Latvia's First Party/Latvian Way
political party in Latvia
Latvia's First Party/Latvian Way (Latvian: Latvijas Pirmā partija/Latvijas Ceļš, LPP/LC) was a conservative-liberal political party in Latvia created from the merger of the Christian-democratic Latvia's First Party (LPP), the liberal Latvian Way (LC) and the regionalist We for our District and Vidzeme Union in 2007. These parties had already formed an electoral coalition in 2006. The unified party was led by Ainārs Šlesers, the former LPP chairman. It was dissolved in December 2011.
In the 2009 European Parliament election, the party won a single MEP Ivars Godmanis. At the 2010 election, the party ran as part of For a Good Latvia with the People's Party. LPP/LC won three of the alliance's eight seats. After the People's Party's dissolution in 2011, the party renamed itself the Šlesers LPP/LC Reform Party and ran alone in the 2011 election, but won only 2.4% of the vote: failing to cross the 5% electoral threshold, and so lost all of its seats. The party then had its name reverted to LPP/LC. At the end of 2011, the party congress decided to disband the party.
Before its liquidation, the LPP/LC party received a fine of 528,870 Lats (more that 700 000 EUR) for illegal donations and exceeding the campaign limit.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Latvia's First Party/Latvian Way” is political party in Latvia. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Latvia's, First and Party, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “political party in Latvia” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 11, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q1756085. VIAF identifies the subject as 305088727. 2 of 3 selected statements include explicit references; 1 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2007, 2006, 2011 and 2009.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Latvia's First Party/Latvian Way”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Latvia's First Party/Latvian Way primary sources, Latvia's First Party/Latvian Way archive and Latvia's research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Latvia's First Party/Latvian Way”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Latvia's First Party/Latvian Way” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.