On 22 March, the Latvian Police detained 21 individuals, including several high-ranking state officials, on suspicion of involvement in a significant IT procurement fraud scheme related to European Union funding, exceeding €1 million. Authorities have indicated that the individuals entered into a clandestine agreement to influence the outcomes of public procurement contracts for at least 6 projects financed by the European Regional Development Fund, totalling over €1.5 million.
Allegations suggest that profits were inappropriately shared among the members of this group. Furthermore, there are indications that certain contracts were secured unlawfully with the assistance of state officials, as reported by Latvia’s public broadcaster LSM.
Criminal proceedings have commenced under the oversight of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). In a coordinated operation, police conducted 67 searches across various businesses and private residences in and around the capital city of Riga.
This operation resulted in the collection of substantial evidence and the detention of the 21 individuals. Among those arrested are two individuals, including one who holds a government position. Notably, Jorens Liopa, the former director of the State Digital Development Agency, has been detained. Liopa was downgraded last year due to infractions related to information technology processes during municipal elections. He currently serves as the deputy director of the Nature Conservation Department at the Nature Conservation Agency; however, he has been suspended following these developments.
On 20 March, in a separate case, the EPPO achieved a conviction at the Riga City Court for procurement fraud involving EU agricultural funds. The case concerns a project to reclaim agricultural land and reconstruct an amelioration system, funded by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and managed by the Latvian Rural Support Service, resulting in damages of €95,803.67.
Investigations revealed that the project beneficiary colluded with another operator to manipulate the procurement process, ensuring a pre-selected company received the contract. However, the beneficiary carried out the work using its own resources, in violation of procurement regulations. Both individuals were found guilty of large-scale fraud.
