Case No. 32/08
                                
      THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA

                            CONCLUSION
     ON  THE INQUIRY SET FORTH IN DECREE OF THE PRESIDENT  OF
     THE REPUBLIC NO. 1K-1564 OF 5 NOVEMBER 2008 WHETHER  THE
     REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA LAW ON ELECTIONS TO THE SEIMAS WAS
     NOT VIOLATED DURING THE 2008 ELECTIONS TO THE SEIMAS  OF
     THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA
                                
                         7 November 2008
                             Vilnius

     The  Constitutional  Court  of the Republic  of   Lithuania,
composed  of  the Justices of the Constitutional  Court   Armanas
Abramavičius,   Toma  Birmontienė,  Pranas  Kuconis,     Kęstutis
Lapinskas, Zenonas Namavičius, Ramutė Ruškytė, Egidijus Šileikis,
Algirdas Taminskas and Romualdas Kęstutis Urbaitis, 
     with the secretary of the hearing—Daiva Pitrėnaitė,
     in the presence of:
     the  representatives of the President of the Republic,   the
petitioner,  who  were Aušra Rauličkytė and  Mindaugas   Kluonis,
advisers to the President of the Republic, and
     Zenonas  Vaigauskas,  Chairman  of  the  Central   Electoral
Commission  of the Republic of Lithuania, Pavelas Kujalis,  Vice-
chairman  of the Central Electoral Commission of the Republic  of
Lithuania and Julius Jasaitis, a member of this commission,
     pursuant  to  Item 1 of Paragraph 3 of Article 105  of   the
Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania, Paragraph 2 of Article
1,  Item  1  of  Article 73 and Article 77 of  the  Law  on   the
Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, in its  public
hearing on 6 November 2008 heard constitutional justice case  No.
32/08  subsequent to inquiry set forth in 5 November 2008  Decree
No.  1K-1564 "On the Inquiry to the Constitutional Court of   the
Republic  of  Lithuania" of the President of the  Republic,   the
petitioner,  regarding  a conclusion whether the  provisions   of
Paragraph  2  of Article 77, Paragraphs 2 and 4 of  Article   79,
Paragraph  1  of  Article  80, Paragraph 1  of  Article  81   and
Paragraph  2  of Article 82 of the Republic of Lithuania Law   on
Elections  to  the  Seimas  were not violated  during  the   2008
elections to the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania.

     The Constitutional Court 
                        has established:

                                I
     1.  On  12  October 2008 the elections to the  Seimas   took
place.  The Members of the Seimas were not elected in 68  single-
member   constituencies  from  the  total  number  of  71    such
constituencies. On 26 October 2008 a repeat voting took place  in
these single-member constituencies.
     2.  On  2 November 2008, the Central  Electoral   Commission
confirmed  the final results of the 2008 elections to the  Seimas
by its decision No. 191 "On the Final Results of Elections to the
Seimas  of  the Republic of Lithuania of 12 October 2008".   This
decision of the Central Electoral Commission was announced on the
Internet  on  2  November  2008, and  in  the  official   gazette
"Valstybės žinios"—on 6 November 2008 (Official Gazette Valstybės
žinios, 2008, No. 127-4891). 
     3.  On  4 November 2008, the Lithuanian  Social   Democratic
Party  lodged  a  complaint with the President of  the   Republic
concerning  the violations of the Law on Elections to the  Seimas
whereby  it  was requested to apply to the Constitutional   Court
with an inquiry "regarding the repeat elections of the Member  of
the  Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania in Šeškinė  Constituency
No. 6".
     4.  By  his  Decree  No. 1K-1564 "On  the  Inquiry  to   the
Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania" of 5  November
2008, the President of the Republic applied to the Constitutional
Court with an inquiry requesting for a conclusion whether the Law
on  Elections  to  the Seimas was not violated during  the   2008
elections to the Seimas.

