of complaint, and migrants have reported ill-treatment by security forces.
Officials must submit asset declarations, and are subject to conflict-of-interest regulations. Public accounting standards help in detecting corruption. The parliament has moderate levels of powers and resources, but committees play a key role in shaping legislation and overseeing the government.
The State Audit operates independently, conducting financial, compliance and performance audits of executive and local authorities. The Data State Inspectorate is independent, and is tasked with protecting fundamental human rights and freedoms in the area of data protection.
The judiciary is regarded as independent. The government usually complies with its rulings. The country generally upholds civil rights. Prison conditions are a source of complaint, and migrants have reported ill-treatment by security forces.
Officials must submit asset declarations, and are subject to conflict-of-interest regulations. Public accounting standards help in detecting corruption. The parliament has moderate levels of powers and resources, but committees play a key role in shaping legislation and overseeing the government.
Graph View
Graph View
Is there an independent audit office? To what extent is it capable of exercising effective oversight?
10
9
9
There exists an effective and independent audit office.
8
7
6
7
6
There exists an effective and independent audit office, but its role is somewhat limited.
5
4
3
4
3
There exists an independent audit office, but its role is considerably limited.
2
1
1
There is no independent and effective audit office.
The State Audit Office is an independent and collegial supreme audit institution. It operates independently of parliament and the government (State Audit Office Law).
The auditor general is appointed to office by the Saeima for four years. The current auditor general was approved in December 2023.
The State Audit Office conducts financial, compliance, and performance audits of executive and local authorities. Both the parliament and the government have full access to the audit findings and conclusions. The State Audit Office also has complete access to the information and evidence required for its audits.
In 2022, it had a 93.1% implementation rate for its recommendations. The highest number of recommendations was for the Ministry of Education and Science and the Ministry of Welfare – both responsible for sectors with major reforms expected (Valsts kontrole, 2024).
The 2022 – 2025 Strategy of the State Audit Office focuses on strengthening the effectiveness of public expenditure, building trust in the public sector, enhancing the impact of the Supreme Audit Office for the public good, and increasing the capacity and professionalism of auditors (Valsts kontrole, 2023).
The audits are extensively reported in the media. The State Audit Office’s Public Council also supports these publicity efforts. Several audits have attracted significant press and public interest – huge financial problems at Rezekne city municipality, public procurement for the military, and the malfunctioning healthcare system in the sphere of oncology.
Citations:
State Audit Office Law. https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/62538-state-audit-office-law
European Court of Auditors. 2023. “Latvia.” https://op.europa.eu/webpub/eca/book-state-audit/en/#h-17
Valsts kontrole. 2023. Latvijas Republikas Valsts kontroles 2022. gada publiskais pārskats. Rīga. https://lrvk.gov.lv/uploads/files/Dokumenti/Par%20mums/Gadap%C4%81rskati/Valsts%20kontroles%202022.%20gada%20publiskais%20p%C4%81rskats.pdf
Valsts kontrole. 2023. “Valsts kontroles darbības stratēģija 2022.-2025.gadam.” https://www.lrvk.gov.lv/lv/par-mums/valsts-kontrole/strategija
5. Valsts kontrole. 2024. “Noslēgtās revīzijas (in Latvian).” https://lrvk.gov.lv/lv/revizijas/revizijas/noslegtas-revizijas
The auditor general is appointed to office by the Saeima for four years. The current auditor general was approved in December 2023.
The State Audit Office conducts financial, compliance, and performance audits of executive and local authorities. Both the parliament and the government have full access to the audit findings and conclusions. The State Audit Office also has complete access to the information and evidence required for its audits.
In 2022, it had a 93.1% implementation rate for its recommendations. The highest number of recommendations was for the Ministry of Education and Science and the Ministry of Welfare – both responsible for sectors with major reforms expected (Valsts kontrole, 2024).
The 2022 – 2025 Strategy of the State Audit Office focuses on strengthening the effectiveness of public expenditure, building trust in the public sector, enhancing the impact of the Supreme Audit Office for the public good, and increasing the capacity and professionalism of auditors (Valsts kontrole, 2023).
The audits are extensively reported in the media. The State Audit Office’s Public Council also supports these publicity efforts. Several audits have attracted significant press and public interest – huge financial problems at Rezekne city municipality, public procurement for the military, and the malfunctioning healthcare system in the sphere of oncology.
Citations:
State Audit Office Law. https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/62538-state-audit-office-law
European Court of Auditors. 2023. “Latvia.” https://op.europa.eu/webpub/eca/book-state-audit/en/#h-17
Valsts kontrole. 2023. Latvijas Republikas Valsts kontroles 2022. gada publiskais pārskats. Rīga. https://lrvk.gov.lv/uploads/files/Dokumenti/Par%20mums/Gadap%C4%81rskati/Valsts%20kontroles%202022.%20gada%20publiskais%20p%C4%81rskats.pdf
Valsts kontrole. 2023. “Valsts kontroles darbības stratēģija 2022.-2025.gadam.” https://www.lrvk.gov.lv/lv/par-mums/valsts-kontrole/strategija
5. Valsts kontrole. 2024. “Noslēgtās revīzijas (in Latvian).” https://lrvk.gov.lv/lv/revizijas/revizijas/noslegtas-revizijas
Is there an independent authority that effectively holds government offices accountable for their handling of data protection and privacy issues?
10
9
9
An independent and effective data protection authority exists.
8
7
6
7
6
An independent and effective data protection authority exists, but its role is somewhat limited.
5
4
3
4
3
A data protection authority exists, but both its independence and effectiveness are considerably limited.
2
1
1
There is no effective and independent data protection office.
The Data State Inspectorate was established in 2001 and now operates under the Personal Data Processing Law (2018). Its independent status is provided for in Article 52 of the Data Regulation. The inspectorate aims to protect fundamental human rights and freedoms in data protection. Therefore, its legal status ensures its operational independence.
The inspectorate is supervised by the Ministry of Justice and financed from the state budget.
The Cabinet of Ministers appoints the director of the inspectorate for a five-year term upon the recommendation of a selection committee. The director of the inspectorate can serve up to two consecutive terms.
Once a year, the inspectorate submits its operational report to the Saeima, the government, the Supreme Court of Latvia, the European Commission, and the European Data Protection Board and makes it available on its website.
