The nationalist nonsense a la Latvia surprises...

In July the Latvian public ombudsman, the lawyer Elena Bachinskaya appealed in the U. N. Security Council to define legal validity of qualification of actions of the USSR concerning the Republic of Latvia on June 17, 1940, as act of «military aggression» that is approved in the Declaration of the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic of May 4, 1990.

«Since September 17, 1991 Latvia is the member of the United Nations. The 39th article of the Charter of the UN assigns to its Security Council an exclusive prerogative in system of international law on fixing and legal qualification of the act of commission of aggression one state against another. On the basis of this qualification competent decisions on punishment of an aggressor are made. Only the U. N. Security Council defines an act of aggression, existence of any threat to world, and also any breach of the world.

However on May 4, 1990 the Supreme Council of the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic in the declaration independently recorded „act of aggression“ of the USSR against the Republic of Latvia. It allowed the Latvian government to adopt regulations which deprived of the rights of nationality and limited the social and economic rights of 860 thousand inhabitants of the republic —the Russian compatriots in overwhelming part. On the basis of this decision of the Supreme Council of the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic the most part of the Russian compatriots underwent to punishment for their ethnic origin», specifies E. Bachinskaya.

Having considering that the law-enforcement practice of Safety Council of the UN originates from 1946, concerning recognition «act of the Soviet military aggression against the Republic of Latvia on June 17, 1940» the answer to the following fundamental questions is required:

1. Is the definition given in the Declaration of the Supreme Council of the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic of May 4, 1990 that on June 17, 1940 the Republic of Latvia underwent military aggression from the USSR proved from the point of view of international law?

2. Is the Republic of Latvia obliged to recognize the priority of the U. N. Security Council on definition of the fact of aggression and to withdraw the given in the declaration of the Supreme Council of the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic of May 4, 1990 that on June 17, 1940 the Republic of Latvia underwent military aggression from the USSR, and does it follow from the fact, that at the time of adoption of this Declaration the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic wasn’t the member of the UN and didn’t coordinate the national norms with norms of international law?

3. Does the U. N. Security Council have the practice of definition of act of military aggression of one country against another backdating?

4. Did the government of Latvia address in the U. N. Security Council with the offer to record the decision of an act of aggression of the USSR against the Republic of Latvia on June 17, 1940?

«The explanation of a position of the U. N. Security Council on the matters will allow to make an attempt on reduction of the legislation of the Republic of Latvia according to norms of international law and to improve matters of the Russian compatriots in the Republic of Latvia», considers Elena Bachinskaya.

The U. N. member states have the right of the address with inquiries to the U. N. Security Council. However the public ombudsman E. Bachinskaya sent the inquiry in Security Council during this period when Russia presided in it. It was made in hope that Russia will assume liabilities of the third party in the conflict between the Russian compatriots and the authorities of Latvia. The authorities of Latvia don’t recognize the Russian compatriots equal in legal relations to Latvians and don’t enter dialogue with them. Recently accepted preamble to the constitution speaks about it, for example, in which situation is fixed that Latvia is the state of Latvians.

+371 29178493
bacinska. jelena@gmail.com