                                II
     1.  At the Constitutional Court hearing, A. Rauličkytė,  the
representative of the President of the Republic, the  petitioner,
explained  that  the  application  by means of  inquiry  to   the
Constitutional Court by the President of the Republic whether the
Law  on Elections to the Seimas was not violated during the  2008
elections to the Seimas was determined by the concern of the Head
of State whether during the repeat voting in the Šeškinė  single-
member constituency the procedures of the elections to the Seimas
linked  to  the counting of votes, record of the  bulletins   and
ensuring of their security were not violated.
     2.  At  the Constitutional Court hearing, Chairman  of   the
Central  Electoral Commission Z. Vaigauskas explained what  facts
were   investigated  and  assessed  by  the  Central    Electoral
Commission  and by what arguments it was guided in the course  of
adoption  of  Decision No. 198 "Regarding the Complaint  of   the
Lithuanian  Social  Democratic Party Whereby It is Requested   to
Recognise the Results of the Elections as Invalid" of 2  November
2008.
     3.  At the Constitutional Court hearing, A. Rauličkytė,  the
representative of the President of the Republic, the  petitioner,
and  J.  Jasaitis, the representative of the  Central   Electoral
Commission,  expressed their doubt regarding the official  source
for announcement of the results of elections and counting of  the
corresponding time periods which are linked thereto and which are
established in laws.

     The Constitutional Court
                           holds that:

