The case of Latvia is an extreme example of the very serious problems caused by the restrictive criterion for the acquisition of nationality in the majority of the independent states that formed part of the former Soviet Union. Lacking official data, we expose the data of the European Commission decision in response to an application to join by Latvia, published in June 1997.
The minorities in Latvia represent around 44% of the population of the country. Of these almost 30% are Russians and significant groups of nationals from other independent states of the former USSR, with more than 4% Belorussians and almost the same percentage of Ukrainians. 28% of the total population of the country do not possess Latvian citizenship and the majority of these people do not have any nationality.
The law of August 1994, which regulates the acquisition of nationality, establishes strict age requirements (nationality can be applied for only at certain times, depending on the age) and an examination on knowledge of the language, history, the institutions and even the Latvian anthem. From the time of the opening up of the process of nationalisation to the publication of the report, hardly five thousand people possessed it, whilst some six hundred and eighty five thousand do not.
In an effort to minimise the negative judgement of the consequences of this very restrictive law, some ostensible advantages of those who do not have Latvian citizenship, are alleged: they are not obliged to do military service and it is easier for them to travel around the former USSR states on the passport of the latter. But among the discriminations that they suffer for this reason (restrictions on the acquisition of certain properties or the holding of public positions, etc.), is the deprivation of the rights to active and passive suffrage.
Apart from the consequences of this situation in the face of Latvia's access to the European Union (obviously difficult, insofar as a third of the persons being stateless, is a negative element as far as institutional stability and the guarantee of basic rights and freedom are concerned), the shortfalls of a system that restricts access to nationality to such an extent and therefore, to political participation by means of voting, are evident.
