Lietuviškai 

                   THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF                   
                    THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA                    

                           R U L I N G                           

        On the compliance of Article 6 of the Republic of        
          Lithuania Law on Amendment of the 1997 State           
          Budget and Local Governments Budgets with the          
            Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania            

                    8 November 2000, Vilnius                     
  
     The  Constitutional  Court  of  the  Republic  of Lithuania,
composed  of  the  Judges  of  the  Constitutional Court Egidijus
Jarašiūnas,   Egidijus   Kūris,   Zigmas   Levickis,   Augustinas
Normantas,   Vladas   Pavilonis,   Jonas   Prapiestis,   Vytautas
Sinkevičius, and Teodora Staugaitienė,
     with the secretary of the hearing-Daiva Pitrėnaitė,
     pursuant  to  Paragraph 1 of Article 102 of the Constitution
of  the  Republic  of  Lithuania  and Paragraph 1 of Article 1 of
the  Republic  of  Lithuania  Law on the Constitutional Court, on
19   October   2000,   in   its   public  hearing  conducted  the
investigation  of  case  No.  1/99  subsequent  to  the  petition
submitted   by   the   Kaunas   Regional   Court   requesting  to
investigate  if  the  provision  of  Article 6 of the Republic of
Lithuania  Law  on  Amendment  of the 1997 State Budget and Local
Governments  Budgets  that  unused  appropriations  of 1996 local
governments   budgets   for   financing   environment  protection
objects  shall  be  returned to the state budget is in compliance
with  Paragraph  1  of  Article  127  of  the Constitution of the
Republic of Lithuania.

     The Constitutional Court
                        has established:                         

                                I                                
     The  petitioner-the  Kaunas Regional Court-was investigating
a  civil  case  on  the  obligation  to  the  local government of
Kaunas  city  to  transfer  the  unused  appropriations  of  1996
allocated  for  financing environment protection objects from its
budget  to  the  state budget. On 21 December 1998, by its ruling
the  said  court  suspended  the  investigation  of  the case and
appealed  to  the Constitutional Court with a petition requesting
to  investigate  whether  the  provision  of  Article  6  of  the
Republic  of  Lithuania Law on Amendment of the 1997 State Budget
and   Local   Governments  Budgets  (Official  Gazette  Valstybės
žinios,  1997,  No.  98-2482; hereinafter also referred to as the
Law)  whereby  unused  appropriations  of  1996 local governments
budgets  for  financing  environment  protection objects shall be
returned  to  the state budget was in compliance with Paragraph 1
of   Article   127   of  the  Constitution  of  the  Republic  of
Lithuania.

                               II                                
     The request of the petitioner is based on these arguments.
     Paragraph  1  of  Article  127  of the Constitution provides
that  the  budgetary  system  of  Lithuania  shall consist of the
independent  state  budget  of  the Republic of Lithuania and the
independent    local    governments   budgets.   This   provision
establishes    independence   of   local   governments   budgets.
Meanwhile,  Article  6 of the 21 October 1997 Law on Amendment of
the  1997  State  Budget and Local Governments Budgets stipulates
that   unused   appropriations   of   1996   to  finance  capital
investments  (the  estimate  value of which exceeds 5000 thousand
litas)  and  environment  protection  objects  shall  be returned
from  local  governments  budgets  to  the  state  budget  to the
extent   that  the  factual  revenues  of  1997  of  these  local
governments  budgets  are larger than the revenues established on
approval  of  deduction  rates  to local governments budgets. The
Law  provides  for taking some funds from the budget of the local
government   against  the  will  of  institutions  of  the  local
government.  The  petitioner  doubts  if  this  requirement is in
compliance with Paragraph 1 of Article 127 of the Constitution.

