Latvia’s Supreme Court Rules Revocation of Belarusian Citizen’s Residence Permit Unjustified

The Department of Administrative Cases of the Senate of the Supreme Court of Latvia upheld the ruling of the Administrative Regional Court, which had annulled the decision of the Office of Citizenship and Migration Affairs (OCMA) to revoke the temporary residence permit of a citizen of Belarus. The OCMA’s decision was deemed disproportionate.

Previously, the applicant’s residence permit—he had formerly served in Belarus’s law enforcement—was revoked based on a conclusion by the State Security Service (VDD) stating that he could pose a threat to national security. The Belarusian citizen challenged the decision in court, arguing that it violated the principle of proportionality. He noted that he had lived in Latvia for a long time, started a family with a Latvian citizen, and was raising two minor children who are also Latvian citizens. His claim was upheld by both the first-instance and appellate courts.

The Supreme Court concluded that the Regional Court had correctly determined the OCMA’s decision to be disproportionate. Although the Immigration Law requires mandatory revocation of residence permits in such cases, the Senate emphasized that the proportionality of mandatory administrative acts must still be assessed when they affect fundamental human rights, the Supreme Court’s press service reported.

In its ruling, the Senate stated that for a decision to be recognized as disproportionate, the court did not need to first establish whether the institution’s actions were arbitrary. These two aspects are subject to independent examination. The Regional Court properly reviewed the observance of the proportionality principle and found no indication that the public benefit of the restriction imposed on the applicant outweighed the harm caused to his private and family life by the revocation of his residence permit.

Accordingly, the Senate confirmed that there were no grounds to alter the Regional Court’s ruling.