Lietuviškai
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF
THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA
R U L I N G
On the compliance of Item 4 of the "Conditions
under Which Persons are Insured by State Funds and
of Compensation Payment upon Their Injury or Death
in the Line of Duty" approved by the 5 December
1991 Government Resolution No. 530 with Article 48
of the Republic of Lithuania Law on the Police
Vilnius, 3 December 1997
The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania,
composed of the Justices of the Constitutional Court Egidijus
Jarašiūnas, Kęstutis Lapinskas, Zigmas Levickis, Augustinas
Normantas, Vladas Pavilonis, Jonas Prapiestis, Pranas Vytautas
Rasimavičius, Teodora Staugaitienė, and Juozas Žilys,
the secretary of the hearing - Daiva Pitrėnaitė,
the party concerned - Audrius Jakutis, a deputy head of
the Legal Division at the Headquarters of the Ministry of
Internal Affairs, the representative of the Government,
pursuant to Part 1 of Article 102 of the Constitution of
the Republic of Lithuania and Part 1 of Article 1 of the Law on
the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, in its
public hearing on 20 November 1997 conducted the investigation
of Case No. 8/97 subsequent to the petition submitted to the
Court by the petitioner - the Court of Appeal of Lithuania -
requesting to investigate if Item 4 of the "Conditions under
Which Persons are Insured by State Funds and of Compensation
Payment upon Their Injury or Death in the Line of Duty"
approved by the 5 December 1991 Government Resolution No. 530
was in compliance with Article 48 of the Republic of Lithuania
Law on the Police.
The Constitutional Court
has established:
I
On 25 February 1997 the petitioner - the Court of Appeal
of Lithuania - was investigating a civil case subsequent to an
appeal of the plaintiff A. Čipkienė concerning the 3 January
1997 decision of the Vilnius County Court. By its interlocutory
ruling the Court of Appeal of Lithuania suspended the
investigation of the case and appealed to the Constitutional
Court with a petition requesting to investigate whether Item 4
of the "Conditions under Which Persons are Insured by State
Funds and of Compensation Payment upon Their Injury or Death in
the Line of Duty" approved by the 5 December 1991 Government
Resolution No. 530 (Official Gazette "Valstybės Žinios", No.
8-212, 1992) was in compliance with Article 48 of the Republic
of Lithuania Law on the Police (Official Gazette "Valstybės
Žinios", No. 2-22, 1991).
II
The request of the petitioner is based on the following
arguments.
Article 48 of the Law on the Police provides that in the
event that a police officer dies while performing his service
duties, his family shall be paid a one-time compensation
equivalent to the ten-year salary of the deceased. Neither this
article nor Chapter 6 entitled "Social Guarantees of Police
Officers" of the same law provides for any reservations under
which such a compensation may not be paid. By its 5 December
1991 Resolution No. 530 the Government approved the "Conditions
under Which Persons are Insured by State Funds and of
Compensation Payment upon Their Injury or Death in the Line of
Duty" (hereinafter in the ruling referred to as the
Conditions). Item 4 of the Conditions as approved by the
Government resolution regulated the events not insured against
when insurance sums and compensations are not to be paid. As
Article 48 of the Law on the Police does not provide for any
situations or conditions under which compensation may not be
paid, the petitioner doubts whether Item 4 of the Conditions
established by the said Government resolution is in conformity
to Article 48 of the Law on the Police.
III
In the course of preparation of the case for judicial
investigation, an explanation of A. Svetulevičius, a secretary
at the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of
Lithuania, and A. Jakutis, the representative of the party
concerned, was received. Therein it is stated that in its 11
December 1990 Resolution "On Entry into Force of the Republic
of Lithuania Law on the Police" the Supreme
Council-Reconstituting Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania
obligated the Government to review and establish the procedure
of providing officers of the procurator's office, those of the
systems of internal affairs and national defence with
apartments, as well as the procedure of paying wages and extra
pays and compensations (for injury or death on duty, material
damage due to service etc.) by orientating oneself towards
respective then valid and undergoing the process of preparation
laws of the Republic of Lithuania, as well as social guarantees
which were being applied to employees of the system of internal
affairs. Chapter 6 of the Law on the Police provides for social
guarantees of police officers. Part 2 of Article 46 of the said
chapter prescribes that the scope of social guarantees shall be
established by the laws of the Republic of Lithuania, and the
procedures of application thereof shall be established by the
Government.