Since 2022, the inspectorate has had the right to provide an opinion on draft legislation directly, without additional confirmation from the Ministry of Justice (Data State Inspectorate, 2023).
Citations:
Personal Data Processing Law. https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/300099-personal-data-processing-law
Data State Inspectorate. 2023. “Annual Report 2022.” https://www.dvi.gov.lv/lv/media/2202/download?attachment
The inspectorate is supervised by the Ministry of Justice and financed from the state budget.
The Cabinet of Ministers appoints the director of the inspectorate for a five-year term upon the recommendation of a selection committee. The director of the inspectorate can serve up to two consecutive terms.
Once a year, the inspectorate submits its operational report to the Saeima, the government, the Supreme Court of Latvia, the European Commission, and the European Data Protection Board and makes it available on its website.
Since 2022, the inspectorate has had the right to provide an opinion on draft legislation directly, without additional confirmation from the Ministry of Justice (Data State Inspectorate, 2023).
Citations:
Personal Data Processing Law. https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/300099-personal-data-processing-law
Data State Inspectorate. 2023. “Annual Report 2022.” https://www.dvi.gov.lv/lv/media/2202/download?attachment
Graph View
To what extent does an independent judiciary ensure that the government, administration and legislature operate in accordance with the constitution and law?
10
9
9
The judiciary effectively ensures that the government and legislature act in accordance with the law.
8
7
6
7
6
The judiciary usually manages to ensure that the government and legislature act in accordance with the law.
5
4
3
4
3
The judiciary fails to ensure effective legal compliance in some crucial cases.
2
1
1
The judiciary fails to ensure effective legal control.
Latvia’s judicial system is autonomous and structured into three levels. According to the constitution, legal authority is allocated among district and city courts, regional courts, the Supreme Court, and the Constitutional Court. In 2020, 31% of the population had complete or partial confidence in the judicial system. Meanwhile, 53% of entrepreneurs rated the independence of courts and judges as very high or somewhat high.
The judiciary’s ability to function independently hinges on factors such as the legal education system, which should be inclusive and accessible to all segments of society. Additionally, the jurisprudence of the judiciary reflects its commitment to independent judicial review, upheld by ethics rules and standards. The Latvian judiciary demonstrates a capacity for independent judicial review. This is evidenced by the consistent application of legal principles and the court’s ability to make decisions free from external influences.
There is an ethical code for judges and the appointment process of justices. The appointment process of justices in Latvia, particularly for the Supreme or Constitutional Court, is designed to ensure independence. A study on the freedom of the judiciary conducted in 2021 surveyed 61% of judges and reflected a relatively high self-assessment of the judiciary’s independence. Both the breakdown of responses and the assessment of autonomy at the judicial system level, a particular court, and the individual judge show that Latvian judges rate their personal independence higher than the collective one. The higher the court level, the higher the self-assessment of independence on all issues.
The Judicial Council has approved the following guidelines: the Judicial Communication Guidelines (2023) and the Judicial Communication Strategy (2023). It has also approved guidelines for writing judgments in administrative and civil cases for courts of first instance and appeal. These guidelines aim to improve the quality of judgments and ensure a uniform approach to judgment writing in all courts.
In Latvia, challenging government action through the judiciary is relatively accessible, reflecting the courts’ operational independence. The judiciary’s rulings in significant cases are generally perceived as independent, suggesting a robust judicial system. The frequency with which the government complies with important court decisions, even in cases of disagreement, is a crucial indicator of judicial effectiveness. While the government compliance rate is high in Latvia, instances of noncompliance do occur.
The Saeima declined to confirm Sanita Osipova, former president of the Constitutional Court, as a judge of the Supreme Court. The decision was influenced by debates over her liberal views and past rulings on same-sex couples’ rights. This rejection – amidst concerns about judicial independence and political interference – marks the third recent instance of a Supreme Court candidate not being confirmed. Legal experts and officials, including the president of Latvia, have expressed concerns over this trend, indicating a potential shift in Latvia’s democratic governance and values.
The Constitutional Court ruled that the norms establishing vaccination against COVID-19 as a precondition for participating in parliamentary work did not comply with the first part of Article 101 of the Constitution. The court emphasized that every Member of the Saeima plays a vital role in Latvia as a parliamentary democracy. Even an opinion expressed by just one or a few members of the Saeima is relevant to its work. A Member of the Saeima can represent the people, including the expression of their will, only if they are allowed to exercise the rights crucial to their role.
Overall, Latvia’s judiciary operates with a considerable degree of independence, ensuring that the government and legislature act according to the law, even if there are areas for improvement.
Citations:
The Constitution of the Republic of Latvia. 1992. https://likumi.lv/ta/id/57980-latvijas-republikas-satversme
Augstākā tiesa. 2020. “Iedzīvotāju aptauja: tiesiskuma stiprināšanai nepieciešami skaidri likumi.” https://likumi.lv/ta/id/57980-latvijas-republikas-satversme
Tieslietu ministrija. 2023. Tiesu administrācijas pārskats 2022. gads. https://www.tm.gov.lv/lv/media/10187/download?attachment
Tieslietu padome. Tiesnešu ētikas kodekss. (In Latvian) https://www.tiesas.lv/tiesnesu-etikas-kodekss
Satversmes tiesa. 2023. “Gada pārskats par 2022. gadu.” https://www.satv.tiesa.gov.lv/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/WEB_ST_gada_parskats_par_2022_gadu_pa_atverumiem.pdf
Putnina, A., and M. Alksne. 2021. “Ziņojums par Tiesas Neatkarību.” https://juristavards.lv/wwwraksti/JV/BIBLIOTEKA/PRAKSES_MATERIALI/ZINOJUMS%20TIESAS%20NEATKARIBA_.PDF
Tieslietu padome. 2023. “Tieslietu padome pieņem nozīmīgus ar tiesu darba organizāciju saistītus lēmumus.” https://lvportals.lv/dienaskartiba/352698-tieslietu-padome-pienem-nozimigus-ar-tiesu-darba-organizaciju-saistitus-lemumus-2023
Satversmes tiesa. 2023. “Ierobežojums pret COVID-19 nevakcinētam deputātam pilnvērtīgi piedalīties Saeimas darbā neatbilst Satversmei.” https://www.satv.tiesa.gov.lv/press-release/ierobezojums-pret-covid-19-nevakcinetam-deputatam-pilnvertigi-piedalities-saeimas-darba-neatbilst-satversmei/
Upleja, S. 2021. “Saeima apstiprina Anitu Rodiņu Satversmes tiesas tiesneša amatā.” https://www.delfi.lv/193/politics/53012637/saeima-apstiprina-anitu-rodinu-satversmes-tiesnesa-amata
Kincis, J., Līcīte, M., and Krenberga, O. 2022. “Bijušo Satversmes tiesas priekšsēdētāju Osipovu neapstiprina par Augstākās tiesas tiesnesi.” https://www.lsm.lv/raksts/zinas/latvija/bijuso-satversmes-tiesas-priekssedetaju-osipovu-neapstiprina-par-augstakas-tiesas-tiesnesi.a443985/
The judiciary’s ability to function independently hinges on factors such as the legal education system, which should be inclusive and accessible to all segments of society. Additionally, the jurisprudence of the judiciary reflects its commitment to independent judicial review, upheld by ethics rules and standards. The Latvian judiciary demonstrates a capacity for independent judicial review. This is evidenced by the consistent application of legal principles and the court’s ability to make decisions free from external influences.
