Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2013, Publicación: 103ª reunión CIT (2014)

Convenio sobre la discriminación (empleo y ocupación), 1958 (núm. 111) - Letonia (Ratificación : 1992)

Legislative developments. The Committee welcomes the adoption on 29 November 2012 of the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination of Natural Persons Engaged in Economic Activity which prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender, religious, political or other convictions, sexual orientation, disability, race or ethnic origin with respect to access to self-employment. The Committee requests the Government to examine the possibility of including colour and social origin in the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Law on Prohibition of Discrimination of Natural Persons Engaged in Economic Activity and to provide information on the application of the law in practice, including any violations detected by or brought to attention of labour inspectors or other competent authorities.

Discrimination on the basis of national extraction. The Committee welcomes the amendment of the Labour Law on 21 June 2012, to include a new provision according to which “it is prohibited to indicate a skill of specific foreign language in a job advertisement, except when it is justifiably necessary for the performance of work duties” (section 32(21)) and therefore improves equal opportunities for minority language groups. The Committee recalls that for a number of years, it has expressed concern, over certain provisions of the Law on State Language of 1999, which might have a discriminatory effect on the employment or work of minority groups. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government on the numerous Latvian language courses offered to children and adults of minority groups by the Latvian Language Agency (LLA). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the number of violations for not mastering the official language to the extent necessary to perform professional duties or duties of office remained relatively stable from 2005 to 2012 (between 529 and 544). The Committee however notes that the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) indicates that the list of occupations in the private sector which “affect the lawful interests of the public” – which means occupations in which the official language shall be used in accordance with section 6(2) of the Law on State Language – has been repeatedly expanded and now includes over 1,000 professions. According to the ECRI “the progressive tightening of the regulations on language use and raising of the sanctions for violations of the Law on State Language is creating an inquisitorial climate which is very likely to deteriorate inter-ethnic relations (notably with the Russian speaking population), as well as affect migrants’ ability to integrate in Latvian society” (CRI(2012)3, 9 December 2011, paragraph 62). The Committee considers that discrimination based on national extraction can occur when legislation imposing a State language for employment in public and private sector activities is interpreted and implemented too broadly, and as such disproportionately and adversely affects the employment and occupational opportunities of minority language groups (General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraph 764). Furthermore, it recalls that any limitation regarding access to employment must be required by the characteristics of the particular job, and be in proportion to its inherent requirements. The Committee asks the Government to take measures to ensure that workers from minority groups are effectively protected against discrimination in employment and occupation, including measures to ensure that the level of language proficiency required does not disproportionately affect them as regards access to employment and occupation, both in the private and public sectors. The Committee also asks the Government to assess the impact of such limitations on the employment of members of minority groups, and to review and revise the list of occupations for which the use of the official language is required under section 6(2) of the Law on State Language to ensure that the language prerequisite is based on the inherent requirements of the particular job. The Government is asked to provide information on the measures taken in this respect.

Discrimination on the basis of political opinion. The Committee recalls its previous comments regarding the provisions of the State Civil Service Act, 2000, which sets out as mandatory requirements in order to qualify as a candidate for any civil service position that the person concerned “is not or has not been in a permanent staff position in the state security service, intelligence or counter-intelligence service of the USSR, the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic (SSR) or some foreign State” (section 7(8)), or “who are not or have not been the members of organizations banned by laws or court rulings” (section 7(9)). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that there is no list of the organizations referred to in section 7(9) of the Act. It also notes the Government’s explanation that these provisions which take into account the historical situation in Latvia, intend to ensure a loyal and politically neutral state administration. The Committee remains concerned that such broad exclusions from being a candidate for any civil service position as provided by section 7(8) and (9) are not sufficiently well defined and delimited, and could result in discrimination in employment and occupation on the basis of political opinion. It further recalls that political opinion may be taken into account as an inherent requirement only for certain posts involving special responsibilities directly concerned with developing government policy. The Committee urges the Government to revise section 7 of the State Civil Service Act to ensure that any requirements to apply for a position in the public service are based on the inherent requirements of the particular job, as strictly defined. The Committee also asks the Government to provide information on the application of sections 7(8) and (9) of the State Civil Service Act in practice, including any available data on the number of candidates to a civil servant position whose application has been rejected on the basis of these provisions and the functions concerned.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2014.]