It is stated in the explanation that a right was delegated
to the Government to establish procedure of application of
social guarantees (as well as compensations). Therefore the
disputed resolution cannot in essence contradict the Law on the
Police, as the same law was in force, while by its resolution
the Supreme Council-Reconstituting Seimas obligated the
Government to approve the aforesaid procedure. An analogous
procedure is established by Article 25 of the Law on Officials
of the Republic of Lithuania, as well as the 31 January 1996
Government Resolution "On Approval of the Regulations for
Compensation Payments for Officials Who Died or Suffered
Injuries in the Line of Duty". Item 8 of these regulations also
provide for cases when compensations are not to be paid.
The explanation points out that a substatutory legal norm
may neither replace the law itself nor create legal norms of
new nature which by their power would compete with the norms of
the law. It also notes that Item 4 of the Conditions as
established by the disputed resolution does not compete with
the norms of the Law on the Police. The said item does not
reduce the circle of entities to whom the norms of the law are
applied, nor does it change in essence the obligation of the
state to pay a compensation for the family of a deceased
officer, while it merely obligates the officers to observe the
requirements of the Law on the Police and other valid laws.
Article 35 of the Law on the Police provides for general
professional duties of police officers. Part 1 of Article 40 of
the said law stipulates that police officers shall be
personally responsible for their own actions and decisions, and
the consequences thereof. Article 48 of the Law on the Police
does not define as to what is considered performance of
professional duties or the event insured against. The events
insured against are defined only by Item 3 of the Conditions
established by the disputed resolution. Only the provision of
Item 3 of the Conditions stipulating that "[...] events
(provided they occur when the insured person is performing
professional duties or moving to or from work [...])" provided
the plaintiff with an opportunity to state in the civil case
that the death of her husband was in the line of duty. In the
opinion of the representative of the party concerned, Item 4 of
the Conditions established by the disputed resolution is in
compliance with Article 48 of the Law on the Police.
In the court hearing A. Jakutis, the representative of the
party concerned, virtually reiterated the arguments set forth
in the explanation.
IV
In the course of preparation of the case for judicial
investigation, an explanation of J. Beinortas, Deputy Chairman
of Seimas Social Affairs and Labour Committee, was received
wherein it is stated that Item 4 of the Conditions approved by
the disputed resolution is grounded on the norms of Article 31
of the Republic of Lithuania Law on the State Security
Department, those of Article 51 of the Republic of Lithuania
Law on National Defence Service, those of Item 4 of the Seimas
Resolution "On Entry into Force of the Republic of Lithuania
Law on the Police", however, the events not insured against as
well as other conditions which by all means would be analogous
to those presently established by the Government must be
provided for by the law.
In the course of preparation of the case for judicial
investigation, an explanation of the specialist - M. Gruodis,
Head of the Court Expertise Division at the Ministry of
Administration Reforms and Local Government Affairs, was also
received. Therein it is stated that Item 4 of the Conditions
established by the disputed resolution is grounded on the norm
of the law, however certain sub-items of this item contradict
Article 48 of the Law on the Police.
The Constitutional Court
holds that:
1. On 11 December 1990, the Supreme Council-Reconstituting
Seimas passed the Law on the Police. Article 48 of the said law
prescribes:
"In the event that a police officer dies while performing
his service duties, his family shall be paid a one-time
compensation equivalent to the ten-year (120 months) salary of
the deceased.
A police officer who sustains personal injuries in the
line of duty shall be compensated the equivalent of one to five
yearly salaries (from 12 to 60 monthly salaries), depending on
the gravity of the sustained injury.
Police officers shall be compensated for material damages
encountered in the line of duty."
The Supreme Council-Reconstituting Seimas by Item 4 of its
11 December 1990 Resolution "On Entry into Force of the
Republic of Lithuania Law on the Police" obligated the
Government to review and establish the procedure of providing
officers of the procurator's office, those of the systems of
internal affairs and national defence with apartments, as well
as the procedure of paying wages and extra pays and
compensations (for injury or death on duty, material damage in
the line of duty etc.) by orientating oneself towards
respective then valid and undergoing the process of preparation
laws of the Republic of Lithuania, as well as social guarantees
which were being applied to employees of the system of internal
affairs.
