The examination established that the doors were not sufficiently equipped with safety sensors. The sensors should be positioned in such a way that when a person enters the danger zone, the doors automatically stop or start moving in the opposite direction. However, the existing placement of the sensors did not eliminate the possibility that the doors could trap a person. Moreover, this system had been in operation at the hospital for several years. ### The doors should not have touched a person at all The State Labor Inspectorate emphasizes that contact of such doors with a patient or employee is unacceptable in itself. The employer is obliged to ensure technical measures that prevent a person from entering the danger zone or that automatically stop the mechanism. The investigation showed that the necessary measures were not taken. In response to a question about the possible responsibility of the door manufacturer, the inspection noted that the obligations to ensure the safe operation of the equipment also lie with its user — in this case, the Eastern Hospital. According to the State Labor Inspectorate, it cannot be said that the manufacturer is responsible if the safety sensors are installed incorrectly or if they are insufficient to prevent a dangerous situation. ### Materials will be handed over to the police All materials from the investigation will be submitted to the State Police. They will be attached to the already initiated criminal proceedings regarding compliance with labor protection requirements and employer liability. At the same time, an administrative proceeding has been initiated against the employer for failure to implement labor protection measures. A monetary fine is provided for such a violation, the amount of which is yet to be determined. ### Doors will be checked in other hospitals After the tragedy, the inspection decided to conduct preventive checks in other medical institutions in Latvia. The State Labor Inspectorate admits that similar automatic doors may be used in other hospitals. Medical institutions will be offered to check their compliance with requirements, carry out necessary maintenance, and ensure that the safety sensors are not only installed but also truly capable of preventing injury to a person. ### The hospital disagreed with the inspectorate's conclusions The State Labor Inspectorate reported that it received numerous explanations from the Eastern Hospital. In them, the institution primarily insisted that the responsibility for the incident does not lie with it. The hospital also disagreed with the cause of the accident established by the inspection. The State Labor Inspectorate states that it has studied and taken into account the position of RAKUS. At the same time, the inspection emphasizes that the hospital does not ignore the requirements of the authority and cooperates with it. Previously, RAKUS had refused to comment in detail on the circumstances of the tragedy until the competent authorities completed their investigations. In addition, the hospital indicated that it is a critical infrastructure facility and therefore cannot publicly disclose detailed information about the technical condition of individual elements of infrastructure and security systems.
