DEFENSE CONCEPT THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE - PROTECTING VALUES FOR THE SUSTAINABILITY OF SOCIETY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17770/etr2025vol5.8511Keywords:
boundaries of freedom, fundamental values, ideologies, militant democracyAbstract
The pivotal function of independent institutions in the adjudication of legally binding decisions, in accordance with the rule of law and the fundamental principles of the Latvian legal system, is evident. These institutions serve to clarify and adjust the applicability of general concepts to specific cases that are the subject of dispute. The unique geopolitical situation of Latvia is a perpetual reminder of the ambiguity with which its state institutions are regarded by the public and other state-level actors. A fundamental and diametrically opposed clash of opinions within the framework of the state itself (between various stakeholders, members of society, political players, institutions) and in the mass media environment, inciting long-term disagreements and turbulence, can literally be created by a few words or one sentence, one illustration, from the context of which the author's opinion on global issues of Latvian history and political position can be interpreted more broadly. The concept of militant democracy involves the potential questioning and challenging of the very guarantees of defending freedoms and human rights. The article provides a critical overview of the latest amendments to legislation and court practice, thereby establishing a unique insight into the ability and methods of all three powers of the state in strengthening and defending state values in times of turbulence.
References
V. Veebel, “Strategic Challenges for Baltic States in Dangerous Times,” Journal on Baltic Security, vol. 9(2), pp.1-4, 2023.
R. Kuokštytė, “EU Defence Policy: Between Functionalism, National Interests, And Transatlantic Realities,” Baltic Journal of Law & Politics, vol.16:2, pp. 23–46, 2023.
J. Pleps, Pašaizsargājošās demokrātijas princips (The Principle of Militant Democracy). Jurista Vārds, vol. 51/52 (1317/1318), pp. 12-17, Dec. 2023.
I. Švarca, Pārejas perioda taisnīguma mehānismi demokrātiskā Latvijā (Transition period justice mechanisms in democratic Latvia). Jurista Vārds, vol. 31 (1141), pp. 24-30, Aug. 2020.
C. Coglianese, “Law as Scapegoat,” in The crisis and confidence in legislation. Eds. N. Lupo, N. Rangone, and M. De Benedetto. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2020, pp. 337-365.
G.Zemītis, Drošības aspekti Latvijas vēsturē (Security aspects in the history of Latvia), Rīga: LU Akadēmiskais apgāds, 2023, p. 448.
D. Šulmane, “Ideology, Nationalism and Law: Legal Tools for an Ideological Machinery in Latvia,” Wroclaw Review of Law, Administration & Economics, vol. 5(1), pp. 61-78, Jun.2015.
Satversmes tiesas 2006. gada 15. jūnija spriedums lietā Nr. 2005-13-0106, para.17.
Satversmes tiesas 2006. gada 11. aprīļa spriedums lietā Nr. 2005-24-01, para. 10.
ECHR case of Sisojeva and Others v. Latvia, no. 60654/00. 15.01.2007.; ECHR case of Tatjana Slivenko and Others v. Latvia, no. 48321/99. 09.10.2003.
J. Pleps, Pašaizsargājošās demokrātijas princips (The Principle of Militant Democracy). Jurista Vārds, vol. 51/52 (1317/1318), pp. 12-17, Dec. 2023.
K.Fedorova and N.Tshuikina, “From “Oppressors” to “Oppressed”: Baltic Russian Post-Soviet Speakers in Search of a New Identity through Social Networking,” Regional Studies of Russia, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia, vol. 13(1), pp. 29–53, 2024.
D. Bleiere, I. Butulis, I. Feldmanis, A. Stranga and A. Zunda, Latvijas vēsture. 20. gadsimts (History of Latvia. 20th Century). Rīga: Jumava, 2005, p.144.
The Supreme Court of Latvia, 30.04.2013. Case no. SKA-172/2013, A42945009, para.19.
Satversmes tiesas 2018. gada 29. jūnija spriedums lietā Nr. 2017-25-01, para. 20.
The Supreme Court of Latvia, 16.02.2017. Case no. C30706512, SKC-26/2017.
Administratīvās apgabaltiesas 2017. gada 2. janvāra sprieduma lietā Nr. A420261115, AA43-0189-17/8, para. 3.2.
A. Vilks, A. Kipane, and A. Krivins. “Preventing international threats in the context of improving the legal framework for national and regional security,” Social & Legal Studios, vol. 7(1), pp. 97-105, 2024.
The Supreme Court of Latvia, Case no. A420229620, SKA-88/2024 ECLI:LV:AT:2024:1105.A420229620.14.S, 05.11.2024.
The Supreme Court of Latvia, Case no. A420209922, SKA-112/2024, ECLI:LV:AT:2024:1125.A420209922.7.S. 25.11.2024, para 18.
T. Rostoks and K.E. Kanasta, “Foreign and Domestic Policy Implications of Latvia’s Reaction to Russia’s Aggression against Ukraine,” Journal on Baltic Security, vol. 9(2): pp. 5-28, Nov. 2023.
National Electronic Media Council (Nacionālā elektronisko plašsaziņas līdzekļu padome), LĒMUMS Nr. 199/1-2 (18012000000723-2), 18.05.2023. Available: https://www.lmepadome.lv/jaunumi/params/post/4294691/latvijas-mediju-etikas-padome-uzskata-par-nesamerigu-nedemokratisku-un-biro [Accessed Mar. 19, 2025].
Public Electronic Media Council, “Atzinums par 2024. gada 24. februārī LSM.lv publicēto “Cūku komiksu”” (Opinion on the Pig Comic published on 24 February 2024 on LSM.lv), Nr. 6/6-3, 12.03.2024. Available: https://www.seplp.lv/lv/media/2022/download?attachment [Accessed Mar. 19, 2025].
Editorial Board of Latvian Radio, “Vārda brīvības robežas sašaurinās” (The boundaries of freedom of speech are narrowing). 04.05.2024. Available: https://latvijasradio.lsm.lv/lv/par-mums/informacija-presei/?id=994 [Accessed Feb. 12, 2025].
E.Levits, “Demokrātijai ir pienākums sevi aizsargāt” (Democracy has a duty to protect itself), Jurista vārds. Dec.2014.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Dace Šulmane
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.