By its 5 December 1991 Resolution No. 530 the Government
approved the "Conditions under Which Persons are Insured by
State Funds and of Compensation Payment upon Their Injury or
Death in the Line of Duty". According to sub-Items 1 and 2 of
Item 1 of the Conditions, officers of the Ministry of Internal
Affairs, those of Republic and local government police service
and other offices of internal affairs (anti-fire, reformatory
affairs, security, etc.), as well as cadets of the Lithuanian
Police Academy and law schools of further learning at the
Ministry of Internal Affairs, members of the territorial
reserve of police commissariats who are doing practice or
working on probation and fulfilling officer duties in the
police shall be sustained by the means of the Budget of the
Lithuanian State, the budgets of local governments, as well as
those of enterprises, offices and organisations. In other
sub-items other categories of persons subject to insurance are
listed. They are: procurators, officers of the Ministry of
National Defence, officers of national defence in active
military service, re-enlistees who have not retired from
service, persons in active military service, officers and
volunteers of the voluntary national defence service, officers
of the State Security Department etc.
The Conditions provide that the health and life of the
aforementioned persons shall be insured. The Conditions also
define what shall be regarded as events insured against. These
are such events which occur when the insured person is
performing professional duties, when he is going to or from
work, or at the time when the person was not at work provided
the court or investigation establishes that these events are
linked with his duties, as well as when they occur during the
time of studies or exercise of the insured person and which
either harm the health of or cause the death to the insured
person. These are: trauma due to an accident, or an attempt on
the life and health of the insured person, as well as any other
instant event when against his will a physical force (chemical,
thermal, that of poisonous gases, or any other physical effect)
acts against the body of the insured person; accidental acute
poisoning through food (as well as getting infected through
food with infectious diseases which are pointed out in the
acute infectious intestine diseases list approved by the
Ministry of Health), medicines, poisonous plants, as well as
acute or chronic poisoning through chemical substances;
negative consequences due to either erroneous diagnosing or the
application of measures of treatment and prophylaxis (medical
injections among them) after the events insured against;
getting of a foreign body into respiratory organs, anaphylactic
shock, drowning or freezing of the insured person.
However, upon the death or injury of the insured person,
compensation is paid or damages suffered are compensated not in
all cases. Item 4 of the Conditions prescribes:
"Events shall not be attributed to the events insured
against and insurance sums and compensations shall not be paid
in the case that:
the insured person has suffered from his own deed wherein
the investigation or the court established signs of intentional
crime, or in the case that this deed is linked with an
administrative transgression of law;
the insured person has suffered in the state of
intoxication through alcohol, narcotics or toxic substances;
the insured person has suffered while driving a means of
transport or any other auto-vehicle without a corresponding
certificate, or upon giving over to another person to drive a
means of transport who was intoxicated through alcohol,
narcotics or toxic substances or who had not any corresponding
certificate;
the insured person has committed suicide, or has attempted
to commit suicide or has injured himself intentionally;
either the health of the insured person has broken down or
he has died due to disease or war."
The petitioner who was investigating the case at law
regarding compensation payment after the death of a police
officer who during an accident was drunk had doubts whether
provisions of Item 4 of the Conditions were in compliance with
Article 48 of the Law on the Police wherein neither situations
nor conditions under which compensation may not be paid are
provided for.
2. The police of the Republic of Lithuania is an executive
institution ensuring law and order and operating within the
system of internal affairs of the country. The main tasks of
the police are prevention of crimes and other violations of
law, detection and investigation of crimes, protection of
public order, peace and security, protection of civil rights,
freedoms and property, protection of the state border, as well
as, within its powers, environmental protection. Furthermore,
the police accomplishes supervision of traffic safety, renders
immediate and other social assistance to the community. It
protects Lithuanian citizens and organisations, as well as
other persons who are in the territory of Lithuania.
The competence of a state institution is accomplished by
persons who work in it. The legal status of persons serving in
the police is determined by the goals, tasks of the activity
and accomplished functions of the police as a state
institution.
The police officer is a citizen of the Republic of
Lithuania who serves and holds a valid post in the police, and
who carries out police functions. He, at all times and places,
has the same legal status and position as a governmental
representative. The honour, dignity, life, health, rights, and
freedoms of a police officer are protected by the laws of this
country. Police officers comprise policemen/policewomen and
police officials. Police officers are also considered persons
indicated in Part 4 of Article 5 of the Law on the Police.
