Lietuviškai
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF
LITHUANIA
DECISION
ON THE PETITION OF A GROUP OF MEMBERS OF THE
SEIMAS OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA REQUESTING TO
INVESTIGATE THE COMPLIANCE OF PARAGRAPH 2 OF
ARTICLE 15 OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA LAW ON
ELECTRICITY (WORDING OF 1 JULY 2004) WITH THE
CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA
15 December 2004
Vilnius
The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania,
composed of the Justices of the Constitutional Court Armanas
Abramavičius, Egidijus Jarašiūnas, Egidijus Kūris, Kęstutis
Lapinskas, Zenonas Namavičius, Jonas Prapiestis, Vytautas
Sinkevičius, and Stasys Stačiokas,
with the secretary of the hearing-Daiva Pitrėnaitė,
in a sitting of the Constitutional Court considered a
petition of a group of members of the Seimas of the Republic of
Lithuania requesting to investigate as to whether the provision
"the equipment of a customer may be connected to transmission
network only in cases where the operator of the transmission
network refuses, due to established technical or maintenance
requirements, to connect the equipment of the customer to the
distribution network which is on the territory indicated in the
licence of the distribution network operator" of Paragraph 2 of
Article 15 (wording of 1 July 2004) of the Republic of
Lithuania Law on Electricity is not in conflict with the
provision of Paragraph 2 of Article 5 of the Constitution of
the Republic of Lithuania that the scope of power shall be
limited by the Constitution, the provision of Paragraph 1 of
Article 46 thereof that Lithuania's economy shall be based on
the right of private ownership and individual freedom of
economic activity and initiative, the provision of Paragraph 2
of Article 46 thereof that the state shall support economic
efforts and initiatives that are useful to the society,
Paragraph 4 of Article 46 thereof that the law shall prohibit
monopolisation of production and the market and shall protect
freedom of fair competition, the provision of Paragraph 5 of
Article 46 thereof that the state shall defend the interests of
the consumer, and the constitutional principle of a state under
the rule of law.
The Constitutional Court
has established:
1. On 1 July 2004, the Seimas adopted the Republic of
Lithuania Law on the Amendment of the Law on Electricity
(Official Gazette Valstybės žinios, 2004, No. 107-3964), by
Article 1 whereof it amended the Republic of Lithuania Law on
Electricity and set it forth in a new wording.
2. Paragraph 2 of Article 15 of the Law on Electricity
(wording of 1 July 2004) provides:
"The transmission system operator must ensure that
conditions for the connection to the transmission network of
electricity generating installations, operators of distribution
networks, and customers' equipment are in conformity with the
requirements established in legal acts and are
non-discriminatory. The equipment of a customer may be
connected to transmission network only in cases where the
operator of the transmission network refuses, due to
established technical or maintenance requirements, to connect
the equipment of the customer to the distribution network which
is on the territory indicated in the licence of the
distribution network operator."
3. The petition of the group of members of the Seimas
requesting to investigate as to whether the provision "the
equipment of a customer may be connected to transmission
network only in cases where the operator of the transmission
network refuses, due to established technical or maintenance
requirements, to connect the equipment of the customer to the
distribution network which is on the territory indicated in the
licence of the distribution network operator" of Paragraph 2 of
Article 15 (wording of 1 July 2004) of the Law on Electricity
is not in conflict with the provision of Paragraph 2 of Article
5 of the Constitution that the scope of power shall be limited
by the Constitution, the provision of Paragraph 1 of Article 46
thereof that Lithuania's economy shall be based on the right of
private ownership and individual freedom of economic activity
and initiative, the provision of Paragraph 2 of Article 46
thereof that the state shall support economic efforts and
initiatives that are useful to the society, Paragraph 4 of
Article 46 thereof that the law shall prohibit monopolisation
of production and the market and shall protect freedom of fair
competition, the provision of Paragraph 5 of Article 46 thereof
that the state shall defend the interests of the consumer, and
the constitutional principle of a state under the rule of law,
was received at the Constitutional Court on 3 November 2004.
On 3 November 2004, the President of the Constitutional
Court issued Ordinance No. 2B-141 whereby he commissioned a
justice of the Constitutional Court to carry out preliminary
investigation and necessary preparatory actions as regards the
said petition of the group of members of the Seimas.
On 9 November 2004, the justice of the Constitutional
Court, having carried out the preliminary investigation,
submitted a note to the President of the Constitutional Court,
in which he held that there were no grounds established in
Article 69 of the Law on the Constitutional Court to refuse to
accept the petition for consideration and, pursuant to Item 1
of Paragraph 1 of Article 25 of the Law on the Constitutional
Court, suggested that the petition be accepted and that one
begin to prepare the case for a Constitutional Court hearing.
4. On 9 November 2004, after the petition had been
received at the Constitutional Court and after the preliminary
investigation had been carried out, a request was received from
seven members of the Seimas, whereby they revoked their
signatures in the petition of the group of members of the
Seimas, received at the Constitutional Court on 3 November
2004, requesting to investigate the compliance of the disputed
provision of Paragraph 2 of Article 15 (wording of 1 July 2004)
of the Law on Electricity with the Constitution, and whereby
they requested the Constitutional Court that it adopt a
decision to refuse to accept the said petition of 3 November
2004 of the group of members of the Seimas.
