Lietuviškai
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF
THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA
D E C I S I O N
On the construction of the 10 January 1998 ruling
of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of
Lithuania
Vilnius, 17 December 1998
The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania,
composed of the Judges of the Constitutional Court Egidijus
Jarašiūnas, Kęstutis Lapinskas, Zigmas Levickis, Augustinas
Normantas, Vladas Pavilonis, Jonas Prapiestis, Pranas Vytautas
Rasimavičius, Teodora Staugaitienė, and Juozas Žilys,
with the secretary of the sitting-Daiva Pitrėnaitė,
pursuant to Article 61 of the Republic of Lithuania Law on
the Constitutional Court, on 10 December 1998 in a court
sitting investigated the request of the petitioner-the
Government of the Republic of Lithuania-to construe the
statement "the Government is anew empowered to exercise its
functions" which is used in the last but one paragraph of Item
3.3 of the stating part of the Constitutional Court of the
Republic of Lithuania Ruling "On the compliance of the 10
December 1996 Seimas Resolution 'On the Programme of the
Government of the Republic of Lithuania' with the Constitution
of the Republic of Lithuania" of 10 January 1998, as well as
the wording "unless half of the ministers have been changed"
which was used in the same ruling.
The Constitutional Court
has established:
On 10 January 1998 the Constitutional Court passed a
ruling whereby it recognised that the 10 December 1996 Seimas
Resolution "On the Programme of the Government of the Republic
of Lithuania" was in compliance with the Constitution. The
petitioner requests to construe certain provisions of the said
Constitutional Court ruling.
In the court sitting, K. Čilinskas, the Government
Chancellor, explained that after the elections of the President
of the Republic, and upon President's oath, the Government
returned its powers to the newly elected President of the
Republic. By its resolution of 10 March 1998, the Seimas
approved of the candidature for the Prime Minister which had
been submitted by the 6 March 1998 decree of the President of
the Republic. The President of the Republic, by his 10 March
1998 decree, appointed G. Vagnorius Prime Minister and
commissioned him to form the Government. By the 25 March 1998
decree of the President of the Republic, the composition of the
Government was confirmed. The Prime Minister and the ministers
were sworn in at the Seimas. The Government is of the opinion
that the said procedures mean that the Government was anew
empowered to exercise its functions. However, after part of the
ministers have been changed, questions arose as for under what
criteria the changing of ministers in the Government is to be
calculated and whether the Government of the present
composition must anew be empowered to exercise its functions?
Therefore the Government requests to construe the meaning of
the statement "the Government is anew empowered to exercise its
functions" of the Constitutional Court ruling, as well as the
wording "unless half of the ministers have been changed" which
was used in the same ruling.
The Constitutional Court
holds that:
1.1. The question of the returning of the powers of the
Government is analysed in Item 3.3 of the Constitutional Court
ruling of 10 January 1998. In the last but one paragraph of
this item it is pointed out that the returning of the powers
procedure provides the President of the Republic with the
opportunity for checking whether the Seimas remains to be
confident in the Seimas. The President of the Republic,
following Article 92 and Item 8 of Article 84 of the
Constitution, as well as taking account of the tradition of
parliamentary democracy, under the procedure established by
Item 8 of Article 84 of the Constitution, submits to the Seimas
the candidature of the Prime Minister of the Government that
has returned its powers for consideration. Upon the consent of
the Seimas to the candidature of the Prime Minister, upon the
appointment of the Prime Minister by the President of the
Republic, and upon the approval of the composition of the
Government submitted, the Government is anew empowered to
exercise its functions, unless more than half of the ministers
have been changed.
The petitioner requests to construe as to how one is to
understand the statement "the Government is anew empowered to
exercise its functions" which is used in the last but one
paragraph of the said item of the stating part of the
Constitutional Court ruling.
The Constitutional Court notes that that the
Constitutional Court ruling constitutes an indivisible whole.
The resolution of the ruling is based on the arguments and
motives of the stating part. While construing corresponding
provisions of the ruling, the Constitutional Court is bound by
the content of the said ruling (Part 3 of Article 61 of the Law
on the Constitutional Court).