Peculiarities of the legal status of police officers are
conditioned by the character of their professional activity,
therefore the laws establish special conditions and procedure
for their admitting to or dismissing from service, as well as
the rights and duties of officers, their responsibility and
social guarantees.
Certain requirements and conditions are raised for persons
who wish to serve in the police. Citizens of the Republic of
Lithuania who are 18 years of age or over, who have a command
of the national language, and who, by their educational,
professional and physical qualifications, personal qualities,
and state of health, are capable of performing the duties of a
police officer, may join the police on a voluntary and
selective basis. Service in the police is based on the
discipline prescribed by service regulations.
When performing his duties, a police officer follows the
laws and other normative legal acts regulating police service,
therefore all citizens, enterprises (i.e. state, private and
other), institutions and organisations (and their officials)
must comply with the demands of a police officer. If lawful
demands of a police officer are not complied with, the officer
has the right to use force, but only to the extent necessary,
and after all other measures of persuasion and the like prove
to be ineffective.
Service in the police is linked with certain requirements
for the officer himself. He must behave and act as a
representative of authority, protect legitimate interests of
people, society and the state, his actions must be legally
grounded. A police officer is addressed by people who await and
hope for his assistance. Therefore, under the chapter entitled
"The Code of Honour of Officers" of the Statute of Service in
the System of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic
of Lithuania, a police officer must "never forget that people
will at all times and places regard the officer as a
representative of authority, while by his appearance, conduct
in service and mode of life they will judge of the entire
system of the police and internal service". A police officer
must comply with the requirements of this code of honour.
Violation of the said requirements is to be condemned, as well
as it incurs moral and disciplinary responsibility.
Alcoholism - a universally recognised social evil - is
remarkably incompatible with the service of a police officer.
Drunk police officials discredit police service, undermine
public confidence in the police, not to mention their inability
to properly perform duties commissioned to them. To avoid these
consequences, legal and educational measures are necessary.
The Law on the Police provides for general and special
rights and duties of police officers. All police officers have
general professional rights and duties. The special
professional rights and duties are granted to police officers
who perform special police functions as provided by the law.
General professional rights of police officers, for
instance, are: the right to demand that citizens who are
violating law and order cease their unlawful actions; the right
to check personal documents upon suspecting that a citizen or
official has violated the law and notifying that person
thereof; the right to bring offenders to the police or other
official premises; the right to use, in cases provided by the
law, firearms, special equipment, and methods of combat
wrestling, etc.
In order to characterise the activity of a police officer,
general professional duties of police officers are of no less
importance. A police officer, at all times and places, must:
take urgent measures, upon witnessing a crime or any other
violation of the law being committed, or upon receiving a
report from a citizen or an officer concerning such an act, to
stop the crime or violation that is being committed; take
measures to apprehend persons guilty of committing a crime or
other violation of the law and to bring them to police quarters
upon receiving a report from a citizen or officer concerning
the commission of such a deed; report information concerning
socially harmful deeds to the police upon the knowledge of such
deeds, take measures to protect the scene of the incident, and
ascertain witnesses of the crime; ensure the protection of the
rights, legal interests, and health of persons who are arrested
and brought to police quarters, and provide first aid to
victims of law violations and persons who are in a helpless
state; take all possible measures to save the property of
citizens, the state, public organisations, and other
organisations in the event of natural calamity, catastrophe,
accidents, or other emergency situations, etc. In carrying out
their duties, police officers must respect and preserve the
dignity of the people, and must ensure and protect their rights
and freedoms.
Thus the activity of a police officer is a specific one.
Due to such a peculiarity of their work, police officers
encounter transgressors of law and dangerous offenders. They
make use of firearms in cases provided for by the law. To
perform professional duties successfully under an extreme
situation, one needs personal courage and determination while
special knowledge and skills are not always of help. Time and
again, the life, health or property of a police officer who
performs his service duties are endangered, therefore the laws
establish certain guarantees to ensure his protection.
On the one hand, the laws provide for penal and
administrative responsibility for impeding a police officer to
perform his duties or attempt at his honour, dignity or life.