There is an ethical code for judges and the appointment process of justices. The appointment process of justices in Latvia, particularly for the Supreme or Constitutional Court, is designed to ensure independence. A study on the freedom of the judiciary conducted in 2021 surveyed 61% of judges and reflected a relatively high self-assessment of the judiciary’s independence. Both the breakdown of responses and the assessment of autonomy at the judicial system level, a particular court, and the individual judge show that Latvian judges rate their personal independence higher than the collective one. The higher the court level, the higher the self-assessment of independence on all issues.
The Judicial Council has approved the following guidelines: the Judicial Communication Guidelines (2023) and the Judicial Communication Strategy (2023). It has also approved guidelines for writing judgments in administrative and civil cases for courts of first instance and appeal. These guidelines aim to improve the quality of judgments and ensure a uniform approach to judgment writing in all courts.
In Latvia, challenging government action through the judiciary is relatively accessible, reflecting the courts’ operational independence. The judiciary’s rulings in significant cases are generally perceived as independent, suggesting a robust judicial system. The frequency with which the government complies with important court decisions, even in cases of disagreement, is a crucial indicator of judicial effectiveness. While the government compliance rate is high in Latvia, instances of noncompliance do occur.
The Saeima declined to confirm Sanita Osipova, former president of the Constitutional Court, as a judge of the Supreme Court. The decision was influenced by debates over her liberal views and past rulings on same-sex couples’ rights. This rejection – amidst concerns about judicial independence and political interference – marks the third recent instance of a Supreme Court candidate not being confirmed. Legal experts and officials, including the president of Latvia, have expressed concerns over this trend, indicating a potential shift in Latvia’s democratic governance and values.
The Constitutional Court ruled that the norms establishing vaccination against COVID-19 as a precondition for participating in parliamentary work did not comply with the first part of Article 101 of the Constitution. The court emphasized that every Member of the Saeima plays a vital role in Latvia as a parliamentary democracy. Even an opinion expressed by just one or a few members of the Saeima is relevant to its work. A Member of the Saeima can represent the people, including the expression of their will, only if they are allowed to exercise the rights crucial to their role.
Overall, Latvia’s judiciary operates with a considerable degree of independence, ensuring that the government and legislature act according to the law, even if there are areas for improvement.
Citations:
The Constitution of the Republic of Latvia. 1992. https://likumi.lv/ta/id/57980-latvijas-republikas-satversme
Augstākā tiesa. 2020. “Iedzīvotāju aptauja: tiesiskuma stiprināšanai nepieciešami skaidri likumi.” https://likumi.lv/ta/id/57980-latvijas-republikas-satversme
Tieslietu ministrija. 2023. Tiesu administrācijas pārskats 2022. gads. https://www.tm.gov.lv/lv/media/10187/download?attachment
Tieslietu padome. Tiesnešu ētikas kodekss. (In Latvian) https://www.tiesas.lv/tiesnesu-etikas-kodekss
Satversmes tiesa. 2023. “Gada pārskats par 2022. gadu.” https://www.satv.tiesa.gov.lv/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/WEB_ST_gada_parskats_par_2022_gadu_pa_atverumiem.pdf
Putnina, A., and M. Alksne. 2021. “Ziņojums par Tiesas Neatkarību.” https://juristavards.lv/wwwraksti/JV/BIBLIOTEKA/PRAKSES_MATERIALI/ZINOJUMS%20TIESAS%20NEATKARIBA_.PDF
Tieslietu padome. 2023. “Tieslietu padome pieņem nozīmīgus ar tiesu darba organizāciju saistītus lēmumus.” https://lvportals.lv/dienaskartiba/352698-tieslietu-padome-pienem-nozimigus-ar-tiesu-darba-organizaciju-saistitus-lemumus-2023
Satversmes tiesa. 2023. “Ierobežojums pret COVID-19 nevakcinētam deputātam pilnvērtīgi piedalīties Saeimas darbā neatbilst Satversmei.” https://www.satv.tiesa.gov.lv/press-release/ierobezojums-pret-covid-19-nevakcinetam-deputatam-pilnvertigi-piedalities-saeimas-darba-neatbilst-satversmei/
Upleja, S. 2021. “Saeima apstiprina Anitu Rodiņu Satversmes tiesas tiesneša amatā.” https://www.delfi.lv/193/politics/53012637/saeima-apstiprina-anitu-rodinu-satversmes-tiesnesa-amata
Kincis, J., Līcīte, M., and Krenberga, O. 2022. “Bijušo Satversmes tiesas priekšsēdētāju Osipovu neapstiprina par Augstākās tiesas tiesnesi.” https://www.lsm.lv/raksts/zinas/latvija/bijuso-satversmes-tiesas-priekssedetaju-osipovu-neapstiprina-par-augstakas-tiesas-tiesnesi.a443985/
How well does the executive branch and its members uphold and safeguard civil rights, and to what extent do the courts effectively protect citizens against rights violations?
10
9
9
There are no limits or constraints on the realization of civil rights.
8
7
6
7
6
There are no significant limits or constraints on the realization of civil rights.
5
4
3
4
3
There are some significant limits or constraints on the realization of civil rights.