I
     1.  On  12  October 2008 the elections to the  Seimas   took
place.  The Members of the Seimas were not elected in 68  single-
member   constituencies  from  the  total  number  of  71    such
constituencies. On 26 October 2008 a repeat voting took place  in
these single-member constituencies. 
     2.  In Šeškinė Single-member Constituency No. 6, the  repeat
voting  took  place as regards two candidates to Members of   the
Seimas  who  had received most votes during the first   electoral
round, and who were Vilija Blinkevičiūtė and Audronius Ažubalis.
     3. After the repeat voting was over and upon counting of the
votes,  on 26 October 2008 at 23.35 o'clock the protocol of   the
Electoral  Commission of the Šeškinė Constituency was signed   in
which it was specified that 12,335 voters took part in the  vote.
11,762  ballot-papers  were  recognised to be valid and  it   was
counted  that  5,865 votes went for A. Ažubalis and 5,897   votes
went  for V. Blinkevičiūtė (the protocol of counting of votes  of
the  Electoral  Commission  of the Šeškinė  Constituency  of   26
October  2008). Thus, the difference between the votes cast   for
the candidates was 32 votes in favour of V. Blinkevičiūtė.
     4. On 27 October 2008, Paulius Švilpa, the representative of
the  Homeland  Union-Lithuanian Christian Democrats  in   Šeškinė
Constituency  No.  6 requested the electoral commission  of   the
constituency to recount all the ballot-papers in Šeškinė  Single-
member Constituency No. 6.
     5.   After   the  Electoral  Commission  of  the     Šeškinė
Constituency has recounted the ballot-papers, on 29 October  2008
at 23.50 o'clock the protocol of the Electoral Commission of  the
Šeškinė  Constituency  was signed in which it was recorded   that
12,337  voters  took  part in the vote, the  number  of   invalid
ballot-papers  was  639, while the number of  the  valid  ballot-
papers  was  11,698,  as well as that 5,877 votes  went  for   A.
Ažubalis and 5,821 votes went for V. Blinkevičiūtė (the  protocol
of  counting of votes of the Electoral Commission of the  Šeškinė
Constituency  of 29 October 2008). Thus, the difference   between
the  votes cast for the candidates was 56 votes in favour of   A.
Ažubalis.
     6.  On  28 October 2008, Chairman of the Central   Electoral
Commission Z. Vaigauskas addressed the Prosecutor General of  the
Republic  of Lithuania with a request to initiate the   pre-trial
investigation regarding the possibly incorrect counting of  votes
of  the  elections  to  the  Seimas  in  Šeškinė    Single-member
Constituency No. 6 which meets the features of the crime provided
for  in  Article  174 of the Criminal Code of  the  Republic   of
Lithuania.
     7.  On  29 October 2008, the Central  Electoral   Commission
received  a  complaint "Regarding Tampering with the Results   of
Elections to the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania" from Julius
Jurginis, the representative of the Lithuanian Social  Democratic
Party  at  the Central Electoral Commission for  the   elections,
whereby it is requested to recognise "the results (of the  repeat
voting  of  elections to the Seimas of 26 October 2008)  of   the
initial counting of votes as final or to call repeat elections to
the  Seimas  in Šeškinė Constituency No. 6". This  complaint   is
grounded on the fact that, according to J. Jurginis, the  results
of counting of the repeat voting could be determined by the deeds
provided for in Article 173 titled "Tampering with a document  of
elections  or  referendum  or use of the  tampered  document   of
elections  or  referendum" of the Criminal Code and Article   174
titled  "False  counting of votes of the elections" of the   same
code.  According to him, upon recounting of votes, one found  the
ballot-papers  with the marked surname of candidate A.   Ažubalis
which, purportedly, had not been counted previously, and could be
put  in the bags of the ballot-papers after the (first)  counting
of votes at night of the elections.
     8.  On  29 October 2008, the Central  Electoral   Commission
formed  a working group composed of the Chairman of the   Central
Electoral Commission Z. Vaigauskas, Vice-chairman P. Kujalis  and
members  Vaidotas Vaičaitis and Živilė Verbylaitė. This   working
group  checked the bags of the ballot-papers of  Šeškinė  Single-
member Constituency No. 6, Šeškinės Polling District No. 258  and
Statybininkų  Poling  District  No.  305, and  it  drew  up   two
verification acts. In these acts it was held that in both polling
districts the number of ballot-papers sealed with the seal of the
constituency is not bigger than that specified in the protocol of
counting of votes and that no ballot-papers sealed with the seals
of  electoral commissions of other polling districts were  found.
The 30 October 2008 verification would not essentially change the
recounting  results  of 29 October 2008: while carrying out   the
verification,  it  was  established  that  in  Šeškinės   Polling
District No. 258, 363 voters voted for A. Ažubalis and 410  voted
for V. Blinkevičiūtė (2 ballot-papers were not sealed), while  in
Statybininkų  Poling  District No. 305, 503 voters voted for   A.
Ažubalis (11 ballot-papers were not sealed) and 448 voted for  V.
Blinkevičiūtė (7 ballot-papers were not sealed) (Decision of  the
Central Electoral Commission No. 198 "Regarding the Complaint  of
the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party Whereby It is Requested to
Recognise the Results of the Elections as Invalid" of 2  November
