Raihman v. Latvia

Last updated

Raihman v. Latvia (Communication No. 1621/2007) was a case decided by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in 2010 (UN Document CCPR/C/100/D/1621/2007).

Contents

Facts and proceedings

Mr. Raihman, a Latvian national and member of Jewish and Russian-speaking minorities, was born in 1959. His name and surname were registered as "Леонид Райхман" by USSR authorities, and used until 1998, when he received a Latvian non-citizen's passport with the name and surname amended to "Leonīds Raihmans", with the ending -s required for most masculine names in Latvian.

In 2004, he applied to the State Language Centre to have his name and surname spelled as Leonid Raihman. The applications was rejected, as were the appeals before Latvian courts.

In 2007, Raihman has filed a complaint before HRC, being represented by Latvian Human Rights Committee co-chairman A. Dimitrovs.

HRC views

The Committee found that

the interference entailed for the author presents major inconveniences, which are not reasonable, given the fact that they are not proportionate to the objective sought. While the question of legislative policy, and the modalities to protect and promote official languages is best left to the appreciation of the State parties [..] the forceful addition of a declinable ending to a surname, which has been used in its original form for decades, and which modifies its phonic pronunciation, is an intrusive measure, which is not proportionate to the aim of protecting the official State language. Relying on the previous jurisprudence, where it held that the protection offered by article 17 encompassed the right to choose and change one's own name, the Committee considers that this protection a fortiori protects persons from being passively imposed a change of name by the State party. The Committee therefore considers that the State party's unilateral modification of the author's name on official documents is not reasonable, and thus amounted to arbitrary interference with his privacy, in violation of article 17 of the Covenant

Human Rights Committee, Doc. CCPR/C/100/D/1621/2007 (para. 8.3.)

Therefore, the Committee did not consider it necessary, to evaluate the case under articles 26 (non-discrimination), 27 (minority rights) and 2 in conjunction with 17, to which Raihman had referred (para. 8.4.).

Two members of the HRC, Krister Thelin and Rafael Rivas Posada, submitted a dissent, seeing no violation of ICCPR in the case.

Aftermath

Mr. Raihman had applied for the court to review his case due to HRC views. The Supreme Court of Latvia decided that the views are a ground to review the case in the executive, in the specific case — in the State Language Centre. [1] Mr. Raihman has gone through court proceedings again; in 2017, the Supreme Court refused to record his name in documents without Latvian endings. [2]

In 2012, the government of Latvia has responded to the Committee that is "sees no need for an immediate action to amend the existing national regulation of writing personal names in official documents. At the same time, the Government will take into account the opinion of the Committee in the possible further discussions on that issue on national level". [3]

The views in Raihman v. Latvia case have been referenced by the UN Human Rights Committee in a later case of Bulgakov v. Ukraine. [4]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights</span> Treaty adopted by United Nations General Assembly in 1965

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is a multilateral treaty that commits nations to respect the civil and political rights of individuals, including the right to life, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, electoral rights and rights to due process and a fair trial. It was adopted by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) on 16 December 1966 and entered into force 23 March 1976 after its thirty-fifth ratification or accession. As of June 2022, the Covenant has 173 parties and six more signatories without ratification, most notably the People's Republic of China and Cuba; North Korea is the only state that has tried to withdraw.

The United Nations Human Rights Committee is a treaty body composed of 18 experts, established by a 1966 human rights treaty, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The Committee meets for three four-week sessions per year to consider the periodic reports submitted by the 173 States parties to the ICCPR on their compliance with the treaty, and any individual petitions concerning the 116 States parties to the ICCPR's First Optional Protocol. The Committee is one of ten UN human rights treaty bodies, each responsible for overseeing the implementation of a particular treaty.

<i>Multani v Commission scolaire Marguerite‑Bourgeoys</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

Multani v Commission scolaire Marguerite‑Bourgeoys, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 256, 2006 SCC 6 is a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in which the Court struck down an order of a Quebec school authority, that prohibited a Sikh child from wearing a kirpan to school, as a violation of freedom of religion under section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This order could not be saved under section 1 of the Charter.