2
1
1
There are multiple significant limits or constraints on the realization of civil rights.
Latvia’s national legal and constitutional framework guarantees civil rights. These include safeguarding personal liberty against both state and non-state actors, ensuring the right to life and security, prohibiting torture and inhumane treatment, protecting privacy, and ensuring equality before the law. The judiciary is independent, and the government generally respects judicial independence.
Latvia generally upholds civil rights, with no reports of government-committed arbitrary or unlawful killings or disappearances. The legal system prohibits torture and other inhumane treatments and emphasizes equal access to justice and due process under the rule of law. This encompasses protection against arbitrary imprisonment and ensures fair legal proceedings for all citizens.
Some concerns include complaints about prison conditions, particularly regarding ventilation and access to healthcare. There have been reports of ill-treatment of migrants by security forces. There were challenges in handling asylum requests during the emergency near the Belarus border.
The executive branch actively identifies, prosecutes, and punishes civil rights violations, although challenges remain in fully realizing these goals. Freedom of peaceful assembly and association is constitutionally guaranteed and generally respected. However, authorities may deny public demonstration permits for public safety and national security reasons.
The principle of legal equality and the prohibition of discrimination as fundamental rights are enshrined in Article 91 of the constitution and international legal instruments. According to the World Bank Group’s publication “Women, Business and the Law 2022,” women in the country have legal standing equal to men (U.S. Department of State, 2022). In 2022, the ombudsman received 73 complaints on various aspects of discrimination, similar to the previous reporting period, when 68 complaints were received. Compared to 2020, when there were 49 such applications, citizens are more aware of their rights, the possibilities for their protection, and the need for it.
Citizens have requested the ombudsman’s assistance with allegations of discrimination or unjustified differential treatment related to mobbing, COVID-19 restrictions, gender, age, disability, and health status. However, the ombudsman did not find unequal treatment or discrimination in all cases. Latvia implements policies to prevent discrimination based on various factors, including sex, gender identity, and ethnicity. The effectiveness of these measures, including positive discrimination and special representation rights, varies, but there is a concentrated effort to protect the rights of disadvantaged and minority groups.
The right to a fair trial is a cornerstone of the functioning of a democratic state under the rule of law. The protection of other human rights and fundamental freedoms largely depends on the proper guarantee of this right. Article 92 of the constitution ensures these fundamental rights for everyone, and their broad scope must be interpreted in conjunction with Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as well as the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.
In 2022, the Ombudsman’s Office received 172 applications related to the aspects of ensuring a fair trial, fewer than the 245 received in the previous reporting period. Most of the issues identified in these applications have already been brought to the ombudsman’s attention. An analysis of the statistics for 2022 and earlier years shows a declining trend in mentions of access to justice, the conduct of legal aid providers, the enforcement of rulings, and the grounds for rulings in submissions. For instance, in 2020, the reasons for a decision were raised in 34 submissions; in 2021, this issue was mentioned in 13 submissions; while in the reporting period, it was raised in only four submissions.
In contrast, the number of submissions expressing dissatisfaction with the alleged unfairness of the proceedings has increased, with 34 submissions in 2021 but 42 in the reporting period. These statistics provide only a glimpse of the issues addressed to the ombudsman and do not substantiate whether the situation in Latvia has improved or deteriorated in this respect, as each case requires an individual assessment for an objective judgment. All individuals in Latvia are entitled to equal access to justice and due process under the rule of law. The judicial system strives to maintain this standard, although there are areas where improvements can be made to ensure more equitable access for all.
Citations:
U.S. Department of State. 2022. “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Latvia.” https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/latvia/
The Constitution of the Republic of Latvia. 1992. https://likumi.lv/ta/id/57980-latvijas-republikas-satversme
Tiesībsargs. 2023. Tiesībsarga 2022. gada ziņojums. https://www.tiesibsargs.lv/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/tiesibsarga_2022_gada_zinojums.pdf
Pilsonības un migrācijas lietu pārvalde. 2023. Ziņojums par migrācijas un patvēruma situāciju Latvijā 2022. gadā. https://www.emn.lv/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/ARM-GALA-VERSIJA-LV.pdf
Latvia generally upholds civil rights, with no reports of government-committed arbitrary or unlawful killings or disappearances. The legal system prohibits torture and other inhumane treatments and emphasizes equal access to justice and due process under the rule of law. This encompasses protection against arbitrary imprisonment and ensures fair legal proceedings for all citizens.
Some concerns include complaints about prison conditions, particularly regarding ventilation and access to healthcare. There have been reports of ill-treatment of migrants by security forces. There were challenges in handling asylum requests during the emergency near the Belarus border.
The executive branch actively identifies, prosecutes, and punishes civil rights violations, although challenges remain in fully realizing these goals. Freedom of peaceful assembly and association is constitutionally guaranteed and generally respected. However, authorities may deny public demonstration permits for public safety and national security reasons.
The principle of legal equality and the prohibition of discrimination as fundamental rights are enshrined in Article 91 of the constitution and international legal instruments. According to the World Bank Group’s publication “Women, Business and the Law 2022,” women in the country have legal standing equal to men (U.S. Department of State, 2022). In 2022, the ombudsman received 73 complaints on various aspects of discrimination, similar to the previous reporting period, when 68 complaints were received. Compared to 2020, when there were 49 such applications, citizens are more aware of their rights, the possibilities for their protection, and the need for it.
Citizens have requested the ombudsman’s assistance with allegations of discrimination or unjustified differential treatment related to mobbing, COVID-19 restrictions, gender, age, disability, and health status. However, the ombudsman did not find unequal treatment or discrimination in all cases. Latvia implements policies to prevent discrimination based on various factors, including sex, gender identity, and ethnicity. The effectiveness of these measures, including positive discrimination and special representation rights, varies, but there is a concentrated effort to protect the rights of disadvantaged and minority groups.
The right to a fair trial is a cornerstone of the functioning of a democratic state under the rule of law. The protection of other human rights and fundamental freedoms largely depends on the proper guarantee of this right. Article 92 of the constitution ensures these fundamental rights for everyone, and their broad scope must be interpreted in conjunction with Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as well as the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.
