Introduction
Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Latvian civic space has been significantly shaped by regional security dynamics. According to the Centre for Public Policy Providus, Latvia’s proximity to Russia has contributed to a politically tense climate in which civic space issues perceived as conflicting with public security are subject to heightened scrutiny. With parliamentary elections scheduled for October 2026, political turbulence has been building in the country. Following a period of political transition, including the resignation of the previous government and the formation of a new coalition in May 2026, several developments have raised concerns regarding civic space and the enabling environment for civil society organisations (CSOs) in Latvia.
Freedom of Association
Civic space in Latvia remains rated “open” by the CIVICUS Monitor. The number of registered CSOs continued to grow in 2025 and 2026, and progress was made in April 2026 toward a national Civil Society Development Strategy and a national implementation plan for the EU Civil Society Strategy, aimed at strengthening the protection and conditions for civil society. The working group is expected to finalise the draft by 30th September, after which the public consultation process will begin. The plan is to adopt the national strategy by the end of the year. Public support for civil society also remains strong: a March 2026 survey found that 62% of respondents believe CSOs make a significant contribution to society.
According to a report by the CSO Civic Alliance – Latvia (CAL) published in March 2026, access to funding for CSOs showed modest improvements, including government approval of a pre-financing and co-financing system for organisations implementing EU or other foreign-funded projects. Nevertheless, they note funding remains one of the most significant challenges facing Latvian civil society, affecting organisations’ long-term planning, independence and operational capacity.
According to CAL, civil society actors also report growing smear campaigns and hostile narratives portraying CSOs as politically suspect or foreign-influenced, contributing to a more contested operating environment.
Termination of contracts and public debate around NGO funding raise concerns around state-civil society relations; senior political figures criticise and discredit the sector
In July 2026, several decisions to terminate cooperation with civil society organisations raised concerns regarding respect for due process and legal certainty in relations between public authorities and CSOs. In the same period, public discourse surrounding state support to NGOs as well as statements from senior political figures also raised concerns about the operating environment for civil society in Latvia.
On 10th July 2026, Minister of the Interior Jānis Dombrava of the national conservative National Alliance party announced that the Ministry would unilaterally terminate its cooperation memoranda with two civil society organisations working on immigration, citing alleged financial irregularities and national security concerns. The memoranda had been concluded by the previous minister with the organisations Latvian Women’s NGOs Cooperation Network and I Want to Help Refugees (Gribu palīdzēt bēgļiem). In a statement on X (formerly Twitter), Dombrava claimed that “gross violations” had been identified in the implementation of the projects and that law enforcement would investigate the organisations. He also made alarmist and discrediting claims that the organisations had “pretended to integrate people for hundreds of thousands of euros” by, among other things, “taking them to the circus”.
The announcement was linked to an ongoing audit by the Ministry of Finance into a project implemented by the Latvian Women’s NGOs Cooperation Network and funded through the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF). However, at the time of Dombrava’s statements, the audit had not been completed and no public assessment by the competent security authorities had been presented. CSOs argued that individual cases were being used to cast doubt on the civil society sector as a whole and raised broader concerns about the rule of law and democratic governance.
On 13th July, Culture Minister Nauris Puntulis, also of the National Alliance party, issued an order unilaterally suspending an AMIF-funded project implemented by the Latvian Women’s NGOs Cooperation Network. He subsequently requested a broader audit of all AMIF projects administered by the Ministry, before formal assessments of project implementation had been completed. These developments raised concerns about due process, the presumption of innocence, legitimate expectations arising from public contracts and the predictability of state cooperation with civil society.
On 15th July, Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs announced on X (formerly Twitter) that he had instructed the State Chancellery to prepare a comprehensive analysis of state funding for NGOs, further fuelling the debate over NGO funding. He criticised NGOs for receiving state funding from the Society Integration Foundation and European Union funds, arguing that, rather than being non-governmental organisations, “they should be called state organisations, or in fact state agencies”. While stating that he fully supported “genuine” NGOs, he called for an assessment of the effectiveness of public funding for civil society and described certain expenditures, such as fees paid to civil society representatives for attending meetings, as “unacceptable”, despite government representatives receiving the same fees for attending those meetings.
In response, more than 550 representatives of civil society, academia and other experts signed an open letter to President Edgars Rinkēvičs on 20th July. The signatories warned that publicly questioning CSOs and research projects before the completion of formal procedures could undermine legal certainty, academic freedom and civic participation, and called on the President to defend these democratic principles. On 29th July, the youth organisation Protests held a rally in Riga under the title “Hands off NGOs”, expressing support for the role of civil society amid the public criticism.