                               III                               
     In  the  course  of  the  preparation  of  the  case for the
Constitutional  Court  hearing,  a  written  explanation  of  the
representative  of  the party concerned-the Seimas-E. Žilevičius,
Vice-Minister of Finance, was received.
     The   representative  of  the  party  concerned  noted  that
Paragraph  1  of  Article 127 of the Constitution and Paragraph 1
of  Article  1  of  the  Republic  of  Lithuania Law on Budgeting
provide  that  the budgetary system of Lithuania shall consist of
the  independent  state  budget  of the Republic of Lithuania and
the  independent  local  governments budgets. The Seimas annually
approves  the  state  budget of the Republic of Lithuania and the
funds  allocated  to  local governments budgets. Local government
councils,  taking  account  of the budget funds allocated to each
particular   local   government,   within  one  month  after  the
approval  of  the  state  budget  of  the  Republic  of Lithuania
approve     respective    local    governments    budgets.    The
aforementioned   procedure   results   in   composition   of  the
independent   state  budget  and  local  governments  budgets  as
Articles  12,  13, 28 and 29 of the Law on Budgeting in a special
manner  regulate  such  issues  as  the  state  budget  and local
governments   budgets   revenues   and   the   needs  covered  by
appropriations  from  the  state  budget  and  local  governments
budgets.   The   independence  of  the  state  budget  and  local
governments  budgets  is  also confirmed by Articles 23 and 31 of
the  said  law  which  establish that additional revenues accrued
in  the  course  of  the  execution  of  the  state budget of the
Republic  of  Lithuania,  and  the  appropriations that have lost
their  purpose,  and  which  were designated for additional state
expenditures,  shall  be  distributed  by  the  Seimas  upon  the
recommendation  of  the  Government of the Republic of Lithuania.
Additional  revenues  accrued  in  the course of the execution of
local  governments  budgets and the appropriations that have lost
their  purpose  remain  at  the  disposition  of local government
councils  and  are  distributed  upon  decisions  of institutions
authorised  by  the said councils for additional local government
needs.
     The  representative  of the party concerned pointed out that
Paragraph  2  of  Article 1 of the Law on Budgeting provides that
appropriations  received  by  local  governments  from  the state
budget  and  used  not  according  to  the established purpose or
unused  at  all  must be returned to the state budget. The Seimas
may  allocate  appropriations  designated  for a specific purpose
from  the  independent  state  budget  to  local  governments for
fulfilment  of  certain  programmes.  As  such appropriations are
allocated  from  the  independent  state  budget,  therefore, the
Seimas  also  establishes conditions upon which local governments
are  entitled  to  use the said state budget appropriations. This
legal  provision  requires  that  local  governments  return  the
approved  state  budget  appropriations  to the state budget upon
certain  conditions,  however,  it  does  not  require  that  the
appropriations  approved  for  local  governments  budgets  under
common   procedure   be   returned.   In   the   opinion  of  the
representative  of  the  party concerned, such a provision of the
law  does  not  violate  the  independence  of  local governments
budgets.  Therefore,  on  21 October 1997, the Seimas adopted the
Law  on  Amendment of the 1997 State Budget and Local Governments
Budgets.  Article  6  thereof,  taking  account of Paragraph 2 of
Article  1  and Article 32 of the Law on Budgeting, provided that
unused  appropriations  of  1996  to  finance capital investments
(the  estimate  value  of  which exceeds 5000 thousand litas) and
environment  protection  objects  shall  be  returned  from local
governments  budgets  to  the state budget to the extent that the
factual  revenues  of 1997 of these local governments budgets are
larger  than  the  revenues  established on approval of deduction
rates to local governments budgets.
     The   representative  of  the  party  concerned  is  of  the
opinion  that  Article  6  of  the  Law  on Amendment of the 1997
State  Budget  and  Local  Governments  Budgets  is in compliance
with Paragraph 1 of Article 127 of the Constitution.

                               IV                                
     In  the  course  of  the  preparation  of  the  case for the
Constitutional  Court  hearing,  written  explanations concerning
the  arguments  of  the  petitioner were submitted by L. Sabutis,
Head  of  the  Seimas Public Administration and Local Governments
Committee,  J.  Rudalevičius,  Minister of Administration Reforms
and  Local  Government  Affairs  of the Republic of Lithuania, G.
Švedas,  Vice-Minister  of  Justice, and S. Šiupšinskas, Director
of Local Governments Association of Lithuania.