In 2022, the Ombudsman’s Office received 172 applications related to the aspects of ensuring a fair trial, fewer than the 245 received in the previous reporting period. Most of the issues identified in these applications have already been brought to the ombudsman’s attention. An analysis of the statistics for 2022 and earlier years shows a declining trend in mentions of access to justice, the conduct of legal aid providers, the enforcement of rulings, and the grounds for rulings in submissions. For instance, in 2020, the reasons for a decision were raised in 34 submissions; in 2021, this issue was mentioned in 13 submissions; while in the reporting period, it was raised in only four submissions.
In contrast, the number of submissions expressing dissatisfaction with the alleged unfairness of the proceedings has increased, with 34 submissions in 2021 but 42 in the reporting period. These statistics provide only a glimpse of the issues addressed to the ombudsman and do not substantiate whether the situation in Latvia has improved or deteriorated in this respect, as each case requires an individual assessment for an objective judgment. All individuals in Latvia are entitled to equal access to justice and due process under the rule of law. The judicial system strives to maintain this standard, although there are areas where improvements can be made to ensure more equitable access for all.
Citations:
U.S. Department of State. 2022. “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Latvia.” https://www.state.gov/reports/2022-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/latvia/
The Constitution of the Republic of Latvia. 1992. https://likumi.lv/ta/id/57980-latvijas-republikas-satversme
Tiesībsargs. 2023. Tiesībsarga 2022. gada ziņojums. https://www.tiesibsargs.lv/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/tiesibsarga_2022_gada_zinojums.pdf
Pilsonības un migrācijas lietu pārvalde. 2023. Ziņojums par migrācijas un patvēruma situāciju Latvijā 2022. gadā. https://www.emn.lv/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/ARM-GALA-VERSIJA-LV.pdf
To what extent are public officeholders prevented from abusing their position for private interests?
10
9
9
Legal, political and public integrity mechanisms effectively prevent public officeholders from abusing their positions.
8
7
6
7
6
Most integrity mechanisms are effective and provide disincentives for public officeholders to abuse their positions.
5
4
3
4
3
Few integrity mechanisms are effective and provide disincentives for public officeholders to abuse their positions.
2
1
1
Public officeholders can exploit their offices for private gain as they see fit without fear of legal consequences or adverse publicity.
Several mechanisms are in place to prevent public officials from abusing their positions for private interests. Latvia has established public accounting standards to detect corruption. The State Treasury is responsible for developing public sector accounting standards legislation. According to the Latvian Association of Certified Auditors and the Association of Accountants, Latvian public sector accounting standards are based on accrual-based principles (IFAC, CIPFA 2020). The financial statements for central and local governments and government-related entities are broadly International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) compliant, except for accounting for tax revenue, which will continue to be on a cash basis with the ultimate goal of transitioning to an accrual basis for tax accounting.
Regulations concerning party financing aim to prevent corruption and include bans and limits on private income, direct public funding, spending regulations, reporting, oversight, and sanctions. To ensure transparency, legality, and compliance, the Law on Financing of Political Organizations (Political Parties) requires parties to submit key data to the Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau. This information is then published online and includes details on donations, membership fees, election revenue and expenditure declarations, and annual reports.
Officials are subject to rules such as asset declarations, conflict of interest regulations, and codes of conduct; these include income and asset reporting, incompatibilities, sanctions, and oversight. Rules have been established to enhance the transparency of public procurement procedures, covering scope, information availability, and open competition. The National Audit Office has also assessed procurement conducted during COVID-19.
Citations:
1. The Cabinet of Ministers. 2018. “Cabinet Regulation No. 87 Accounting Procedures for Budget Institutions.” https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/297134-accounting-procedures-for-budget-institutions
2. Korupcijas novēršanas un apkarošanas birojs. Partiju finansēšana. (In Latvian) https://www.knab.gov.lv/lv/partiju-finansesana (accessed: 01.12.2023).
Saeima. 1995. Law on Financing of Political Organisations (Parties). https://likumi.lv/ta/id/36189-politisko-organizaciju-partiju-finansesanas-likums
Saeima. 2002. “On Prevention of Conflict of Interest in Activities of Public Officials.” https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/61913-on-prevention-of-conflict-of-interest-in-activities-of-public-officials
Saeima. 2016. Public Procurement Law. https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/287760-public-procurement-law
Latvijas Republikas Valsts kontrole. “Noslēgtas revīzijas.” https://www.lrvk.gov.lv/lv/revizijas/revizijas/noslegtas-revizijas?area=&type=&municipality=&department=&published=1&search=iepirkumi&resor=&start_date=&end_date=
Regulations concerning party financing aim to prevent corruption and include bans and limits on private income, direct public funding, spending regulations, reporting, oversight, and sanctions. To ensure transparency, legality, and compliance, the Law on Financing of Political Organizations (Political Parties) requires parties to submit key data to the Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau. This information is then published online and includes details on donations, membership fees, election revenue and expenditure declarations, and annual reports.
Officials are subject to rules such as asset declarations, conflict of interest regulations, and codes of conduct; these include income and asset reporting, incompatibilities, sanctions, and oversight. Rules have been established to enhance the transparency of public procurement procedures, covering scope, information availability, and open competition. The National Audit Office has also assessed procurement conducted during COVID-19.
Citations:
1. The Cabinet of Ministers. 2018. “Cabinet Regulation No. 87 Accounting Procedures for Budget Institutions.” https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/297134-accounting-procedures-for-budget-institutions
2. Korupcijas novēršanas un apkarošanas birojs. Partiju finansēšana. (In Latvian) https://www.knab.gov.lv/lv/partiju-finansesana (accessed: 01.12.2023).
Saeima. 1995. Law on Financing of Political Organisations (Parties). https://likumi.lv/ta/id/36189-politisko-organizaciju-partiju-finansesanas-likums
Saeima. 2002. “On Prevention of Conflict of Interest in Activities of Public Officials.” https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/61913-on-prevention-of-conflict-of-interest-in-activities-of-public-officials
Saeima. 2016. Public Procurement Law. https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/287760-public-procurement-law
Latvijas Republikas Valsts kontrole. “Noslēgtas revīzijas.” https://www.lrvk.gov.lv/lv/revizijas/revizijas/noslegtas-revizijas?area=&type=&municipality=&department=&published=1&search=iepirkumi&resor=&start_date=&end_date=
Graph View
Do members of the legislature possess sufficient personnel and structural resources to effectively monitor government activities?