1.2. Assessing the compliance of the Seimas resolution of
10 December 1996 with the Constitution, the Constitutional
Court analysed the legal significance of the Programme of the
Government and the constitutional relations of the supreme
institutions of power which are linked with this. The
peculiarity of these relations are revealed when one compares
the notions "resignation of the Government" and "returning of
the powers of the Government" which are used in the
Constitution. The Constitutional Court held that they may not
be treated as identical. They are linked with different legal
situations. This also determines different legal effects.
The bases for the resignation of the Government are
established by Part 3 of Article 101 of the Constitution. Under
Part 2 of Article 101 of the Constitution, the Government must
also resign if it has not been re-invested with authority by
the Seimas after more than half of the ministers were changed.
The resignation of the Government is linked with loss or
non-acquirement of the trust of the Seimas in the Government.
The resignation of the Government means that its activities
terminate. After the resignation, and in the case provided for
by Item 4 of Part 3 of Article 101 of the Constitution-prior to
it, the procedure of the formation of a new Government begins.
Therefore, it needs to be noted that a new Government may be
formed and a Programme of the Government may be confirmed only
after the resignation of the Government.
The returning of the powers of the Government has another
legal meaning, which was explained in the ruling. The
Constitution expressly provides that the Government shall
return its powers after the elections of the Seimas and the
elections of the President of the Republic. As mentioned above,
when more than half of the ministers have been changed, the
Government must anew be empowered to exercise its functions as
well. In case the Government is not empowered anew, it must
resign.
It was noted in the Constitutional Court ruling that after
the elections of the President of the Republic, the Government
also returns its powers to a newly elected President of the
Republic. However, the Constitution does not prescribe that the
Government must resign then. This is due to the fact that after
the change of the head of the state, the confidence of the
Seimas in the Government remains intact. Upon the consent of
the Seimas to the candidature nominated by the President of the
Republic of the Prime Minister of the Government which returned
its powers, upon the appointment of the Prime Minister by the
President of the Republic, and upon the approval of the
composition of the Government submitted, it is recognised that
the Government is anew empowered to exercise its functions,
unless more than half of the ministers have been changed.
The Constitutional Court notes that in such a case it
means that the Government is anew empowered to exercise its
functions, therefore changes of the ministers must be
calculated from the moment when the Government was empowered
anew.
2. The petitioner also requests to explain whether the
wording "unless half of the ministers have been changed" which
was used in the same ruling of the Constitutional Court
presumes the change of the composition of the Government which
is regulated by Article 202 of the Statute of the Seimas. The
petitioner inquires whether the cases when ministers were
dismissed due to the abolition of respective institutions or
because such office no longer existed, and by virtue of change
of the name of the post of ministers after the government
functions of ministries had either been expanded or reduced
even though the ministers continued to work are to be
attributed to such a change of the composition of the
Government. The petitioner also wants to know whether it is
recognised that ministers have been changed when not a single
minister was changed after some ministries had been abolished
and their functions had been distributed to the other
ministries.
The Constitutional Court notes that these questions were
not investigated in the 10 January 1998 ruling of the
Constitutional Court, therefore they may not be construed. This
is a matter of special investigation.
Conforming to Article 61 of the Law of the Republic of
Lithuania on the Constitutional Court, the Constitutional Court
has adopted the following
decision:
1. To construe that the statement "the Government is anew
empowered to exercise its functions" upon the consent of the
Seimas to the candidature of the Prime Minister, upon the
appointment of the Prime Minister by the President of the
Republic, and upon the approval of the composition of the
Government submitted, unless more than half of the ministers
have been changed, which is used in the last but one paragraph
of Item 3.3 of the stating part of the Constitutional Court of
the Republic of Lithuania Ruling "On the compliance of the 10
December 1996 Seimas Resolution 'On the Programme of the
Government of the Republic of Lithuania' with the Constitution
of the Republic of Lithuania" of 10 January 1998 means that a
new period of the powers of the Government begins, therefore
the change of ministers in the Government is to be calculated
from the beginning of this period.
2. To refuse to construe the wording "unless half of the
ministers have been changed."