Who is behind the plot to topple the Latvian parliament?

The Latvian parliament building in Riga. Photo: Ralf Roletschek (CC) Commons.wikimedia.org

Launched by a group of Latvian doctors who felt betrayed by deceitful government policies in late-October last year, the movement was quickly hijacked by pro-Russian groups, the far-right and radical populists – all wishing to topple the Latvian parliament as a stark display of contemporary power dynamics. The exploitation of popular demands by the doctors caused an unprecedented  response from all walks of society; a rather peculiar phenomenon in a country that has historically witnessed absurdly low levels of civic engagement in national politics.

Protest waves

Last October, the Latvian government announced that it will allocate only 3.9 per cent of its GDP to healthcare starting in 2022 – well below the EU’s average of 10 per cent  (the EU’s lowest is currently Romania with 5.2 per cent) – and despite unfulfilled and false promises by the Latvian Prime Minister, Krišjānis Kariņš, to increase salaries for medical professionals. This came as a serious blow to the thousands of doctors in Latvia who are already underpaid and overworked, and whose interests are often overlooked by the government and its inaction when it comes to the deteriorating quality of the healthcare system.

The first wave of protests hit Riga on November 7th. Hundreds of doctors took to the streets in a protest that saw the Speaker of the Latvian Parliament, Ināra Mūrniece, personally apologising to the doctors for the government’s inaction. The protesters’ key demand was a salary of 4,000 euros per month for doctors, way above the current average salary of 881 euros. At the same time, the first calls for radical action were heard from all sectors of Latvian society. In mid-November, what was previously thought to be impossible became reality. A proposal by several anti-establishment political groups, including the Center Party and the far-right party, Power to the Latvian Nation, was delivered to the Central Election Commission of Latvia on November 14th which allowed citizens to sign in favour of the dissolution of the national legislature. It was at that point when it became clear that the two groups had started a movement that would cause an unprecedented rift in civil society.

Latvians have always heavily scrutinised the work of the national legislature. In 2011 the then Latvian president, Valdis Zatlers, used his constitutional powers to dissolve the parliament, referring to the “privatisation of Latvian democracy”  and the unwillingness of the legislature to tackle the problems caused by the rise of oligarchy prior to and during the 2008 economic crisis. The main difference between 2011 and today lies in the fact that eight years ago, the dissolution of parliament was a justified and effective measure to deal with the rapidly deteriorating state of democracy. The act was not usurped by a handful of radical populists and pro-Kremlin factions who are now actively welcoming the subsequent instability that will further polarise Latvian society.

The Democratic Center Party, one of the main initiators of the movement, does not hold any political power in Latvia, but is rather seen as a disruptor of national politics. It has taken part in parliamentary elections in the previous years, albeit unsuccessfully. The party’s stance is right-wing (similar to the Law and Justice party in Poland and Fidesz in Hungary) ranging from anti-immigration to being openly anti-LGBT and pro-Russian. During the 2019 European Parliament election, one of its candidates was Waldemar Herdt, a German politician from the far-right AfD party and self-proclaimed supporter of conservative Christian values. The Baltic Centre for Investigative Journalism Re:Baltica wrote that “the Center Party’s line up for the election in 2018 included representatives from radical religious organisations and the ’Night Wolves’ – a pro-Russian motorcycle club notorious for its support of Russian President Vladimir Putin and close links to the Kremlin.”

The party gained support from certain religious factions in the country as well. Described in the Latvian media as a “sect”, Jaunā paaudze (“the New Generation” in English) has gained a large following for staging mass sermons and theatrical plays. In the 2019 European Parliament elections, a member of this religious group, Aigars Bitāns, unsuccessfully ran under the Democratic Center Party’s ballot.

On January 15th this year, the party submitted another proposal to the Central Election Commission, but this time it called for a reduction in the size of the national legislature from 100 MPs to just 50. As of early March, only slightly more than 3,000 signatures had been collected and it is unlikely that the Democratic Center Party will collect the other 147,000 in time to advance with the proposal any further.

Party bum

Another group, a popular movement eloquently called Power to the Latvian People, works in tandem with the Democratic Center Party, and is perhaps the most visible organisation in this whole ordeal. It is led by a rather diverse body of representatives, such as the Eurosceptic party For an Alternative with similarities to the AfD in Germany. In the 2018 parliamentary election, the party advocated for restoring the death penalty, returning to the lats (the national currency before the adoption of the euro in 2014), as well as dropping all sanctions against Russia after the 2014 annexation of Crimea.

