This year, the State Security Service (VDD) of Latvia has conducted preventive interviews with approximately 100 individuals, primarily in relation to expressing pro-Kremlin messages.
VDD confirmed that on the 24th of March, for example, it obtained a statement from Andrejs Pagors, a representative of the political party “Latvian Russian Union” and a member of the Jelgava City Council, regarding his recent post on the messaging platform Telegram, which contained messages aligning with Russian interests about military operations carried out by the Russian army.
During talks, the individual was warned that publicly justifying or glorifying Russia’s war crimes, inciting national hatred, assisting a foreign country in actions against Latvia, or committing other crimes against national security could result in criminal liability.
LETA also reported that in early February, the VDD held a similar conversation with Aleksejs Rosļikovs, leader of the “Stability!” party and a member of the Saeima, regarding his recent public statements directed against Latvians.
Rosļikovs was warned about the potential legal consequences of inciting national hatred or committing other criminal offenses.
According to LETA archives, this practice—where the security service summons individuals from various sectors due to their public statements or potential actions—is well-established. For example, in December of last year, the VDD interviewed Riga City Council member Natālija Ābola (GKR) regarding her social media comments. Similar interviews have previously been conducted with leaders of the “Latvian Russian Union”.
According to the law, the VDD has the right, within its competence, to summon any individual to the national security agency in relation to an information review or in connection with cases and materials under the agency’s jurisdiction. The service also has the right to issue a warning if a person’s actions show signs of potential unlawful activity, emphasizing the inadmissibility of violating laws that are directed against or harmful to national security.
Additionally, the service has the authority to demand that individuals cease illegal activities or other actions that interfere with the execution of duties by national security officials, and to apply coercive measures as stipulated by law in cases of violations.