Further project terminations followed later in July. On 30th July 2026, the Ministry of Culture announced the suspension of a migrant rights project run by I Want to Help Refugees, citing ongoing criminal proceedings against human rights defender (HRD) Ieva Raubiško as the justification for halting the funding. In August 2025, Raubiško, a journalist and activist, was sentenced by the District Court to 200 hours of community service for assisting migrants at the Latvia-Belarus border. As previously reported, she was charged with “organising the intentional illegal crossing of the state border for a group of persons” after helping five Syrian asylum seekers, on whose behalf she had obtained an interim measure from the European Court of Human Rights. Watchdogs, including the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, have expressed concerns about the case as an example of the criminalisation of solidarity. At the end of July, I Want to Help Refugees sent a response letter to the Ministry of Culture, arguing that the decision was unlawful, ran counter to the presumption of innocence and set a dangerous precedent by penalising CSOs for humanitarian work and creating a chilling effect on civic engagement.
On 5th August 2026, Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs met with representatives of Latvian CSOs to discuss public funding for civil society. The meeting attracted public attention, partly because of the Prime Minister’s previous critical comments. He questioned whether existing reporting adequately demonstrated the impact and value of public funding allocated to CSOs and called for stronger reporting and evaluation requirements. According to CSOs, however, the meeting was not constructive and focused primarily on challenging individual organisations and their funding rather than discussing systemic improvements to the funding framework. Without sufficient explanation of how public funding for civil society is structured, such communication risks portraying publicly funded organisations as inherently suspect rather than as legitimate partners in democratic societies.
Continued uncertainty over the future of the Society Integration Foundation
Concerns regarding the sustainability of public support for civil society intensified following discussions initiated by senior government officials on the possible liquidation of the Society Integration Foundation (SIF), Latvia’s main public institution responsible for supporting civil society organisations, social cohesion and independent media. Although the Government established an interinstitutional working group in April 2026 to assess possible reforms following an external audit, public communication has largely focused on the option of liquidation, creating uncertainty about the future of Latvia’s public support system for civil society.
These discussions followed proposals by certain political parties during negotiations on the 2026 state budget in November 2025 to liquidate the Foundation and substantially reduce funding for civil society. Following broad civil society mobilisation, these proposals were withdrawn. While the Foundation has continued its work pending the outcome of the review process, the repeated questioning of its future has contributed to uncertainty within the sector.
Anti-SLAPP law enters into force
A positive development has been the adoption of the Law on the Protection of Persons Engaged in Matters of Public Interest, which transposes the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive into national law. The law entered into force on 7th May 2026 and expands protection mechanisms for journalists, activists and CSO representatives against strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs).
In line with the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive, the law defines what constitutes “acting in the public interest” and sets out criteria for identifying abusive or manifestly unfounded claims. It also allows courts to dismiss proceedings at an early stage where it is clear that their purpose is not to protect rights, but to intimidate or otherwise negatively affect the defendant. Claimants found to have brought an abusive case will be required to cover the defendant’s legal costs and may also face a financial penalty. Amendments to the Civil Procedure Law have also been adopted to increase penalties for the malicious exercise of procedural rights, with the aim of preventing the misuse of court proceedings.
Continued concerns about surveillance of social and protest movements
As reported in the previous CIVICUS Monitor update, in 2025, the State Security Service (VDD) appeared to confirm that it regularly monitors the activities of various civil society organisations (CSOs) and social movements, raising concerns about surveillance and the criminalisation of activism.
As previously reported by the CIVICUS Monitor, in May 2025, Vladislavs Romanenko, a long-time member of the community centre Maiznīca (Bakery), received a decision from the Ministry of Internal Affairs ordering his indefinite expulsion from Latvia and declaring him a “supporter of left-wing extremism and communist ideology”, allegedly because of a lecture he had given on Marxism. While the details of the decision were classified as a state secret, it was widely believed to have been based on a tip-off from an informant. At the end of May, Kaspars Rozitis, who writes on Facebook under the pseudonym Anna Bezmiegs, published a confession claiming that he had collaborated with the VDD and informed on social movements, including Maiznīca and Fridays for Future. According to his account, Rozitis was given a bicycle, paid 600 euros a month and promised a new mobile phone in exchange for providing his handler with detailed reports on public events organised by left-wing groups. He also reported that he had been sent to attend a Fridays for Future protest and to campaign tents for several political parties ahead of the June 2025 municipal elections.
