By pushing the civil union draft law, Konservatīvie party is deceiving voters and the church

The votes in the Saeima and the preparatory work carried out beforehand to push through the civil union draft law expose its authors and promoters - the Conservatives (Konservatīvie) party - as deceiving their voters and the Latvian Christian churches, says former Saeima MP, corresponding member of the Latvian Academy of Sciences, Chairman of the Board of the Institute of Legal Sciences, professor at the University of Latvia, Dr. iur. Ringolds Balodis in a conversation with Neatkarīgā.

The state law specialist reminded that the civil union draft law, which is the basis for the recognition of same-sex marriages, dates back to the scandalous Constitutional Court judgment of November 12, 2020, which initiated a dangerous double standard reading of the text of the Constitution. The text of the Constitution says one thing, while the responsible state institutions read something diametrically opposed into it.

The will of the people - neutered

"'How do four legs help the table, for he does not run, how do two ears help the pot, for he does not hear, how do a thousand eyes help the net, for he does not see,' the former member of the Constitutional Assembly Jānis Rainis once said. Following his words, how does the Constitution help us if it does not work? The Constitution says that marriage is a union between a man and a woman; it says that we are a democratic republic, that the sovereign power of the state belongs to the people of Latvia, that we have two legislatures - the Parliament and the people. But is that really the case? For example, until 2012, the people could still be the legislators, who could express their will in a referendum, but in 2012, after the referendum on the second national language, Unity (Vienotība) amended the law on referendums, stipulating that 150,000 signatures were needed to initiate a referendum instead of 10 000 signatures. This is an impossible mission in a country with just under a million people eligible to sign. The referendum has been stolen from the people. The only way for the people to express their will, then, is by electing a parliament, that is, by taking part in the Saeima elections. In the elections, the people choose their representatives according to what the parties promise in their programs," explained Balodis.

"But even this last option is now irretrievably messed up. The Conservative party's statutes say that the traditional family is sacred, i.e. marriage is between a man and a woman only. The electorate, in voting for this party, undoubtedly valued this issue. If Development/For (Attīstībai/Par) openly postulated in their program that their priority is the law of cohabitation, i.e. families can be formed by members of the same sex, while Unity wrote in their statutes that they are for a tolerant society, then they were speaking directly to the electorate. What they have written, promised and done is no different. But the Conservatives have turned out to be like a Russian matryoshka - the name and values of this party are like a shell that can be dropped like a prop at the slightest opportunity. The civil union draft law came to the Saeima from the Ministry of Justice, headed by Conservatives leader Jānis Bordāns. In addition, the Conservatives also chair the Saeima's Legal Affairs Committee, whose head, Juris Jurašs, and his successor, Jānis Butāns, act as if there is nothing in his party's program about the traditional family. The fact that they cover themselves with rhetoric about how the Constitutional Court's decisions must be obeyed, that European regulations must also be obeyed and that fundamental rights prohibit discrimination is just a legal smokescreen where the will of the people is neutered," said Balodis.

Legislative cookery, or a tutorial on how to ditch the electorate

He also drew attention to the means used to promote the draft law.

"The way the draft law was literally pushed through the Ministry of Justice to the Saeima for a first reading on March 31 is a good illustration of how the people are being cheated after they have clearly expressed their will in the elections. The party says, 'Vote for us, we stand for a normal family union between a man and a woman', but instead the Conservatives become the creators and promoters of the same-sex draft law. The voter is being fooled and votes cast for the party are being thrown in the trash," said Balodis.

He stressed that such a controversial bill had to be discussed in committees in an attempt to reach a compromise between the Constitutional Court's ruling, the parties' programmatic positions, the bill's lobbyists and the public. However, with the same-sex bill, everything happened unforgivably fast.

"It is interesting that Inese Lībiņa-Egnere, who chaired the Saeima session instead of Ināra Mūrniece, allegedly misspoke at the beginning that the vote on referral to committees and first reading would now take place. In reality, her misspeaking was revealing the plan. She knew the procedure well, and her action was actually well thought out. Referring the bill to the committee would mean that the members of the committee would have to spend some time studying it, as is usually the case. In this case, referral to committee meant that it was being driven through first reading."

In other words, after only a few hours, the draft law was proposed to the Saeima for adoption at first reading, and it is not clear how long the Legal Affairs Committee had already had to discuss the document, as the Members of the Saeima had to work intensively during the session.

As the professor pointed out, the "legislative cooks" in the Saeima had also done a good job on the votes. In the first vote, 82 MPs took part, of whom 42 voted in favor and 32 against. However, the vote on adoption at the first reading had a minimum quorum of 50.