10
9
9
As a group, legislative members have access to a range of resources that are suited for effectively monitoring all government activity.
8
7
6
7
6
As a group, legislative members have access to a range of resources that are suited for effectively monitoring a government’s key activities.
5
4
3
4
3
As a group, legislative members have access to a range of resources that are suited for selectively monitoring some government activities.
2
1
1
The resources provided to legislative members are not suited for any effective monitoring of the government.
There is an Analytical Service and a library accessible to the legislature. Established in 2017, the Analytical Service’s functions include research, analysis, and providing sectoral information. It reports to the Saeima Presidium and is also responsible for the parliamentary library, which offers up-to-date periodicals and books.
Research topics may be proposed to the Analytical Service by the Saeima Presidium, the Fraction Council, a Saeima committee, or the leadership of at least two fractions, provided the proposal is signed by at least 20 Members of the Saeima. Research and reports are publicly available and cover many themes. In 2023, there are eight thematic reports (usually 12 pages long) and one synthesis. There were seven researchers at the beginning of 2024.
Overall, the legislature can access the library and request reports from the Analytical Service. However, the effectiveness of these mechanisms in practice can vary. Under current statutes, the Analytical Service can only accept a limited number of requests.
The allocation of staff for parliamentary factions is predetermined and based on the number of members in each group, as governed by a decision from the Saeima Presidium. Every group is entitled to one technical secretary. Additionally, the group size determines the availability of further staff positions: A group with five MPs can appoint one consultant. In comparison, a group with six to ten MPs can appoint both a consultant and a senior consultant. An additional staff position is allocated for every increment of five members in a group.
Despite these regulations, the composition of staff typically remains constant and is not influenced by changes in party representation within parliamentary factions. Staff members are often party affiliates and remain the same even when the party is re-elected. In parliamentary committees, the staff generally stays consistent across multiple terms. They are familiar with experts in relevant fields, as well as non-governmental organizations and public authorities, and their roles stay consistent with changes in political party representation in parliament.
Citations:
Saeima. 2017. “Infografika: Saeimas Analītiskais dienests - zināšanas balstītai likumdošanai.” https://www.saeima.lv/lv/par-saeimu/informativie-materiali-par-saeimu/infografika-saeimas-analitiskais-dienests-zinasanas-balstitai-likumdosanai/
Research topics may be proposed to the Analytical Service by the Saeima Presidium, the Fraction Council, a Saeima committee, or the leadership of at least two fractions, provided the proposal is signed by at least 20 Members of the Saeima. Research and reports are publicly available and cover many themes. In 2023, there are eight thematic reports (usually 12 pages long) and one synthesis. There were seven researchers at the beginning of 2024.
Overall, the legislature can access the library and request reports from the Analytical Service. However, the effectiveness of these mechanisms in practice can vary. Under current statutes, the Analytical Service can only accept a limited number of requests.
The allocation of staff for parliamentary factions is predetermined and based on the number of members in each group, as governed by a decision from the Saeima Presidium. Every group is entitled to one technical secretary. Additionally, the group size determines the availability of further staff positions: A group with five MPs can appoint one consultant. In comparison, a group with six to ten MPs can appoint both a consultant and a senior consultant. An additional staff position is allocated for every increment of five members in a group.
Despite these regulations, the composition of staff typically remains constant and is not influenced by changes in party representation within parliamentary factions. Staff members are often party affiliates and remain the same even when the party is re-elected. In parliamentary committees, the staff generally stays consistent across multiple terms. They are familiar with experts in relevant fields, as well as non-governmental organizations and public authorities, and their roles stay consistent with changes in political party representation in parliament.
Citations:
Saeima. 2017. “Infografika: Saeimas Analītiskais dienests - zināšanas balstītai likumdošanai.” https://www.saeima.lv/lv/par-saeimu/informativie-materiali-par-saeimu/infografika-saeimas-analitiskais-dienests-zinasanas-balstitai-likumdosanai/
Are legislative committees able to exercise oversight of government activities in practice?
10
9
9
The legislature is able to exercise its oversight function.
8
7
6
7
6
The legislature is able to exercise its oversight function most of the time.
5
4
3
4
3
The legislature faces constraints in exercising its oversight function in a significant number of cases.
2
1
1
The legislature’s oversight function is frequently and severely compromised.
The Saeima holds certain powers and resources to exercise oversight of government activities. The assessment of these capabilities can be divided into de jure (legal) and de facto (practical) aspects.
Legally, the Saeima has the right to request and receive information and documents from the government. This is a fundamental aspect of parliamentary oversight and is typically enshrined in the national constitution or in the Rules of Order of the Saeima.
Parliamentary committees have the legal authority to summon ministers to committee meetings. This allows them to hold ministers accountable and ask pertinent questions regarding their departments and actions. Deputies can submit a request to the minister or prime minister to answer questions raised by members. The Rules of Order of Saeima regulate the procedure.
In practice, the effectiveness of the provision process can vary. There might be instances where documents are provided in full and on time, but there can also be delays or instances where the information is incomplete or redacted. The extent to which ministers comply with invitations and provide satisfactory answers can vary. While some ministers may fully engage with the process, others offer limited or evasive responses.
In 2022, the 13th Saeima submitted 11 requests to the prime minister and ministers. No requests were submitted by members of the 14th Saeima in 2022.
Members of the Saeima may also submit questions to the prime minister, their deputy, a minister, and the president of the Bank of Latvia on matters within the competence of these officials. The concerned official shall give the answer in writing or orally at a sitting scheduled to answer members’ questions. In 2022, 91 members’ questions were submitted. The 13th Saeima had 77 questions, and the 14th Saeima had 14 questions. The parliament’s website, www.saeima.lv, provides access to members’ questions and the answers provided by the Cabinet of Ministers.
The parliament is somewhat hesitant to use instruments for government oversight.
Citations:
Saeima. 1994. “Rules of Order of Saeima.” https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/57517-rules-of-order-of-saeima
Saeima. 2010. “Saeimas komisija rīt uz sēdi aicinājusi labklājības ministri.” https://www.saeima.lv/lv/aktualitates/saeimas-zinas/17830-saeimas-komisija-rit-uz-sedi-aicinajusi-labklajibas-ministri
Saeima. 2023. “Saeimas gada pārskats 2022. gads.” https://www.saeima.lv/files/PP/Saeimasgadaparskats2022.pdf
Legally, the Saeima has the right to request and receive information and documents from the government. This is a fundamental aspect of parliamentary oversight and is typically enshrined in the national constitution or in the Rules of Order of the Saeima.