Asked by LSM+ to comment on the allegations, a VDD representative said that the agency would “refrain from commenting on [Rozitis’] statements” and denied that he had ever been an employee of the agency. As noted by LSM+, however, the VDD had been asked whether it had cooperated with Rozitis, rather than whether he had been formally employed by the agency. Concerningly, as previously reported, the VDD did confirm that it regularly monitors various organisations on national security grounds, including assessing whether they “proclaim radical and extreme ideas that would allow the use of violence to achieve the goals of the organisation”.
On 28th July 2025, Maiznīca announced that it was ceasing operations at its existing premises after the owner reportedly asked the organisation to commit to disclosing the names of visitors to all events as a condition for renewing its rental agreement. According to the post, Maiznīca activists had been informed by the owner that the VDD had contacted him. The community centre subsequently resumed operations at a new location.
In December 2025, Latvia’s Constitutional Court began hearing a case brought by Romanenko, challenging provisions of the Immigration Law governing the inclusion of foreigners on the list of persons prohibited from entering Latvia and the procedure for contesting such decisions in court. According to Romanenko’s lawyer, the complaint seeks to challenge current practices under which individuals expelled or barred from the country are not informed of the allegations against them and are therefore unable to respond substantively.
Fire at humanitarian aid organisation’s warehouse
On the night of 19th July 2026, a fire severely damaged the warehouse of “Tavi draugi,” a CSO providing humanitarian assistance to Ukraine and people in Latvia. The premises were broken into and deliberately set on fire. As a result, the organisation’s office, warehouse, and logistics centre sustained severe damage, with donated goods for Ukraine and vulnerable people in Latvia being destroyed. The incident follows previous hostility and smear campaigns on pro-Russian social media channels targeting organisations supporting Ukraine.
Freedom of Peaceful Assembly
The legal framework formally protects the right to protest, but according to Civic Alliance Latvia, in practice, organisers often face administrative and financial obstacles. For example, they note that the legal requirement that a group must have an individual person responsible for safety and public order who has at least two years of experience in managing security measures, as well as mandatory civil liability insurance, places an unreasonable burden on protest organisers and small CSOs and movements.
Largest protest wave in recent history to oppose withdrawal from Istanbul Convention
In November 2025, Latvia experienced one of the country’s largest protest waves in recent history, as mass demonstrations under the ‘Nosargāsim Māti Latviju” (Let Us Defend Mother Latvia) movement opposed a proposed withdrawal from the Council of Europe Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women.
In late October, the Saeima voted in favour of a draft law proposing Latvia’s withdrawal from the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence, commonly known as the Istanbul Convention. Latvia had ratified the Convention only in autumn 2023, under the same parliament. The draft, which was supported by the far-right Latvia First party and several MPs from nationalist conservative and centre-right parties, contained no explanatory report. However, opponents of the Convention justified their stance by claiming it was ineffective in combating violence against women and that it would negatively affect Latvian society due to its promotion of “gender ideology”. Latvia had signed the Convention in 2016 but delayed ratification due to objections from right-wing parties, which argued that its references to gender as a social construct were incompatible with the Constitution and so-called “traditional values”.
On 6th November 2025, more than ten thousand people gathered at Dome Square in Riga alone. According to LSM, several other protests took place across the country – around 270 participants gathered in Cēsis, around 600 in Liepāja, and around 50 in Daugavpils. The Latvian diaspora also held protests in at least 17 cities around the world, including London, Berlin and Helsinki. According to media reports, all the protests passed without any major incidents. However the State Police informed the news agency LETA that two people were detained in Riga in connection with disobeying law enforcement officers and violence against a protest participant.
The protests coincided with growing public opposition to the proposed withdrawal. On the evening of 3rd November, after around 61,000 people had signed a petition opposing withdrawal from the Convention, President Edgars Rinkēvičs announced that he would request a second review of the law. On 5th November, following the President’s decision not to promulgate the law, the Saeima decided to defer the issue to the next legislature.
This mass mobilisation contributed to halting the proposal, despite smear campaigns targeting women’s rights and LGBTQI+ groups, as well as restrictions on CSO participation in parliamentary debates. In October 2025, for example, the association Centrs Marta, which supports victims of domestic violence, reported an increase in threats that affected its work and prompted it to contact the police. A representative of the organisation said the debate surrounding the Convention had “emboldened the perpetrators of violence”.
Numerous other protests took place without incident during the reporting period, covering economic, social, foreign policy and other issues. These included protests in January 2026 supporting demonstrators in Iran and opposing US intervention in Venezuela; a rally in February marking the anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine; taxi drivers’ protests against ride-sharing app Bolt in April; and a Pride parade in Riga in June, which drew thousands of participants.