The Constitutional Court
holds that:
1. Under Article 106 of the Constitution, not less than
1/5 of all members of the Seimas have the right to apply to the
Constitutional Court. An analogous requirement is consolidated
in Item 1 of Article 65 of the Law on the Constitutional Court
of the Republic of Lithuania. It means that the petition must
be signed by not less than 29 members of the Seimas
(Constitutional Court decision of 26 August 1993). The will of
the members of the Seimas to apply to the Constitutional Court
must be expressed clearly and unambiguously (Constitutional
Court decision of 24 April 2002). If the petition to the
Constitutional Court is submitted by a group of less than 29
members of the Seimas, one is to hold that the entity of
submission of a petition established in the Constitution and
the Law on the Constitutional Court is absent.
2. The petition of the group of members of the Seimas
requesting to investigate as to whether the provision "the
equipment of a customer may be connected to transmission
network only in cases where the operator of the transmission
network refuses, due to established technical or maintenance
requirements, to connect the equipment of the customer to the
distribution network which is on the territory indicated in the
licence of the distribution network operator" of Paragraph 2 of
Article 15 (wording of 1 July 2004) of the Law on Electricity
is not in conflict with the provision of Paragraph 2 of Article
5 of the Constitution that the scope of power shall be limited
by the Constitution, the provision of Paragraph 1 of Article 46
thereof that Lithuania's economy shall be based on the right of
private ownership and individual freedom of economic activity
and initiative, the provision of Paragraph 2 of Article 46
thereof that the state shall support economic efforts and
initiatives that are useful to the society, Paragraph 4 of
Article 46 thereof that the law shall prohibit monopolisation
of production and the market and shall protect freedom of fair
competition, the provision of Paragraph 5 of Article 46 thereof
that the state shall defend the interests of the consumer, and
the constitutional principle of a state under the rule of law,
which was received at the Constitutional Court on 3 November
2004, was signed by 31 members of the Seimas, whose signatures
were confirmed by the First Deputy President of the Seimas.
Thus, the said petition was signed by the entity
established in the Constitution and the Law on the
Constitutional Court.
There are no grounds provided for either in the
Constitution, the Law on the Constitutional Court, or the Rules
of the Constitutional Court, due to which it would be possible
to refuse to consider the petition or return it to the
petitioner.
3. It needs to be noted that at the time when the seven
members of the Seimas revoked their signatures in the petition
received at the Constitutional Court on 3 November 2004, which
requests to investigate the compliance of the disputed
provision of Paragraph 2 of Article 15 (wording of 1 July 2004)
of the Law on Electricity with the Constitution, the said
petition had already been received and registered at the
Constitutional Court, its preliminary investigation had been
carried out and the justice who carried it out had already
suggested that it be accepted and that one begin to prepare the
case for a Constitutional Court hearing.
4. In case one granted the request of the members of the
Seimas who revoked their signatures in the petition received at
the Constitutional Court on 3 November 2004 (which requests to
investigate the compliance of the disputed provision of
Paragraph 2 of Article 15 (wording of 1 July 2004) of the Law
on Electricity with the Constitution) to adopt a decision to
refuse to consider the said 3 November 2004 decision of the
group of members of the Seimas, then one would virtually deny
the already implemented right of the group of members of the
Seimas, i.e. an entity that has the right, under the
Constitution and the Law on the Constitutional Court, to apply
to the Constitutional Court with a petition requesting to
investigate whether a legal act is not in conflict with the
Constitution. Thus, one would deny the legitimate expectation
of the other 24 members of the Seimas who signed the aforesaid
petition of 3 November 2004 of the group of members of the
Seimas that their already implemented right to apply, together
with the other members of the Seimas, to the Constitutional
Court requesting to investigate the compliance of a legal act
with the Constitution, will not be denied after their common
request is received at the Constitutional Court and the
procedural actions which are indicated in the Law on the
Constitutional Court and the Rules of the Constitutional Court
are commenced.
Conforming to Article 106 of the Constitution of the
Republic of Lithuania and Paragraph 1 of Article 28 of the Law
on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, the
Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania has adopted
the following
decision:
To accept the petition of a group of members of the
Seimas, the petitioner, requesting to investigate as to whether
the provision "the equipment of a customer may be connected to
transmission network only in cases where the operator of the
transmission network refuses, due to established technical or
maintenance requirements, to connect the equipment of the
customer to the distribution network which is on the territory
indicated in the licence of the distribution network operator"
of Paragraph 2 of Article 15 (wording of 1 July 2004) of the
Republic of Lithuania Law on Electricity is not in conflict
with the provision of Paragraph 2 of Article 5 of the
Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania that the scope of
power shall be limited by the Constitution, the provision of
Paragraph 1 of Article 46 thereof that Lithuania's economy
shall be based on the right of private ownership and individual
freedom of economic activity and initiative, the provision of
Paragraph 2 of Article 46 thereof that the state shall support
economic efforts and initiatives that are useful to the
society, Paragraph 4 of Article 46 thereof that the law shall
prohibit monopolisation of production and the market and shall
protect freedom of fair competition, the provision of Paragraph
5 of Article 46 thereof that the state shall defend the
interests of the consumer, and the constitutional principle of
a state under the rule of law.
This Constitutional Court decision is final and not
subject to appeal.
The decision is promulgated in the name of the Republic of
Lithuania.
Justices of the Constitutional Court: Armanas Abramavičius
Egidijus Jarašiūnas
Egidijus Kūris
Kęstutis Lapinskas
Zenonas Namavičius
Jonas Prapiestis
Vytautas Sinkevičius
Stasys Stačiokas