For example, one may mention responsibility provided for by
Article 2011 of the Criminal Code for resistance against a
police officer or police supporter, as well as that provided
for by Article 2031 for an attempt on the life of a police
officer or police supporter, that provided for by Article 187
of the Code of Administrative Transgressions of Law for
non-compliance with a lawful demand of a police officer, as
well as that for the insult to his honour and dignity, etc. On
the other hand, special social guarantees are provided for
police officers: provision with flats, a prolonged yearly
vacation, extra pays, the right to receive compensation for
expenditures for the accommodation in a sanatorium and
treatment therein etc. under the procedure established by the
laws and other legal acts. A one-time compensation equivalent
to the ten-year (120 months) salary paid in the event that a
police officer dies while performing his service duties as
provided for by Article 48 of the Law on the Police is also to
be attributed to social guarantees. Alongside, the law
prescribes that a police officer who sustains personal injuries
in the line of duty shall be compensated the equivalent of one
to five yearly salaries (from 12 to 60 monthly salaries),
depending on the gravity of the sustained injury.
The norm of Article 52 of the Constitution, which provides
that the state shall guarantee the right of citizens to old age
and disability pension, as well as social assistance in the
event of unemployment, sickness, widowhood, loss of
breadwinner, and other cases provided by law, also conditions
establishment of compensation for the death or injury of a
police officer. By the said norm social assistance, one type of
which is compensation in the event of the death or injury of a
police officer, is recognised as having the status of a
constitutional value. It is important to ensure it effectively,
therefore rendering of such social assistance is established by
the laws. The obligation of the state is to guarantee
sufficient means of implementation and protection of this
right.
One should note that the legislator, by establishing
compensations in the event of the death of a police officer in
Part 1 of Article 48 of the Law on the Police, has defined the
condition, which is "performing service duties" in a most
general form under which the right appears to the said
payments. Parts 2 and 3 of the said article which establish
compensation payment to a police officer who has suffered
injury or material damage use the formulation "in the line of
duty". Thus, under the law, compensation shall be paid in every
case when the cause of the death or injury of a police officer
was no other than performance of his service duties or his
service in the police.
Taking account of these circumstances, the Constitutional
Court will investigate the compliance of Article 48 of the Law
on the Police with Item 4 of the Conditions.
3.1. By approving the "Conditions under Which Persons are
Insured by State Funds and of Compensation Payment upon Their
Injury or Death in the Line of Duty", the Government was
accomplishing the 11 December 1990 Resolution of the Supreme
Council-Reconstituting Seimas which had obligated it to review
and establish the procedure of providing officers of the
procurator's office, those of the systems of internal affairs
and national defence with apartments, as well as the procedure
of paying wages and extra pays and compensations along with
other social guarantees. Such was the obligation of the
legislator to the executive.
In the Conditions whereby implementation of the norms of
the law was to be ensured one had to particularise the
procedure of insurance of persons by state means against the
death or injury in the line of duty. Article 48 of the Law on
the Police contains an imperative norm: the right to
compensation appears upon the death of a police officer who was
performing service duties, or his injury in the line of duty.
The law does not establish any other conditions. However, Item
4 of the Conditions provides for cases under which
compensations to police officers or other indicated persons are
not to be paid. These are the cases when the insured persons
suffered in the state of alcoholic or narcotic intoxication, or
that caused by any other toxic substances; when signs of
intentional crime have been established in their deed etc.
Thereby by the said item of the Conditions other regulation of
compensation for police officers is established than that
provided for by the Law on the Police.
The Constitutional Court, in assessing the relation
between a law and a substatutory act, has noted many a time
that the norms of the law are implemented by a substatutory
act, however, such a legal act may not replace the law itself
nor may it create new legal norms of general character which
would compete by their power with those of the law. Thereby the
constitutional principle of supremacy of laws in respect to
substatutory acts is ensured.
One should note that the disputed norms were adopted
before going into effect of the present Constitution. Article 2
of the 6 November 1992 Republic of Lithuania Law on the
Procedure for the Enforcement of the Constitution of the
Republic of Lithuania provides that laws, other legal acts, or
parts thereof which were in effect on the territory of the
Republic of Lithuania prior to the adoption of the Constitution
of the Republic of Lithuania, shall be effective provided they
do not contradict the Constitution and this Law. The
legislator, as well as the executive, is obligated by this norm
to review the legal acts adopted before while taking account of
the norms of the Constitution, and to ensure a harmonious
hierarchical system of legal acts which regulate the same
relations. Therefore the legislator had to take into
consideration Article 52 of the Constitution guaranteeing
social security for citizens which must be ensured by laws. One
may neither establish nor restrict the conditions of appearance
of this right or its scope by a substatutory regulation of
these relations.
