7 July, 2021
On 7 July, the Department of Administrative Cases of the Senate rejected the application and upheld the decision of the Minister of the Interior to include the applicant in the “black list” or to include a person in the list of foreigners prohibited from entering the Republic of Latvia. The Senate acknowledged that the decision of the Minister of the Interior is legal and justified, as well as the ban on entry imposed on the applicant and the resulting restriction of rights is proportionate.
The Senate considered the case orally at the hearing of June 16. In the open part of the court hearing, the Senate heard the participants of the case, as well as the opinion of the Prosecutor General's Office. Having declared a part of the hearing closed, the court examined the case file, including the opinions of the security authorities, which were the basis for the contested decision, and questioned representatives of the Ministry of the Interior, the State Security Service and the Military Intelligence and Security Service.
In its judgment, the Senate acknowledged that the decision of the Minister of the Interior complies with legal provisions and cannot be considered arbitrary. The decision to maintain the entry ban imposed on the applicant in the initial decision is based on information obtained through intelligence and counter-intelligence services and is justified by the interests of national security protection. The security authorities have indicated the circumstances according to which such a restriction was objectively necessary in the specific case at the time of adopting the initial decision, as well as justified that the entry restriction should be maintained at this moment, too.
By responding to the applicant's argument that the entry ban disproportionately restricts the rights of the applicant and his family members to private and family life, the Senate indicated in its judgment that in accordance with Article 116 of the Satversme (Constitution) and Article 8, Paragraph two of the European Convention on Human Rights the rights of protection of private and family life may be restricted in cases provided for by law which are necessary to protect the rights of others, the democratic order, public security, welfare and morals. The restriction applied in the present case is a proportionate means of protecting national security interests.
Case No SA-2/2021
Information prepared by Baiba Kataja, the Press Secretary of the Supreme Court
Tel.: +371 67020396; e-mail: email@example.com