     The Constitutional Court
                           holds that:                           

     1.  On  21  October 1997, the Seimas adopted the Republic of
Lithuania  Law  on  Amendment  of the 1997 State Budget and Local
Governments  Budgets.  Article  6  of  the  Law provides: "Unused
appropriations  of  1996  to  finance  capital  investments  (the
estimate   value  of  which  exceeds  5000  thousand  litas)  and
environment  protection  objects  shall  be  returned  from local
governments  budgets  to  the state budget to the extent that the
factual  revenues  of 1997 of these local governments budgets are
larger  than  the  revenues  established on approval of deduction
rates to local governments budgets."
     Taking  account  of  the  petition  of  the  petitioner, the
Constitutional  Court  will  investigate  the  compliance  of the
provision  of  Article 6 of the Law that unused appropriations of
1996   to   finance   environment  protection  objects  shall  be
returned  from  local  governments budgets to the state budget to
the  extent  that  the  factual  revenues  of 1997 of these local
governments  budgets  are larger than the revenues established on
approval  of  deduction  rates  to local governments budgets with
the Constitution.
     2.   Paragraph   1   of  Article  127  of  the  Constitution
provides:  "The  budgetary  system  of  the Republic of Lithuania
shall  consist  of  the  independent State Budget of the Republic
of Lithuania and the independent local governments budgets."
     Under  Paragraph  1  of  Article  127  of  the Constitution,
local  governments  budgets  are independent and at the same time
they   are   a  part  of  the  indivisible  budgetary  system  of
Lithuania.  Systematic  interpretation  of  this provision, while
taking  into  consideration  the  other provisions of Article 127
as  well  as  those  of Articles 121 and 131 of the Constitution,
makes   it   possible   to   state  that  local  governments,  in
accordance   with   the   Constitution  and  laws,  independently
dispose of appropriations provided for by laws.
     3.   Local  governments  budgets  accrue  funds  to  finance
social,  economic  and other needs, to maintain local governments
institutions.  Local  governments  budgets  may  also provide for
appropriations  for  capital  investments, environment protection
objects, and other programmes having specific purposes.
     4.  It  is  established in the disputed provision of Article
6  of  the  Law  that:  unused  appropriations of 1996 to finance
environment  protection  objects  must  be  returned  from  local
governments    budgets    to   the   state   budget;   the   said
appropriations  must  be returned from the 1997 local governments
budgets;  the  said unused appropriations must be returned to the
state  budget  to the extent that the factual revenues of 1997 of
these  local  governments  budgets  are  larger than the revenues
established  on  approval of deduction rates to local governments
budgets.
     5.  Consideration  of  the  legal  regulation established in
Article  6  is  to  be  based  on  the fact that Annex 5 of the 7
December  1995  Law  "On  the  Republic  of  Lithuania 1996 State
Budget   and   the   Deduction   Rates  and  Subsidies  to  Local
Governments   Budgets"  established  concrete  appropriations  to
particular  local  governments  for financing certain environment
protection   objects.   Besides,   Article  3  of  the  said  law
established   that  remaining  appropriations  unused  for  their
purpose  were  to  be  returned  to  the  state budget. Thus, the
appropriations  established  in  the  said  law  were  to be used
according to their purpose only.
     The   Constitutional  Court  notes  that  the  provision  of
Paragraph  1  of  Article  127  of  the  Constitution  that local
governments   budgets   are   independent   does  not  mean  that
appropriations  for  financing  environment  protection  objects,
established   in  laws,  may  be  used  not  according  to  their
purpose,  or  that  the remaining appropriations unused according
to  their  purpose may not be returned to the state budget. Thus,
the   requirement   of   Article   6   to   return   the   unused
appropriations  designated  for  financing environment protection
objects  from  local  governments  budgets to the state budget in
itself  does  not  deny  the  principle  of independence of local
governments budgets established in the Constitution.
     6.  Article  6  contains  a wording "unused appropriations".
The  content  of  this  wording  is  not  disclosed  in  the Law.
Finance  law  of  Lithuania  defines  appropriations  as a sum of
money  established  in  the Law on Establishment of the Financial
Indicators  of  the  State  Budget and Local Governments Budgets,