2008).
     On 29 October 2008, the Electoral Commission of the  Šeškinė
Constituency recounted the annulled ballot-papers of all  polling
districts  of  the Šeškinė constituency, matched the numbers   of
counterfoils   of  these  ballot-papers  with  the  numbers    of
counterfoils  of  the  ballot-papers  issued  to  the   electoral
commissions of the polling districts (the protocol of  recounting
of  votes  of  the polling districts  of  Šeškinė   Single-member
Constituency No. 6 of 29 October 2008).
     9. On 29 October 2008 J. Jurginis, the representative of the
Lithuanian  Social  Democratic  Party at the  Central   Electoral
Commission  for the elections, addressed the Prosecutor   General
with a request to carry out the pre-trial investigation regarding
recounting  of  votes of the elections to the Seimas in   Šeškinė
Single-member  Constituency No. 6 which met the features of   the
crimes provided for in Articles 173 and 174 of the Criminal Code.
     10. On 29 October 2008, the Office of the Prosecutor General
assigned the Chief Prosecutor of the Local Prosecutor's Office of
the Vilnius City to conduct the pre-trial investigation.
     11.  On 1 November 2008, the Chief Prosecutor of the  Second
Division   of  Organised  Crimes  Investigation  of  the    Local
Prosecutor's  Office  of the Vilnius City adopted a decision   to
dismiss  the pre-trial investigation subsequent to the  petitions
of the Chairman of the Central Electoral Commission Z. Vaigauskas
and  J.  Jurginis, the representative of the  Lithuanian   Social
Democratic  Party  at the Central Electoral Commission  for   the
elections, since in Šeškinė Single-member Constituency No. 6  and
polling districts, while counting the results of the elections to
the  Seimas  of  the second electoral round,  no  criminal   deed
provided  for  in Paragraph 1 of Article 173 and Paragraph 1   of
Article 174 of the Criminal Code had been committed.
     The  joint  investigation  group of the  officials  of   the
Prosecutor's  Office of the Vilnius City and the State   Security
Department  established that the seals and envelopes of the  bags
with the ballot-papers of the elections were undamaged except for
one  envelope  with invalid ballot-papers which was in  the   bag
received  from Statybininkų Poling District No. 305—its side  was
torn. The seal of the bag received from Ozo Polling District  No.
251  was not fully tightened (therefore, it was easy to take   it
off, even though it had to be taken off only after breaking  it),
however, after having recounted the ballot-papers of this polling
district,  no discrepancies were found. According to the data  of
the investigation, the premises where the ballot-papers were kept
were  always  locked, the member of the electoral commission   K.
Kazliūnas  had the key, and later the key was held by the  Deputy
Chairman  of the electoral commission L. Lajauskas. According  to
the witness L. Lajauskas, for the night of 26 to 27 October 2008,
the  alarm was turned on in the premises. No traces of   break-in
were  found  in the lock. Upon receipt of the request  from   the
observer  of  the  elections P. Švilpa on 27 October  2008,   the
ballot-papers  of the polling districts of Šeškinė   Constituency
No.  6  were  recounted,  first of all  of  Statybininkų   Poling
District  No.  305  in  which the difference of  votes  for   the
candidates was the smallest (Decision of the Chief Prosecutor  of
the  Second  Division of Organised Crimes Investigation  of   the
Local  Prosecutor's  Office  of the Vilnius City of  1   November
2008).
     12. By Decision of the Central Electoral Commission No.  198
"Regarding  the  Complaint of the Lithuanian  Social   Democratic
Party,  Whereby It is Requested to Recognise the Results of   the
Elections  as  Invalid" of 2 November 2008, the complaint of   J.
Jurginis, the representative of the Lithuanian Social  Democratic
Party at the Central Electoral Commission for the elections,  was
rejected. The Central Electoral Commission drew a conclusion that
all  the feasible possibilities had been used to verify and  make
sure  that  during the time period between the counting  of   the
results  of voting on 26 October 2008 and their recounting on  29
October  2008 no unlawful actions were committed in order to  try
to  change  the ballot-papers. The Central Electoral   Commission
also  held  that  the votes were recalculated in  the   Electoral
Commission  of  the  Šeškinė  Constituency on  29  October   2008
pursuant  to the provisions of Paragraph 6 of Article 82 of   the
Law on Elections to the Seimas and that there was no legal ground
to  doubt  the  recounting  results or to  make  any   additional
recounting.  Therefore, the Central Electoral Commission drew   a
conclusion  that  the  request to recognise the results  of   the
initial  counting  of  votes of 26 October 2008 as final  or   to
recognise  the  results of the repeat voting as invalid  and   to
announce  the  repeat  elections was groundless and  was  to   be
rejected.
     13.  On  2 November 2008, the Central Electoral   Commission
adopted  Decision No. 191 "On the Final Results of Elections   to
the  Seimas  of the Republic of Lithuania of 12  October   2008",
whereby it was decided:
     "1.  To  establish the results of the repeat voting of   the
Elections  to the Seimas of 26 October 2008 in 68   single-member
constituencies (Annex 1);
     2.  To establish the final ranks of the lists of  candidates
for Members of the Seimas in the multi-member constituency of the
