Re: Jus' gim'me a «reason» - Ah'll fahnd an a'ticle 'n law fer ya!

Short excerpt, my capitalisation

«Ilze Brands-Kehre:

Freedom of speech should not be restricted UNLESS THERE IS A SPECIFIC
REASON, however, this time Mr. Domburs [host of analytical talk show of
Latvian public TV] was mistaken. By providing a platform to express her
views to Liene Apine [quite prominent activist in one marginal group
advocating what they call "de-occupation, de-bolshevization and
de-colonization" of Latvia], he [I kid you not!!!] LEGITMATED POSITION
of this person and put her on the same level as other participants of
discussion, who [I kid you not!] HOLD SERIOUS POSTS. It is the
responsibility of journalist, and he should not [I kid you not!] ACT
WITH EXTREMISTS in order to POPULARISE AND TO SPREAD THEIR VIEWS in
society.»

So, now the delightful neo-commie byo.. *err* human rights expert and
political analyst is starting to try to influence if not blackmail and
intimidate journalist of our public TV, who is thus far virtually the
only whom I have seen actually trying to talk about and to define
something trying to approach uniform legal standard, when it comes to
limits of freedom of speech. He said: «I believe that there are
serious grounds to evaluate incitement to hatred, if there are serious
infringements, advocacy of violence».

Recently Nils Muiznieks painted on Dombur's show a scary picture of
what would happen in Latvia if people like Liene Apine were to assume
power - Russians would be deported, he would be jailed, freedoms
would be curtailed, yada, yada, yada. The likelihood of flaky and
comical views [both in content and the presentation] like those
advocated by Liene Apine winning approval of even 5% of electorate in
Latvia is currently approaching *err* nil (provided the pseudoliberals
stop assailing freedom of speech making part of public to not turn out
for some sort of misguided protest vote).

On one specific point Liene Apine was, however, absolutely right - it
is Nils Muiznieks who is attempting to subvert democracy in Latvia
*glances in general direction of Peteris C*, although she, as usual,
failed miserably substantiating her points.

It was NILS MUIZNIEKS who WAS IN POWER, and the lesser minions of his
and Brands-Kehre probably were and still are in power or authority
yielding positions in Latvia - not Liene Apine. Thus far it has been
the case that IT WAS HIM - among others - who tried to silence Liene
Apine and - potentially - to even JAIL HER and her compadres under the
"incitement to hatred" clauses, for expressing her views - and not the
other way around. It was him, among others, who tried to impose those
arbitrary, unknown to public limits on freedom of speech in Latvia - by
being one of writers of "expertly opinions" who served in the way of
grounds to institute proceedings against and to prosecute DDD
"paperlet", Liene Apine and few other individuals in Latvia. Not
only did they try to silence her in publicly owned media or the
commercial media they can influence - they tried to banish Garda's
and her privately owned «soap-box» DDD from the «playing field» as
well!

I can find out what the legal limits on freedom of speech in the USA
are - in about 5 minutes, free of charge. I cannot say the same about
Latvia. There is virtually no court practice to speak of, the one there
maybe is, is available in a commercial database, and I have impression
that the standard is "defined" by loosely knit, ostensibly apolitical
group of people who are "invited" to write "expertly opinions" for
Security Police. That can not even be called a "reasonable person's"
standard, because the individuals seem to be selected from a narrow
segment of left leaning academia (and in Latvia there is no trial by
jury), not necessarily even legal experts, some raising serious
questions about their impartiality. Thus far I have only be able to
find out few names (some are mentioned here
http://www.virtualliepaja.lv/modules.php?name=zinjas&file=article&sid=135):

- Nils Muižnieks - who by now rightfully could be called infamous
and scandalous; has been ringleader of «Everything for Sweden!»
(LCHRES); myriad of activities with or for «sorosites» before
becoming Minister for Integration;

- Ābrams Kleckins - dean of department of Communication Studies of
Social Sciences faculty of University of Latvia, whom I personally
deeply respect, but who does not come from legal background; has been
expert with Soros Foundation Latvia;

- Līga Biksiniece - legal expert with State Human Rights Bureau,
DEPUTY EDITOR of Soros Foundation Latvia public policy center's
«Providus» internet portal politika.lv/policy.lv; was supported by
Jaunais Laiks as alternative to Nils Muiznieks; lately has made
headlines by repeatedly expressing (in her official capacity) opinion
balancing on being ludicrous regarding the proposed amendments to
Citizenship law, and, possibly (SHRB did not name author of opinion),
as one of the authors of SRBS opinion, appearing before court had the
opportunity to examine the case, pronouncing illegal withdrawal by Riga
municipality of consent to hold the Gay parade;