Parliamentary committees have the legal authority to summon ministers to committee meetings. This allows them to hold ministers accountable and ask pertinent questions regarding their departments and actions. Deputies can submit a request to the minister or prime minister to answer questions raised by members. The Rules of Order of Saeima regulate the procedure.
In practice, the effectiveness of the provision process can vary. There might be instances where documents are provided in full and on time, but there can also be delays or instances where the information is incomplete or redacted. The extent to which ministers comply with invitations and provide satisfactory answers can vary. While some ministers may fully engage with the process, others offer limited or evasive responses.
In 2022, the 13th Saeima submitted 11 requests to the prime minister and ministers. No requests were submitted by members of the 14th Saeima in 2022.
Members of the Saeima may also submit questions to the prime minister, their deputy, a minister, and the president of the Bank of Latvia on matters within the competence of these officials. The concerned official shall give the answer in writing or orally at a sitting scheduled to answer members’ questions. In 2022, 91 members’ questions were submitted. The 13th Saeima had 77 questions, and the 14th Saeima had 14 questions. The parliament’s website, www.saeima.lv, provides access to members’ questions and the answers provided by the Cabinet of Ministers.
The parliament is somewhat hesitant to use instruments for government oversight.
Citations:
Saeima. 1994. “Rules of Order of Saeima.” https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/57517-rules-of-order-of-saeima
Saeima. 2010. “Saeimas komisija rīt uz sēdi aicinājusi labklājības ministri.” https://www.saeima.lv/lv/aktualitates/saeimas-zinas/17830-saeimas-komisija-rit-uz-sedi-aicinajusi-labklajibas-ministri
Saeima. 2023. “Saeimas gada pārskats 2022. gads.” https://www.saeima.lv/files/PP/Saeimasgadaparskats2022.pdf
Do legislative committees have the capacity to investigate unconstitutional or illegal activities carried out by the executive branch?
10
9
9
The legislature is able to exercise its investigation function.
8
7
6
7
6
The legislature is able to exercise its investigation function most of the time.
5
4
3
4
3
The legislature faces constraints in exercising its investigation function in a significant number of cases.
2
1
1
The legislature’s investigation function is frequently and severely compromised
The Saeima can establish a parliamentary committee of inquiry if requested by at least one-third of members of parliament. Parliamentary committees of inquiry have the power to request information, invite public officials to their meetings, and order audits.
According to the Law on Parliamentary Committees of Inquiry, these committees will cease to function on the eighth day after the final report has been examined at a meeting of the Saeima unless the Saeima decides otherwise. After the final report is published, the Parliamentary Inquiry Committee sends the proposals for eliminating the identified shortcomings mentioned in the final report to the committees of the Saeima, the Cabinet of Ministers, ministries or the institution of a public person responsible for implementing the relevant proposals.
The authorities mentioned in the final report must review its findings and determine the necessary measures to rectify the identified deficiencies. However, no subsequent report is required to assess whether these recommendations have been implemented, nor is an explanation required if the suggestions are not adopted within a specific timeframe. Consequently, it is not always possible to observe the actual impact of parliamentary investigation on policymaking.
There is a trend that parliamentary committees are established on controversial and politically sensitive issues. On April 8, 2022, a parliamentary committee of inquiry was set up, following an application from 36 members of parliament, to investigate possible government misconduct during the Covid-19 pandemic. The committee consisted of eight members and held 25 sittings. A parliamentary committee of inquiry was also established in 2023. It examined the adverse effects of a restructuring of the financial sector, linked to efforts to strengthen state supervision, on the country’s financial and capital market system. Additionally, the committee investigated the possible insolvency of PNB Bank, the circumstances of the forced self-liquidation of ABLV Bank, and the suspension of Baltic International Bank.
Citations:
Saeima. 2003. Parlamentārās izmeklēšanas komisiju likums. https://likumi.lv/ta/id/75140-parlamentaras-izmeklesanas-komisiju-likums
Saeima. 2023. “Saeimas gada pārskats 2022. gads.” https://www.saeima.lv/files/PP/Saeimasgadaparskats2022.pdf
Vīlipa-Folka, D., Kincis, J., and Līcīte, M. 2023. “Izveido parlamentārās izmeklēšanas komisiju par finanšu sektora ‘kapitāla remonta’ sekām.” https://www.lsm.lv/raksts/zinas/latvija/izveido-parlamentaras-izmeklesanas-komisiju-par-finansu-sektora-kapitala-remonta-sekam.a494147/
According to the Law on Parliamentary Committees of Inquiry, these committees will cease to function on the eighth day after the final report has been examined at a meeting of the Saeima unless the Saeima decides otherwise. After the final report is published, the Parliamentary Inquiry Committee sends the proposals for eliminating the identified shortcomings mentioned in the final report to the committees of the Saeima, the Cabinet of Ministers, ministries or the institution of a public person responsible for implementing the relevant proposals.
The authorities mentioned in the final report must review its findings and determine the necessary measures to rectify the identified deficiencies. However, no subsequent report is required to assess whether these recommendations have been implemented, nor is an explanation required if the suggestions are not adopted within a specific timeframe. Consequently, it is not always possible to observe the actual impact of parliamentary investigation on policymaking.
There is a trend that parliamentary committees are established on controversial and politically sensitive issues. On April 8, 2022, a parliamentary committee of inquiry was set up, following an application from 36 members of parliament, to investigate possible government misconduct during the Covid-19 pandemic. The committee consisted of eight members and held 25 sittings. A parliamentary committee of inquiry was also established in 2023. It examined the adverse effects of a restructuring of the financial sector, linked to efforts to strengthen state supervision, on the country’s financial and capital market system. Additionally, the committee investigated the possible insolvency of PNB Bank, the circumstances of the forced self-liquidation of ABLV Bank, and the suspension of Baltic International Bank.