Stefan Nystrom was a long-time resident of Australia who was deported to Sweden in 2006. He won a landmark decision at the United Nations in 2011, establishing that non-citizens may also have the right to enter a country.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human rights in Latvia</span>

Human rights in Latvia are generally respected by the government, according to the US Department of State and Freedom House. Latvia is ranked above-average among the world's sovereign states in democracy, press freedom, privacy and human development. The country has a relatively large ethnic Russian community, which has basic rights guaranteed under the constitution and international human rights laws ratified by the Latvian government.

<i>Toonen v. Australia</i> Court case

Toonen v. Australia was a landmark human rights complaint brought before the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) by Tasmanian resident Nicholas Toonen in 1994. The case resulted in the repeal of Australia's last sodomy laws when the Committee held that sexual orientation was included in the antidiscrimination provisions as a protected status under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights</span> 1966 United Nations treaty

The First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is an international treaty establishing an individual complaint mechanism for the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). It was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 16/12/1966, and entered into force on 23/03/1976. As of January 2023, it had 117 state parties and 35 signatories. Two of the ratifying states have denounced the protocol.

Latvian names, like in most European cultures, consist of two main elements: the given name (vārds) followed by family name (uzvārds). During the Soviet occupation the practice of giving a middle name was discouraged, but since the restoration of independence, Latvian legislation again allows the giving of up to two given names and it has become more common to give a middle name to children.

Human rights in Estonia are acknowledgedas being generally respected by the government. Nevertheless, there are concerns in some areas, such as detention conditions, excessive police use of force, and child abuse. Estonia has been classified as a flawed democracy, with moderate privacy and human development in Europe. Individuals are guaranteed on paper the basic rights under the constitution, legislative acts, and treaties relating to human rights ratified by the Estonian government. Estonia was ranked 4th in the world by press freedoms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Latvian Human Rights Committee</span>

Latvian Human Rights Committee is a non-governmental human rights organization in Latvia. It is a member of international human rights and anti-racism NGOs FIDH, AEDH. Co-chairpersons of LHRC are Vladimir Buzayev and Natalia Yolkina. According to the authors of the study "Ethnopolitics in Latvia", former CBSS Commissioner on Democratic Institutions and Human Rights Ole Espersen "had visited LHRC various times and had used mostly the data of that organisation in his views on Latvia".

Waldman v. Canada was a case decided by the UN Human Rights Committee in 1999.

Ignatāne v. Latvia was a case decided by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in 2001.

J.G.A. Diergaardt et al. v. Namibia (2000) was a case decided by the United Nations Human Rights Committee.

Ballantyne, Davidson, McIntyre v. Canada was a case on Quebec's language law submitted in 1989 and decided by the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations in 1993.

Arenz, Röder and Dagmar v. Germany was a case decided by the UN Human Rights Committee in 2004.

Expression of racism in Latvia include racist discourse by politicians and in the media, as well as racially motivated attacks. European Commission against Racism and Intolerance notes some progress made in 2002–2007, mentioning also that a number of its earlier recommendations are not implemented or are only partially implemented. The UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance highlight three generally vulnerable groups and communities: ethnic Russians who immigrated to Latvia under USSR, the Roma community and recent non-European migrants. Besides, he notes a dissonance between "opinion expressed by most State institutions who view racism and discrimination as rare and isolated cases, and the views of civil society, who expressed serious concern regarding the structural nature of these problems".

The Republic of Vanuatu is a parliamentary democracy with a population of approximately 326.000. The Constitution of Vanuatu is supreme law and sets out the legal framework which deals with the respect of human rights.

<i>Ross v New Brunswick School District No 15</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

Ross v New Brunswick School District No 15 [1996] 1 S.C.R. 825, is a Supreme Court of Canada decision.

The Republic of Uruguay is located in South America, between Argentina, Brazil and the South Atlantic Ocean, with a population of 3,332,972. Uruguay gained independence and sovereignty from Spain in 1828 and has full control over its internal and external affairs. From 1973 to 1985 Uruguay was governed by a civil-military dictatorship which committed numerous human rights abuses.

The International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance is a document which attempts to "clarify how international human rights law applies in the current digital environment". Communications surveillance conflicts with a number of international human rights, mainly that of privacy. As a result, communications surveillance may only occur when prescribed by law necessary to achieve legitimate aim, and proportionate to the aim used.

References