Legal proceedings concerning an LTV7 current affairs programme in Latvia have concluded. The programme examined a family’s experience with high-cost lending and its serious consequences, including mounting debt, the loss of the family home and the death of the interviewee’s father. It also featured opinions of other individuals, raising wider issues of public interest concerning lending practices and the risks faced by people in financial difficulty.
The claimant brought a wide-ranging claim against Latvian Public Service Media (LSM), the journalist personally and the interviewee, seeking the retraction of statements made in the programme, its removal and a ban on further publication, a public apology, as well as EUR 100,000 in compensation. Had the claim succeeded, the programme addressing matters of public interest would no longer have remained publicly available.
The Supreme Court declined to initiate cassation proceedings, and the Riga Regional Court’s judgment of 16 March 2026 has therefore come into force.
“This case illustrates the importance of protecting freedom of expression where legal claims are brought directly against media or journalists in relation to reporting on matters of public interest. Here, the claimant sought not only substantial compensation, but also the removal of the programme and a prohibition on its further publication. The court found no grounds for such restrictions. The judgment confirms that critical opinions remain protected where they have a sufficient factual basis and stay within the permissible limits of criticism,” explains Gabriela Šantare, Head of COBALT’s Administrative and Criminal Litigation Practice Group and legal counsel to LSM.
Assessing the programme as a whole and in context, the Riga Regional Court found that the interviewee’s statements constituted a subjective opinion supported by a factual basis rather than false statements requiring retraction. The court explained that the statements had to be assessed from the perspective of a reasonable and neutral average viewer. It also found no unlawful conduct by the defendants or causal link between the publication of the programme and the damage alleged by the claimant.
The judgement is also significant in the broader context of media freedom. It highlights the need to balance an individual’s right to protection of reputation against journalists’ freedom to report on matters of public interest and the public’s right to receive information. At the same time, the judgment underlines the importance of a sufficient factual basis when expressing critical opinions.
The Latvian Public Service Media was represented in the proceedings by the COBALT’s Head of the Administrative and Criminal Litigation Practice Group Gabriela Šantare, and the team also included Junior Associates Elīza Madsena and Marisa Aktumane.
Leading experts
