A/HRC/7/19/Add.3 page 16 58. Apart from the problem of citizenship, the Russian-speaking communities highlighted concerns over language policy in Latvia, in terms of language requirements for naturalization, regulations on the use of non-official languages in public and private life and the role of language in education. One of the main reasons that was raised as an explanation for the decline in the rate of naturalization was the language requirement in the naturalization exam, which is seen as strict by representatives of the Russian-speaking communities. In particular, although the Government has sponsored some language instruction courses for non-citizens, free-of-charge Latvian language classes in preparation for the naturalization exam are seen as a fundamental step to positively encourage more applications for citizenship, particularly of marginalized members of the Russian-speaking communities. 59. Regulations for the use of non-official languages are believed to have drastically curtailed the use of Russian even in community affairs, permission only being granted to use Russian in police and hospital emergencies. These restrictions have especially affected vulnerable groups. NGOs highlighted the situation of Russian-speaking persons in Latvian prisons, who have limited access to legal counsel and formal communication with wardens and the judicial system. Concerns have been expressed that the existing regulations are sometimes used to restrict usage of Russian even in private affairs, by claims of a “legitimate public interest”. The Russian-speaking communities highlighted the importance of establishing clear limits to the regulations prohibiting use of non-official languages in order to guarantee that private affairs, including business, is not affected. Moreover, the Special Rapporteur’s interlocutors called for authorization of the use of Russian in local affairs in areas densely populated by Russian-speaking citizens. 60. Another area of concern in terms of language policy regards the educational reforms introduced in 2004, which introduced bilingual education in minority schools by establishing a minimum share of 60 per cent of courses that need to be taught in Latvian, or bilingually, in public secondary schools. In its concluding observations on Latvia, CERD called for closer dialogue between the Government, schools, parents and pupils in order to ensure that a high quality of education is maintained and that the educational needs of minorities are met.7 C. Views of the Roma community 61. Representatives of the Roma community expressed their concern regarding widespread discrimination faced in various fields of social life, including the constant threat of physical violence by extremist groups. This discrimination was reportedly not manifested in regard to citizenship status, as some 92 per cent of Roma are citizens. Rather, Roma representatives, as well as human rights NGOs, argue that discrimination against Roma has two major expressions: (a) structural discrimination, manifested in the field of economic, social and cultural rights (particularly employment and education), in the judiciary and law enforcement agencies, as well as in the negative stereotypes of the Roma that are still pervasive in Latvian society; (b) racist violence by extremist groups, which has been on the rise in the past few years and has not been met with a firm reaction by State officials, particularly those in law enforcement. 7 Ibid., para. 15.