Citations:
Saeima. 2003. Parlamentārās izmeklēšanas komisiju likums. https://likumi.lv/ta/id/75140-parlamentaras-izmeklesanas-komisiju-likums
Saeima. 2023. “Saeimas gada pārskats 2022. gads.” https://www.saeima.lv/files/PP/Saeimasgadaparskats2022.pdf
Vīlipa-Folka, D., Kincis, J., and Līcīte, M. 2023. “Izveido parlamentārās izmeklēšanas komisiju par finanšu sektora ‘kapitāla remonta’ sekām.” https://www.lsm.lv/raksts/zinas/latvija/izveido-parlamentaras-izmeklesanas-komisiju-par-finansu-sektora-kapitala-remonta-sekam.a494147/
To what extent are the organization and operations of legislative committees effective in guiding the development of legislative proposals?
10
9
9
The organization and operations of legislative committees are well-suited for effectively monitoring ministry activity.
8
7
6
7
6
The organization and operations of legislative committees are, for the most part, suited for effectively monitoring ministry activity.
5
4
3
4
3
The organization and operations of legislative committees are rarely suitable for monitoring ministry activity.
2
1
1
The organization and operations of legislative committees are not at all suitable for monitoring ministry activity.
Committees play a crucial role in the work of parliament. Parliamentary commissions specialize in specific areas of legislation, preparing bills for consideration by the Saeima and exercising parliamentary control over the government’s activities. Some parliamentary committees also undertake additional tasks, such as evaluating the justification of public spending, investigating ethical breaches, or assessing Latvia’s national position on European Union (EU) issues. According to the Saeima’s Rules of Procedure, the Saeima has 16 standing committees.
Committee representatives are elected at the start of each parliamentary term but can be changed later during the parliament’s work. Each committee comprises members from different political groups, with proportional representation of the political forces elected to the Saeima. The exceptions are the Committee on Mandates, Ethics and Submissions, composed of two members elected from each parliamentary faction, and the National Security Committee, composed of one member from each faction. Article 150 of the Rules of Procedure of the Saeima provides that the Saeima may establish special committees to carry out specific legislative tasks.
Subcommittees may be established in addition to the Saeima committees. Their creation and election do not require a vote of the Saeima. Subcommittees may also include members who are not part of the relevant committee. The subcommittee submits its decisions and proposals to the committee. The subcommittee’s work is conducted by a chairman and a secretary elected from among the subcommittee members. A member may serve on up to two standing committees and three subcommittees at any time. A member may hold the office of chairperson of only one standing committee.
In 2022, members of the 13th Saeima served on 18 subcommittees; members of the 14th Saeima served on nine. In the 13th Saeima, a range of standing and subcommittees (commissions) oversee various national governance and policy aspects. Each committee focuses on specific areas, with subcommittees diving deeper into specialized topics.
As a rule, a committee can be chaired by a coalition or opposition member of parliament. Members of opposition parties chair several committees: the Foreign Affairs Committee, the Defense, Home Affairs and Anti-Corruption Committee, and the Sustainable Development Committee. However, the leadership of the committees can change if the political parties forming the coalition change.
The Saeima’s committees play a significant role in the legislative process. Out of 476 proposed laws, 359 were reviewed by committees, demonstrating their active involvement in evaluating legislation. Moreover, the high number of proposals (4,446) assessed in the second and third readings highlights the committees’ detailed scrutiny of legislative content. The acceptance of 207 laws, including 34 new ones, further underlines the practical impact of these committees in shaping legislation. This suggests that committees in the Saeima are actively engaged and influential in the legislative process.
Citations:
Saeima. 1994. “Rules of Order of Saeima.” https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/57517-rules-of-order-of-saeima
Saeima. 2023. Saeimas gada pārskats 2022. gads. https://www.saeima.lv/files/PP/Saeimasgadaparskats2022.pdf
Ministru kabinets. 2023. “Ministru kabineta sastāvs.” https://www.mk.gov.lv/lv/ministru-kabineta-sastavs
Saeima. “Saeimas komisijas un apakškomisijas.” https://www.saeima.lv/lv/14-saeima/komisijas-un-apakskomisijas-14/
Committee representatives are elected at the start of each parliamentary term but can be changed later during the parliament’s work. Each committee comprises members from different political groups, with proportional representation of the political forces elected to the Saeima. The exceptions are the Committee on Mandates, Ethics and Submissions, composed of two members elected from each parliamentary faction, and the National Security Committee, composed of one member from each faction. Article 150 of the Rules of Procedure of the Saeima provides that the Saeima may establish special committees to carry out specific legislative tasks.
Subcommittees may be established in addition to the Saeima committees. Their creation and election do not require a vote of the Saeima. Subcommittees may also include members who are not part of the relevant committee. The subcommittee submits its decisions and proposals to the committee. The subcommittee’s work is conducted by a chairman and a secretary elected from among the subcommittee members. A member may serve on up to two standing committees and three subcommittees at any time. A member may hold the office of chairperson of only one standing committee.
In 2022, members of the 13th Saeima served on 18 subcommittees; members of the 14th Saeima served on nine. In the 13th Saeima, a range of standing and subcommittees (commissions) oversee various national governance and policy aspects. Each committee focuses on specific areas, with subcommittees diving deeper into specialized topics.
As a rule, a committee can be chaired by a coalition or opposition member of parliament. Members of opposition parties chair several committees: the Foreign Affairs Committee, the Defense, Home Affairs and Anti-Corruption Committee, and the Sustainable Development Committee. However, the leadership of the committees can change if the political parties forming the coalition change.
The Saeima’s committees play a significant role in the legislative process. Out of 476 proposed laws, 359 were reviewed by committees, demonstrating their active involvement in evaluating legislation. Moreover, the high number of proposals (4,446) assessed in the second and third readings highlights the committees’ detailed scrutiny of legislative content. The acceptance of 207 laws, including 34 new ones, further underlines the practical impact of these committees in shaping legislation. This suggests that committees in the Saeima are actively engaged and influential in the legislative process.
Citations:
Saeima. 1994. “Rules of Order of Saeima.” https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/id/57517-rules-of-order-of-saeima
Saeima. 2023. Saeimas gada pārskats 2022. gads. https://www.saeima.lv/files/PP/Saeimasgadaparskats2022.pdf
Ministru kabinets. 2023. “Ministru kabineta sastāvs.” https://www.mk.gov.lv/lv/ministru-kabineta-sastavs
Saeima. “Saeimas komisijas un apakškomisijas.” https://www.saeima.lv/lv/14-saeima/komisijas-un-apakskomisijas-14/