"The Constitution stipulates that the Saeima's meetings are quorate if half of the members are present, and decisions are lawful if a majority of those present (i.e. 26 out of 50) vote in favor of them. If those who voted against really wanted to stop the progress of this bill, it was quite easy to do so by removing the cards from the voting machine, which would have meant breaking the quorum. So the story about voting with a minimum quorum is a hoax on the electorate, which allowed the bill to get through," explained Balodis. "For example, some of the Members who were the most sophisticated in their approach to this value vote chose to 'courageously' miss the start of the sitting or did not turn up at all. It is clear that in this vote the parties have clearly played a game to ensure that the bill does make it to the first reading in the name of government stability. The legislative cooks of the Saeima, who have worked in the Saeima for many terms, know how to get a positive vote, and this is not the first time this has happened," said the former MP.

Shameful Latvians

Balodis called for attention to be paid to the MPs who voted and those who did not vote. "It is clear how Development/For and New Unity will vote on this bill. For example, just recently, during a session of the Saeima, Lībiņa-Egnere, when reviewing the report of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, lamented that it was a tragedy that Latvia had not acceded to the Istanbul Convention. With her, everything is clear and can be understood. But the 14 MPs from Conservatives party who voted in favor made the difference.

If this party did not betray its values, did not ditch its electorate, the vote would undoubtedly not have been positive.

"We also see other interesting things in the vote. For example, despite the party's discipline, which is iron-clad in Unity, Aldis Adamovičs did not vote. Why did he not vote? Probably because he is from Latgale, and in Latgale it is unlikely that his liberalism would be understood. The faction took pity on him and allowed him to break the iron discipline of the faction so that he could tell his legend to the voters of Latgale. Ieva Akurātere, on the other hand, voted in favor of referral to the committee, but did not vote in favor of adoption at first reading, because it was already clear that there were enough votes to pass the bill.

They are all manipulations. There is another most interesting audience that did not turn up at all. For example, Dagmāra Beitnere-Le Galla, Māris Mičerevskis and the Speaker of the Saeima herself, Ināra Mūrniece. But let it be left to the conscience of each individual. For its part, Harmony (Saskaņa) ensured a quorum for the vote. If all the MPs had acted in accordance with their own values and those of the party, the result would have been completely different."

Constitutional Court in the shoes of the legislator

"The content of the civil union draft law has been attempted by various lobbies to get into the Saeima for over a decade, but the official start was given on November 12, 2020, with the scandalous judgment of the Constitutional Court, which concluded that regulation of same-sex families was necessary. The Constitutional Court stepped into the shoes of the legislator and started the process of regulating same-sex couples. As Aldis Laviņš, the current President of the Constitutional Court, has pointed out, the Court has thus effectively interfered in the legislature's sphere of work, which is a very, very slippery slope. The Constitution clearly states that marriage is between a man and a woman, whereas the Constitutional Court reads that marriage is also between members of the same sex. The clear idea of the Constitution is thus replaced by a text invented by appointed judges. The question arises: what does the Constitution matter anymore if we can arrive at anything through free interpretation? For example, if someone needs to, the words in the preamble of the Constitution about Latvia promoting a "united Europe" can be interpreted to mean that the people agree to a federal Europe. Then we will lose statehood in one fell swoop. This is where I see the end of national sovereignty," said Balodis.

A frightening erosion of trust in the power

"It turns out that there are political forces that can afford to betray their voters blatantly. It was the Conservatives who formed the backbone of this vote. It is trampling on the rights of the people, it is a theft of the state and a mockery of values. If the Conservatives had been honest before the elections and said that they, too, stood for same-sex relationships as the best relationships in the world, they would not have gotten the votes, they would not have gotten into the Saeima. With this bill and its promotion, the Constitution is also being highlighted as a piece of paper that supposedly has to be respected, but can be ignored if you really want to."

Balodis called attention to the role of lawyer Lauris Liepa in promoting this draft law. "This could not have happened without the support of professionals like Lauris Liepa. As every song has lyrics and a songwriter, in this case the words come from Lauris Liepa and the authorship belongs to the Conservatives. If you are a politician, how can you betray your constituents? To ditch the electorate and to ditch the churches is absolute impunity and utter shamelessness. This move by the Conservatives will further aggravate what sociologist Arnis Kaktiņš warns about - the loss of people's faith in democratic state power," concluded Balodis.

*****

Be the first to read interesting news from Latvia and the world by joining our Telegram and Signal channels.