The constitutional status of social rights, alongside,
does not deny the right of the legislator to establish certain
conditions of their appearance and restrictions of the said
rights. For instance, Article 10 of the Republic of Lithuania
Provisional Law on Repaying Damages Pertaining to Accidents in
Work or Vocational Disease consolidates a provision that the
damages for a person who has suffered damage shall not be paid
in the case that: the cause of an accident is intoxication
through alcohol, narcotics or toxic substances which is not
linked with a technological process; the damage occurred in the
process of committing an intentional crime by the aforesaid
person; the damage occurred when the aforesaid person performed
a job independently without the permission (consent) of the
employer or the farmer or when the job was being performed not
to the advantage of the employer or the farmer; the aforesaid
person was striving for the accident intentionally. In this
case the Government could particularise and concretise certain
conditions established by the law. In the disputed case there
was not any proper regulation by the law. The Government
regulated these relations by a substatutory act. Thereby the
constitutional principle of legal protection of people's social
rights was violated.
On the grounds of the motives set forth a conclusion is to
be made that Item 4 of the "Conditions under Which Persons are
Insured by State Funds and of Compensation Payment upon Their
Injury or Death in the Line of Duty" approved by the 5 December
1991 Government Resolution No. 530 in the part whereby the
events not insured against for police officers are established
contradicts as to its form Article 48 of Law on the Police.
3.2. Besides, the Constitutional Court notes that the
aforesaid Conditions, unlike Article 48 of the Law on the
Police, Part 1 whereof uses the notion "while performing
service duties" while Parts 2 and 3 whereof use the notion "in
the line of duty", use the only notion "in the line of duty" in
all cases. Due to such a diversity of the notions used in the
law and the substatutory act there may occur problems when one
applies these norms.
The norm of sub-Item 1 of Item 4 provides that events
shall not be attributed to the events insured against and
insurance sums and compensations shall not be paid in the case
that the insured person has suffered from his own deed wherein
the investigation or the court established signs of intentional
crime, or in the case that this deed is linked with an
administrative transgression of law. In defining the event not
insured against, the Government used the notions "a deed which
has signs of intentional crime" and "a deed which is linked
with an administrative transgression of law". The system of
valid laws defines the crime, as well as the administrative
transgression of law, as dangerous deeds. On performing the
said deeds, one violates certain values. One of the goals of
the law and order institutions is to put a stop to unlawful
deeds of such character. Measures of criminal or administrative
responsibility are applied to persons who have been recognised
guilty for committing a crime or administrative transgression
of law. Such are dire effects for contempt of prohibitions of
the law. Professional activity of police officers by which one
attempts to put a stop to crimes and other transgressions of
law, as well as to detect and investigate them, is incompatible
with a violation of law. However, for example, under penal law
the notion "a deed which has signs of intentional crime" would
include both indispensable defence and an indispensable
necessity. These deeds correspond to the signs of crime, even
though in their content they are not dangerous and are
beneficial to society. Therefore the formulation contained by
the Conditions is defective as it assesses deeds of different
character alike. Moreover, the significance of committing a
crime through negligence has not been assessed in establishing
existence or absence of the event insured against.
The notion "a deed which is linked with an administrative
transgression of law" is used in this item of the Conditions.
The content of this notion is not clear. It is not clear
whether one has in mind an administrative transgression of law
or the actions which are linked with it in one or another way.
The actions which might be of different character should,
perhaps, be assessed differently from legal standpoint. This is
another essential deficiency in the formulation of the norm.
Sub-Item 2 of Item 4 of the Conditions prescribes that
events shall not be attributed to the events insured against in
the case that the insured person has suffered when he was in
the state of intoxication through alcohol, narcotic or toxic
substances.
It is evident that drunkenness of a person or his
intoxication through narcotic or toxic substances negatively
affects the human being. He is incapable of controlling
himself, he perceives the occurring situation inadequately,
co-ordination of his actions and his self-possession are
slackened. Frequently due to such an intoxication various
negative effects occur, due to it laws are violated, therefore
legal norms negatively assess such a human state. For example,
Item 10 of Article 41 of the Criminal Code provides that when a
criminal punishment is being given, the fact that the crime has
been committed by a drunk person, or who was intoxicated
through narcotic or toxic substances shall be held an
aggravating circumstance. Article 10 of the Provisional Law on
Repaying Damages Pertaining to Accidents in Work or Vocational
Disease prescribes that the damages for a person who has
suffered injury shall not be paid in the case that the cause of
an accident is intoxication through alcohol, narcotic or toxic
substances which is not linked with a technological process.
In general, however, a negative attitude toward
intoxication through alcohol, narcotic or other substances does
not deny the fact that there must be a causal relationship
between the deed and its effects. Therefore, it is important to
establish in every case whether the consequences for which a
person is responsible are causally related to the intoxication
of a person. The consequences provided for the aforesaid norm
of Article 10 of the Provisional Law on Repaying Damages
Pertaining to Accidents in Work or Vocational Disease occur in
the case that it was the intoxication of a person that caused
the accident. Penal laws, too, grant the court the right not to
recognise the intoxication of a culprit as an aggravating
circumstance in the case of certain crimes depending on their
nature.
The Government, while formulating the norm of Item 4 of
the Conditions, used the notion "has suffered in the state of
intoxication through alcohol, narcotics or toxic substances".
This notion means that absence of the event insured against is
linked with such an objective fact, that the insured person was
intoxicated through alcohol, narcotics or toxic substances.
After such unreserved treatment of the significance of the
state of an insured person, establishment of the causes which
have brought about harmful effects becomes senseless.
According to the doctrine of causation, drunkenness could
be the direct cause for occurrence of an event not insured
against. Then the effects would appear due to this reason but
never because of performing service duties or the service
itself. Of course, such a provision should not be applied in
the case that the person who has suffered damage was
intoxicated against his will. However, the present wording of
the disputed sub-item permits not to pay compensation
regardless of the fact as to what direct causes of the death or
injury were. It is sufficient that during the death or injury
the person who has suffered damage was intoxicated through
alcohol, narcotics or toxic substances.
Under sub-Item 3 of Item 4 of the Conditions, events shall
not be attributed to the events insured against and insurance
sums and compensations shall not be paid in the case that "the
insured person has suffered while driving a means of transport
or any other auto-vehicle without a corresponding certificate,
or after giving over to another person to drive a means of
transport who was intoxicated through alcohol, narcotics or
toxic substances or who had not any corresponding certificate".
The part of the said sub-item which establishes that an
event shall not be attributed to the event insured against in
the case that the person who has suffered damage has suffered
while driving a means of transport or any other auto-vehicle
without a corresponding certificate links the occurrence of
negative effects with one of traffic rules violations. However,
under such a wording of this norm, compensation would not be
paid even in such cases when the insured person has not
violated traffic requirements, while the accident occurred due
to other reasons (e.g., upon violation of such requirements by
other traffic participants). In such a case the effects would
occur due to the actions of another person but never those of
the insured person. Driving a means of transport without a
certificate is a violation of traffic rules, however, in itself
this cannot be the cause of death or injury.
Sub-Items 4 and 5 of Item 4 of the Conditions provide that
events shall not be attributed to the events insured against
and insurance sums and compensations shall not be paid in the
case that "the insured person has committed suicide, or has
attempted to commit suicide or has injured himself
intentionally", as well as "the health of the insured person
has broken down or he has died due to disease or war".
In the first case the direct cause of the death or injury
is a deed of the insured person himself - intentional
destruction of his life, an attempt at suicide or an
intentional injury of his health performed by any manner. In
the second case an event which occurred due to either disease
of the insured person or war is not considered the event
insured against. All these provisions would not restrict
Article 48 of the Law on the Police provided they indicated
that the aforesaid facts are not linked with performance of
police service duties or the service of the officer. Thus this
norm is also not sufficiently clear.
Conforming to Article 102 of the Constitution of the
Republic of Lithuania and Articles 53, 54, 55 and 56 of the Law
of the Republic of Lithuania on the Constitutional Court, the
Constitutional Court has passed the following
ruling:
To recognise that Item 4 of the "Conditions under Which
Persons are Insured by State Funds and of Compensation Payment
upon Their Injury or Death in the Line of Duty" approved by the
5 December 1991 Government Resolution No. 530 in the scope
whereby the events not insured against for police officers are
established contradicts Article 48 of the Republic of Lithuania
Law on the Police.
This Constitutional Court ruling is final and not subject
to appeal.
The ruling is promulgated on behalf of the Republic of
Lithuania.