- Artūrs Kučs - Director of the Institute of Human Rights of
University of Latvia, Doctoral Candidate, Faculty of Law; frequent
contributor to politika.lv and speaker at conferences held by «Soros»
NGO conglomerate;

- Sergejs Kruks - dean of University of Latvia, a lecturer of
Communication Theories and Discourse Analysis; frequent contributor to
politika.lv, speaker at conferences held by «Soros» NGO conglomerate,
regular participant of various discussions held by politika.lv and
another Soros Foundation's Latvia internet project dialogi.lv; does
not come from legal background;

Impartiality or lack thereof of Sergei Kruk merits, in my opinion,
close scrutiny. He has, for instance, expressed following "ideas"
denigrating Latvia's institute of citizenship, in an introduction to,
incidentally(?), Soros Foundation's financed research on Russian
media in Latvia (my capitalization):

"The new government ACCORDED citizenship rights to the prewar citizens
and their descendants."

A person, who has read 1991. Supreme council's decision as well as
citizenship law, is well aware that what the government did was:
acknowledge that citizenry in accordance with Citizenship law of 1919
continued to exist de iure, and restored de facto their ability to
exercise citizens' rights.

"Most of the Soviet era immigrants were DEPRIVED of the political
rights,"

Does this even merit comment..? In other words, some Sergei Kruk's
views do not materially differ from those advocated by radical Russian
revanchist party PCTVL. His impartiality and political neutrality is
suspect at best and a nonexistent at worst.

- Juris Rozenvalds - Head of the department of Political Sciences
of Social Sciences faculty of University of Latvia; one of the FOUNDERS
of now nearly politically bankrupt leftist «Peoples Harmony Party» -
prominent members were also Janis Jurkans, Boris Tsilevich and Janis
Urbanovichs; has been engaged in «expertly capacities» with or by
«sorosites», politika.lv, dialogi.lv; fairly frequently quoted in or
interviewed in Russian press;

Notice a sort of pattern emerging here..?

Nils Muiznieks is perhaps not the worst of this lefty pseudo-liberals
flock - at least his proposals as to how to (further) restrict
freedom of speech and press in Latvia do not go nearly as far as those
by Brands-Kehre. One can be glad he was voted down for now, but the
campaign to restrict fundamental democratic freedoms in Latvia seems to
be far from over, and there will be another opportunity for Muiznieks
to stand for position when State Human Rights Bureau is reorganized
next year.

These people need to be told off by public in general and be made to
recognize that they themselves remain a fairly marginal (although well
financed and prominent) group as well, - told that, while they can
censor private media they own or control to their heart extent, they do
not own or control, for instance, public TV, - nobody appointed them
to be some sort of censor there, nor is it up to them to restrict
individuals' freedoms they did not invent or «give».

.

Relevant Pages

  • Nice Article
    ... > Freedom of speech should not be restricted UNLESS THERE IS A SPECIFIC ... I have noted this tendency of self-appointed political elite in Latvia ... > "The new government ACCORDED citizenship rights to the prewar citizens ...
    (soc.culture.baltics)
  • Re: Another article about Latvian migration
    ... >> martin wrote: ... Someday it might be that you understand that wanting freedom ... > vision of what Latvia is becoming, ... Please show me where I viewed Belarus in such a light. ...
    (soc.culture.baltics)
  • Re: Another article about Latvian migration
    ... Someday it might be that you understand that wanting freedom ... >> vision of what Latvia is becoming, ... >> you also viewed Belarus in an admiring light when comparison to Latvia. ... It is forbidden explore certain issues, regardless of their eventual ...
    (soc.culture.baltics)
  • Re: Another article about Latvian migration
    ... Martin. ... >> support the education of these people, if they get a job abroad at the ... Someday it might be that you understand that wanting freedom ... Maybe it is good for Latvia ...
    (soc.culture.baltics)
  • Re: Ukraine blames Karlas Red Partisan Momma for Holocaust
    ... Riflemen played an enormously important role in the Russian history, ... Letts/Latvians than the right-wing Waffen SS types is to deny Latvia ... disappointed in Soviet power once they saw what it actually meant.. ... Latvian citizenship until Latvia achieved independence. ...
    (soc.culture.baltics)