While Power to the Latvian People surprised many with its rather peculiar line up, one of the most prominent figures and chairman of the group, Igors Lukjanovs, is more widely known in Latvia as “Party bomzis” (“bomzis” is a pejorative term for a homeless person in Latvian). Lukjanovs has become known as someone who shows up at private events, receptions and social gatherings unannounced. This has given him a very impressive following on social media which he has successfully exploited while being one of the main faces of the movement seeking to dismiss the parliament. He is also an editor of a small Latvian online publication, Protesti.lv, which often publishes pro-Kremlin and far-right views, aligning with the official line of Vladimir Putin in criticising western values and the state of transatlantic relations.

The origins of Protesti.lv are by no means surprising. As the researcher Jānis Polis writes: “The website was originally founded by Jānis Cīrulis, a Latvian far-right nationalist and member of the Pērkonkrusts – an illegal neo-Nazi paramilitary organization in Latvia”. Cīrulis has gained prominence by supporting anti-immigrant sentiments following the 2015 refugee crisis in Europe and by publishing videos portraying the fictional assassination of several Latvian MPs. With Lukjanovs being the editor of Protesti.lv, the real aims of the movement are becoming clearer. The website often republishes fake news, and makes profit from ads. Since 2015, Lukjanovs has published more than 3,000 articles on the website that claims itself to be a credible news agency.

In just a few weeks, in a coordinated action on a variety of social media platforms, mainly Facebook, the movement collected almost one-third of the required 150,000 signatures to initiate a referendum. Re:Baltica writes that “groups promoting the agenda of the prominent Latvian oligarch Aivars Lembergs (who was recently sanctioned by the US Treasury over corruption charges) and anti-5G movement actively shared messages advocating for the dissolution of the parliament”. Multiple MPs and Latvian politicians also tuned in. Two members of the KPV LV –  a political party that has become notorious prior to the 2018 parliamentary election for attacking journalists and NGOs, bringing cases against prominent investigative journalists to the court, discrediting experts and providing unreasonable populist promises – have expressed their support of the movement.

Not just populists but also members of the largest pro-Russian political party in Latvia, the LKS, have urged their supporters to sign the online petition. Sputnik, the Russian government’s main mouthpiece in Europe, has published dozens of news articles expressing support for the destabilisation of Latvian democracy by encouraging readers to contribute to the cause.

Persistence

Technology and social media are now further exacerbating the problem, providing a safe haven where these activists can reach out to the masses. The movement’s initial success could be attributed to the extensive use of Facebook and other social media platforms that allowed for a rapid spread of disinformation, resulting in over 40,000 signatures in just a few weeks. Dozens of live videos, lengthy posts, skits and cartoons were extensively used by closely-affiliated individuals. One of the most iconic moments during the campaign was a Facebook video in which Sergejs Žuravļovs, a member of For an Alternative, called for the Latvian people to sign in favour of dissolving the parliament while holding a bright red phallic figure in his hand which Žuravļovs dubbed “a pen to sign the petition with.”

However, a Google Trends data comparison shows that the people’s interest in the groups advocating for the dismissal of parliament peaked in mid-November, the same time when the proposal was submitted to the CEC, as evidenced by a vast and previously unseen increase in related Google search results in Latvia. But fast forward just a few days, and the search results reflect a completely different situation: the interest has plummeted to near-zero, a perfect litmus test indicative of the myopic nature of the populist actors.

Even if the movement is able to collect the 150,000 signatures it needs, which is very unlikely given the present circumstances and the rate at which new supporters are now signing the proposal, it still does not have a clear plan of action in case it gets elected to parliament in the following elections. The movement has not established any far-reaching goals, nor does it have a plan for political co-operation with other parties. Thus, it is putting the question of transparent governance at stake – given both movements’ ties with pro-Russian and Eurosceptic forces, future prospects under such a government seem bleak.

Acts like these, albeit often ridiculed by the general public, are dangerous and are ultimately putting democracy at risk. A movement that started with justifiable demands but was hijacked by a handful of individuals looking forward to profiting from the rifts within Latvian society can very easily be exploited by those benefiting from the weakening of the state.

The main takeaway is clear: no matter what the German far-right, the pro-Kremlin forces, or the domestic populists do in order to throw liberal democracy under the bus of borderline authoritarianism, Latvians will persist. The dissatisfaction with how slowly and inefficiently laws are legislated into place may be a reflection of the failures of the current government, but it must not, by any means, give an impetus to exploit the interests of the Latvian people in order to satisfy the personal ambitions of a handful of extremists. This is a matter of democratic integrity, not blatant populism.

The ostentatious imagery of populists centralising power in the turbulence of the post-2015 Europe is a cautionary tale for civic societies all across Central and Eastern Europe. But let our own history be a guide for what a democracy should stand for – fairness, openness and accountability. Other than that, it is up to us to uphold the values we once fought so bravely for and fight against those actively trying to do everything to undermine freedom, integrity and the rule of law.

Ričards Umbraško is a writer based in Riga, Latvia. His work has been published in several Latvian publications including Diena and Žurnāls IR.

Latvia, politics, protests, Riga