which  a  holder  of appropriations has the right to receive from
the  funds  accrued in the budget. The Constitutional Court notes
that  the  wording  "unused  appropriations  <...>  for financing
environment  protection  objects" is to be construed as including
the   appropriations   which   had   been   received  to  finance
environment  protection  objects  but used for other purposes and
also  appropriations  which  had  been received but were not used
at all.
     7.  As  mentioned,  under  Article  6 of the Law, the unused
1996   appropriations   for   financing   environment  protection
objects  must  be  returned to the state budget from the funds of
the  local  governments  budgets  of  1997.  The  reason  of this
obligation  to  local  governments  is  that in the course of the
execution  of  the 1996 budget the appropriations provided for in
local  governments  budgets  for financing environment protection
objects  were  not used according to their purpose. Therefore the
legal   relations  regulated  by  Article  6  of  the  Law  occur
provided   in   1996   local   governments   did   not   use  the
appropriations  for  financing environment protection objects and
did  not  fulfil  the  obligation established in Article 3 of the
Law  "On  the  Republic  of  Lithuania  1996 State Budget and the
Deduction  Rates  and  Subsidies to Local Governments Budgets" to
return  the  unused  appropriations to the state budget. Thus, it
may  be  concluded  that  such  disputed  legal regulation, which
provides   that  the  unused  appropriations  of  1996  shall  be
returned  from  the  local governments budgets funds of 1997 does
not   deny   the   independence   of  local  governments  budgets
established in the Constitution.
     8.  Under  Article  6  of the Law, the unused appropriations
of  1996  for  financing  environment protection objects shall be
returned  from  local  governments  budgets  to  the state budget
only  to  the  extent  that the factual revenues of 1997 of these
local   governments   budgets   are   larger  than  the  revenues
established   on   approval   of   deduction   rates  from  local
governments  budgets.  The  regulation  establishes the amount of
the  appropriations  that must be returned. Such establishment of
the  size  of  the  unused  appropriations which must be returned
does not deny the independence of local governments budgets.
     9.  The  disputed  legal regulation established in Article 6
of  the  Law  does  not  create  any  new  obligations  to  local
governments,  but  gives  more  concrete  expression of the legal
regulation  established  in  the  7  December  1995  Law  "On the
Republic  of  Lithuania 1996 State Budget and the Deduction Rates
and  Subsidies  to  Local  Governments Budgets", i. e., it points
out  the  size  of  sums, as well as concrete finances from which
the  said  sums must be taken, that must be returned to the state
budget  in  order to fulfil the obligation established in Article
3 of the said law of 7 December 1995.
     Taking  into  consideration  the  above-mentioned arguments,
one  is  to  conclude that the provision of Article 6 of Republic
of  Lithuania  Law  on  Amendment  of  the  1997 State Budget and
Local  Governments  Budgets  adopted  on  21  October  1997  that
unused  appropriations  of 1996 to finance environment protection
objects  shall  be returned from local governments budgets to the
state  budget  to the extent that the factual revenues of 1997 of
these  local  governments  budgets  are  larger than the revenues
established  on  approval of deduction rates to local governments
budgets  is  in compliance with Paragraph 1 of Article 127 of the
Constitution.

     Conforming  to  Article  102  of  the  Constitution  of  the
Republic  of  Lithuania  and  Articles  53,  54  and  56  of  the
Republic  of  Lithuania  Law  on  the  Constitutional  Court, the
Constitutional Court has passed the following

                             ruling:                             
     To  recognise  that  the  provision  of  Article  6  of  the
Republic  of  Lithuania Law on Amendment of the 1997 State Budget
and  Local  Governments  Budgets  that  unused  appropriations of
1996   to   finance   environment  protection  objects  shall  be
returned  from  local  governments budgets to the state budget to
the  extent  that  the  factual  revenues  of 1997 of these local
governments  budgets  are larger than the revenues established on
approval  of  deduction  rates to local governments budgets is in
compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.
     This  Constitutional  Court  ruling is final and not subject
to appeal.
     The  ruling  is  promulgated  on  behalf  of the Republic of
Lithuania.