Orange alert: splitting the Society Integration Foundation threatens NGO and media independence

On behalf of civil society organisations, the Civic Alliance of Latvia (CAL) is sounding the alarm: the Ministry of Culture’s proposal to split the programmes of the Society Integration Foundation (SIF) between various ministries and the State Chancellery threatens the independence of funding allocation and creates a risk of political interference in the work of NGOs and the media.

Furthermore, the reform would increase bureaucracy and administrative costs, with the administrative expenditure of the Ministry of Culture’s programmes alone set to rise by 61.1%.

“We call on the government to halt this proposal and ensure that decisions are based on evidence rather than a political desire to control civically active people. Democracy cannot exist if public funding is used to silence criticism and weaken the voices of independent organisations and media. If the government continues to ignore civil society’s objections, we are ready to move beyond arguments and towards broader civic mobilisation to defend the principles of democratic governance and civil society independence,” emphasises Elīna Grīnhofa, Director at the Civic Alliance - Latvia.

We have previously highlighted that fragmenting the programmes would mean different requirements, separate regulations and varying reporting procedures across institutions. Such short-sightedness would create a disproportionate bureaucratic burden, with small regional associations, local communities and socially vulnerable groups suffering the most, as they lack the administrative resources needed to navigate the differing requirements of multiple ministries.

“The Ministry of Culture is pushing ahead with the reform while disregarding the recommendations of the professional audit, the conclusions of the working group and repeated objections from the media sector, the State Chancellery and other ministries. This raises serious concerns about the reform’s objectives. By also entrusting the National Electronic Mass Media Council (NEPLP) with the allocation of media support funding, both supervisory authority and influence over funding for the entire media landscape would be concentrated in the hands of a single institution. This would create a risk of conflicts of interest, increase public expenditure and open the door to influencing independent media.

These concerns are further heightened by long-standing unresolved issues in the NEPLP’s relationship with the media sector and the interference in the content of an independent media outlet identified in an Administrative Court ruling. Until these issues are addressed, expanding the NEPLP’s powers could encourage self-censorship and undermine media independence,” says Sabīne Sīle, founder and director of the Media Hub Riga.

During the legislative consultation process, 81 non-governmental organisations and public institutions have opposed the proposal, submitting more than 100 opinions in total. Ignoring these arguments and failing to provide transparency regarding rejected objections turns public consultation into a mere simulation of democratic processes.

This issue goes far beyond the institutional future of the SIF. It concerns the independence of civil society, the principles governing the allocation of public funding, and whether public participation in Latvia offers a genuine opportunity to influence decision-making or is merely a formal procedure.

The CAL calls on the Ministry of Culture and the government to ensure compliance with the public participation procedures established by law: to genuinely assess the proposals and objections received, provide reasons for accepting or rejecting them, document differing opinions and ensure transparency throughout the process.

Dalies: