Lietuviškai
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF
THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA
D E C I S I O N
On the request of a group of Seimas members to
investigate if the Provisional Law on the
Suspension of the Validity of the Republic of
Lithuania Law "On the Procedure and Conditions of
the Restoration of the Rights of Ownership to the
Existing Real Property" is in compliance with the
Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania
Vilnius, 13 November 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,
in the organisational sitting of the Constitutional Court
has discussed the request of the petitioner - a group of Seimas
members - to investigate if the Republic of Lithuania
Provisional Law on the Suspension of the Validity of the Law
"On the Procedure and Conditions of the Restoration of the
Rights of Ownership to the Existing Real Property" was in
compliance with Articles 23, 106, 109, 114, and 145 of the
Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.
The Constitutional Court
has established:
I
The petitioner - a group of Seimas members - appealed to
the Constitutional Court with a petition requesting to
investigate whether the 16 January 1997 Provisional Law on the
Suspension of the Validity of the Republic of Lithuania Law "On
the Procedure and Conditions of the Restoration of the Rights
of Ownership to the Existing Real Property" (Official Gazette
"Valstybės Žinios", No. 6-89, 1997) was in compliance with the
Constitution.
The petitioner bases his request on the following
arguments.
1. By the Provisional Law on the Suspension of the
Validity of the Republic of Lithuania Law "On the Procedure and
Conditions of the Restoration of the Rights of Ownership to the
Existing Real Property" the validity of the prior in force law
is suspended. Instances when the validity of a law is suspended
are rare. This may be linked with some special occurrence and
must be legally grounded. For example, Article 145 of the
Constitution provides that during martial law or a state of
emergency certain human rights and freedoms, as those of
inviolability of the private life of an individual and his
dwelling place, that of free expression of his own convictions,
that of moving freely etc. may be temporarily restricted.
However, even in such a case the Constitution does not provide
for suspension of the rights to property. Besides, Part 4 of
Article 106 of the Constitution provides for one situation only
when the validity of a law may be suspended, i.e. when by its
decision the Seimas appeals to the Constitutional Court to
investigate the conformity of the law with the Constitution.
The Constitution does not indicate any other situations when
the validity of a law may be suspended.
The petitioner contends that in the universal practice,
including Lithuanian one, during the process of perfection of
valid laws one either makes amendments of such laws or such
laws are recognised as null and void when new laws are being
adopted.
2. One of the signs of a democratic and law-governed state
is legal consolidation and implementation of the principle of
separation of powers. Part 1 of Article 5 of the Constitution
provides that in Lithuania the powers of the State shall be
exercised by the Seimas, the President of the Republic and the
Government, and the Judiciary. The competence of the courts as
judicial power are regulated in Chapter 9 entitled "The Court"
of the Constitution. According to Part 1 of Article 109 of the
said chapter, "the courts shall have the exclusive right to
administer justice". One of the fundamental principles of
justice implementation is independence of judges and courts.
Article 114 of the Constitution prescribes that no one -
neither institutions of state power and administration, nor
members of the Seimas and other officers, nor political
parties, nor citizens may interfere with the activities of the
judge or the court. These constitutional provisions are
particularised in the Law on Judiciary, the Code of Civil
Proceedings, the Code of Criminal Proceedings, as well as other
legal acts.
Meanwhile, under Item 3 of Article 2 of the Provisional
Law on the Suspension of the Validity of the Republic of
Lithuania Law "On the Procedure and Conditions of the
Restoration of the Rights of Ownership to the Existing Real
Property", execution of court decisions which have taken effect
shall be suspended. In this case the Seimas adopts a procedural
decision in a civil case and thereby violates the
constitutional provision whereby the courts shall administer
justice. Thus legislative power - the Seimas - takes over the
functions of judicial power - the court, and this may be
interpreted as the interference of the Seimas with the
activities of the court by violating the constitutional
principle of independence of courts. Only the court may adopt a
procedural decision in a civil case and, when following the
provisions of the Code of Civil Proceedings, decide whether to
suspend the investigation of the case and execution of the
court decision. Neither the Seimas nor any other state
institution may decide for the court as to what procedural
actions must be performed in a civil case.
II
On 1 July 1997 the Seimas adopted the Republic of
Lithuania Law on the Restoration of the Rights of Ownership to
the Existing Real Property (Official Gazette "Valstybės
Žinios", No. 65-1558, 1997). Item 3 of Article 22 of the said
law provides that upon entry into force of this law, the
Provisional Law on the Suspension of the Validity of the
Republic of Lithuania Law "On the Procedure and Conditions of
the Restoration of the Rights of Ownership to the Existing Real
Property" becomes null and void.
The Constitutional Court
holds that:
1. Part 4 of Article 106 of the Constitution stipulates
that "upon the proposal of the President or the decision of the
Seimas to investigate the conformity of the act with the
Constitution, the validity of the act shall be suspended". If
the Constitutional Court adopts a decision to accept a petition
for a court investigation, the Chairperson of the
Constitutional Court shall give an official announcement about
the suspension of the validity of such an act (Part 2 of
Article 26 of the Law on the Constitutional Court).
Article 145 of the Constitution prescribes that under
special conditions - during martial Law or a state of
emergency, the rights and freedoms specified in Articles 22,
24, 25, 32, 35, and 36 of the Constitution may be temporarily
restricted. This could be done by suspending the validity of
certain norms of respective laws. The Constitution does not
provide for any other cases of suspension of the law.
By the 16 January 1997 law the Seimas suspended the
process of restoration regulation of ownership rights to
existing real property. The basis for the suspension, as well
as new forms of regulation of these relations and the
procedure, was not established. By the way, it is not the first
time when the Seimas adopts laws which suspend the validity of
other laws.
It should be noted that the laws, while establishing the
liberty limits of legal entities, as well as the possibilities
of social activity in all spheres of life, respectively
influence the behaviour of persons and shape it. Thereby the
laws regulate, consolidate and safeguard social relations.
Therefore laws must not only be reciprocally co-ordinated but
also sufficiently stable. Of course, dated, not effective etc.
legal norms have to be changed and recognised as null and void.
An analysis of the norms of Part 5 entitled "Legislation
Proceedings" of the Statute of the Seimas also permits to
assert that law-making by its nature and purpose is not linked
with suspending of validity of laws. This is so because in a
situation arising after a suspension of law validity one can
perceive preconditions for occurrence of ambiguities in the
process of regulation of respective social relations, as well
as that of gaps in law. Alongside, there might appear other
legal problems too. Naturally, this does not increase
confidence in laws, power and its institutions.
Thus one should note that suspension of validity of laws
is not characteristic of law-making and, as a rule, is linked
with situations pointed out in the Constitution.
2. Article 5 of the Constitution consolidates the
principle of separation of powers: in Lithuania the powers of
the State shall be exercised by the Seimas, the President of
the Republic and the Government, and the Judiciary. The
Constitution and laws determine for every power its competence
which corresponds the nature of the power. Thereby independence
of particular powers, the place of every power in the overall
system of powers, as well as their equilibrium, are
consolidated. Every power is based on the competence
established in the Constitution. The constitutional principle
of the separation of powers conditions independence of the
judiciary.
By their legal power court decisions which have taken
effect become like laws and their execution is guaranteed by
state power, therefore they are mandatory for all state and
administrative institutions, as well as all legal and natural
persons. When court decisions are adopted and executed, in the
state the principle of justice is realised, the stability of
legal relations established and confirmed by court decisions
which have taken effect is guaranteed. This consolidates
confidence of legal entities in state power and laws.
Alongside, actual possibilities are created to realise the
obligation of the court to guarantee the protection of human
rights, which is emphasised in the legal acts of the Republic
of Lithuania, as well as the international documents.
The laws consolidate the basis for suspension of execution
of court decisions which have taken effect, they establish that
only the court shall have the right to decide issues concerning
execution or suspension of their decisions while taking account
of particular circumstances of the case (Article 238 of the
Code of Civil Proceedings). Undoubtedly, the Seimas is entitled
to establish other basis on the grounds of which the court is
empowered to suspend execution of court decisions.
By adopting the provision of Item 3 of Article 2 of the
disputed law as to the suspension of execution of court
decisions which have taken effect, the Seimas paid no heed to
the constitutional nature of judicial power, therefore this
might be assessed as a restriction of the constitutional
competence of judicial power.
3. On 1 July 1997 the Seimas passed the Republic of
Lithuania Law on the Restoration of the Rights of Ownership to
the Existing Real Property Item 3 of Article 22 whereof
provides that upon entry into force of this law, the
Provisional Law on the Suspension of the Validity of the
Republic of Lithuania Law "On the Procedure and Conditions of
the Restoration of the Rights of Ownership to the Existing Real
Property" becomes null and void.
According to Part 1 of Article 105 of the Constitution,
the Constitutional Court shall consider cases concerning
conformity of valid legal acts with the Constitution and the
laws, therefore in the case at issue the Constitutional Court
shall not judge the constitutionality of the disputed law which
has become null and void.
Conforming to Part 4 of Article 69 of the Law of the
Republic of Lithuania on the Constitutional Court, the
Constitutional Court has adopted the following
decision:
To dismiss the initiated legal proceedings in the case.