Far-right party proposes anti-LGBTQI+ amendments to assembly law
In September 2025, the far-right opposition party “Latvia First” proposed amendments to the Law on Meetings, Processions and Pickets that would prohibit minors from participating in events that “promote LGBT ideas and values”. As of September 2026, the proposal remains pending before the Legal Affairs Committee.
The deputies also proposed amending the Children’s Rights Protection Law to state that “a child has the right to freedom of association to the extent that it does not endanger his or her health, life, or morals”. Currently, the relevant provision of the law provides that “a child has the right to freedom of association to the extent that it does not endanger his or her health or life”.
Freedom of Expression
Freedom of expression remains legally protected but faces growing practical challenges, particularly due to rising hate speech and hate crimes, disinformation and pressures affecting independent media and civil society voices. In its 2025 civic space report, while assessing that the environment for freedom of expression in Latvia has remained largely unchanged, CAL notes that CSOs working on gender equality, human rights and inclusion have been targeted by smear campaigns, while journalists and activists reported harassment and risks of self-censorship. While initiatives such as hate speech reporting mechanisms, new protection initiatives and guidelines for journalists marked important progress, the practical environment for free expression remained strained by polarisation and attacks on independent voices.
In a positive development, on 23rd March 2026, the Latvian Journalists’ Association (LŽA) signed a memorandum of cooperation with the State Police, Latvian Regional Media Association and Media Hub Riga to strengthen journalists’ safety and improve cooperation between the media and security institutions.
Parliament’s rejection of civil society nominee to media regulatory body raises concerns
Concerns over media independence intensified following parliament’s repeated rejection of civil society nominees to the public media regulator, raising fears of political interference. On 13th November 2025, the Saeima rejected Jānis Siksne - a candidate selected through an open competition and nominated by the Council for the Implementation of the Memorandum of Cooperation between Non-Governmental Organisations and the Cabinet of Ministers - for a seat on the Public Electronic Mass Media Council (SEPLP). It was the second time MPs had rejected the Council’s nominee, even though the law explicitly requires that one of the SEPLP members be chosen from candidates put forward by civil society. Civic Alliance Latvia described the decision as a “dangerous signal”, warning that it could undermine public participation and the independence of public media.
Concerns about academic freedom and freedom of expression
Recent developments have also raised questions regarding academic freedom. Researchers have been publicly called upon by political representatives to explain research projects and topics that had already undergone independent scientific evaluation and received public funding.
In July 2026, Climate and Energy Minister and head of the parliament’s Public Expenditure and Audit Committee, Kaspars Melnis, told the news portal Delfi that the Committee intended to review previously funded research projects, arguing that the state is a “customer” and that researchers should demonstrate their projects’ “added value”. Three project leaders whose research was funded through the Latvian Science Council’s Fundamental and Applied Research Programme (FLPP) were subsequently invited to a Committee meeting to discuss the usefulness of their work. In his interview with Delfi, Melnis said the Committee would focus on projects “with the most interesting titles”: the three projects selected examine anti-gender discourse, perceptions of same-sex relationships, and democracy.
Antra Boča, Director of the Department of Science at the University of Latvia, said the selection “gives the impression that they were not selected randomly to analyse the quality of the evaluation process, but because their topics do not correspond to specific ideological views.” While parliamentary scrutiny of public expenditure is legitimate, the interventions have prompted concerns about respect for academic independence, the autonomy of scientific expertise and researchers’ freedom of expression.
Russian scholar of North Korea deported ahead of lecture
In another concerning development, on 24th February 2026, Andrei Lankov, a prominent Russian scholar of North Korea, was detained by Latvian police at a hotel in Riga shortly before he was due to deliver a lecture and subsequently deported to Estonia. As documented by Novaya Gazeta, municipal police and border guard officers arrived at the Park Inn by Radisson hotel in central Riga, where Lankov was scheduled to speak on the political regime of the DPRK in a lecture entitled “North Korea: What the Elites Want and What They Fear”. Lankov said police gave no reason for his detention before handing him over to immigration authorities, who escorted him to the Estonian border. Kookmin University in Seoul, where Lankov teaches history, subsequently confirmed to the Associated Press that he had been released and was travelling to Estonia.
Following the incident, the Latvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that Lankov had been declared persona non grata based on information available to the country’s national security agencies. Lankov holds Russian and Australian citizenship and has previously criticised Russia’s war in Ukraine. He has also faced increasing pressure from Russian authorities. After a second administrative case was filed against him in May 2026 under the law on “undesirable organisations”, he announced that he would largely stop speaking to the media, fearing that a third case could lead to criminal prosecution and imprisonment.