elections to the Seimas of 12 October 2008 (Annex 2);
     3. According to the results of the elections in multi-member
and  single-member constituencies, to establish the persons   who
have  been  elected to the Seimas of the Republic  of   Lithuania
(Annex  3).  To  grant the certificate of Seimas Member  to   the
elected  Members  of  the Seimas in the March 11th Hall  of   the
Seimas  of the Republic of Lithuania at 12 o'clock on 5  November
2008;
     <...>
     5.  To  announce the final results of the elections on   the
Internet and in the next the official gazette 'Valstybės  žinios'
".
     This  decision  of  the Central  Electoral  Commission   was
announced on the Internet on 2 November 2008 and in the  official
gazette  "Valstybės žinios"—on 6 November 2008 (Official  Gazette
Valstybės žinios, 2008, No. 127-4891).
     14.  On  4 November 2008, the Lithuanian Social   Democratic
Party addressed the President of the Republic requesting to apply
to  the Constitutional Court with request "regarding the   repeat
elections  of  the  Member  of the Seimas  of  the  Republic   of
Lithuania in Šeškinė Constituency No. 6".
     In  the complaint of the Lithuanian Social Democratic  Party
it  is  stated that while recounting the votes, one noticed   the
uncounted ballot-papers which had been cast for A. Ažubalis,  and
these ballot-papers could be put in the bags of the ballot-papers
already  after counting the votes on the day of elections. It  is
also  specified that upon recounting the ballot-papers, all   the
non-sealed  ballot-papers in the constituency were recognised  as
invalid,  even  though,  according to Article 80 of the  Law   on
Elections  to the Seimas, only the ballot-papers which were  sent
by  post  and  which  are  not  sealed  with  the  seal  of   the
constituency may be recognised as invalid. Before taking the bags
of  the  ballot-papers  of the repeat voting  to  the   electoral
constituency  and before the recounting of votes in the  election
commission of the constituency, the seals of all bags should have
been checked, however, this was not done.
     15. In this context, it needs to be noted that the  Republic
of Lithuania Law on the Procedure of Publication and Coming  into
Force  of  Laws  and Other Legal Acts inter alia  provides:   the
official publication of laws and other legal acts shall be  their
publishing in the official gazette "Valstybės žinios", the day of
their  publication  in the official gazette  "Valstybės   žinios"
shall  be the day of their release; in cases established by  this
law, the official publication of other legal acts shall be  their
publishing  in  the mass media or in the internet websites of   a
corresponding  institution (Paragraph 1 (wording of 7 July  2005)
of Article 2)); the decisions of the Central Electoral Commission
regarding  the final results of the elections to the Seimas  must
be  announced in the official gazette "Valstybės žinios" (Item  7
(wording  of  10  December 2002) of Paragraph 1 (wording  of   16
January 2007) of Article 3).
     16. Paragraph 1 of Article 93 (wording of 11 December  2004)
of  the Law on Elections to the Seimas provides that the  Central
Electoral  Commission shall establish the final election  results
after  it  has investigated all complaints and  established   all
election results in the constituency, including of the voters who
have  voted on ships and abroad. Paragraph 2 (wording of 11   May
2004)  of the same article inter alia provides that the   Central
Electoral  Commission shall announce the final election   results
not later than within 7 days following the election or the repeat
voting, and that the Central Electoral Commission shall first  of
all  announce the final results on the Internet and in the   next
issue of the official gazette "Valstybės žinios".
     Therefore,  Paragraph 2 (wording of 11 May 2004) of  Article
93 of the Law on Elections to the Seimas provides for two sources
for  announcement  of the final results of the elections to   the
Seimas: the Internet and the official gazette "Valstybės žinios".
     17.  It needs to be mentioned that in its ruling of 27  June
2007,  the Constitutional Court held: in general, the  legislator
may  regulate  the  official publishing of the legal acts  in   a
differentiated  manner  also on other grounds and  to   establish
alternative  (in  comparison with the general procedure  of   the
official  publishing  of  the  legal  acts)  sources,  ways   and
procedure  of  the  official  publishing  of  legal  acts;   such
situations  are possible when a certain legal act must come  into
force  immediately, right after being issued. In such cases,  one
must  ensure  the necessary expeditious and as fast as   possible
official publishing of legal acts; the official public publishing
of the whole legal act is not an end in itself—it is necessary so
that the subjects of law would know what the corresponding  legal
act  is, would be able to familiarise themselves with the   whole
legal  act  and  to follow it; the purpose and  essence  of   the
official  public  publishing of an entire legal act is  that   it
becomes  accessible to the subjects of law and no doubts   remain
regarding the authenticity of its contents.
     18.  Alongside, it needs to be noted that the provision   of
Paragraph  2 of Article 93 of the Law on Elections to the  Seimas
establishes that the Central Electoral Commission shall first  of
all  announce the final results in the Internet and in the   next
issue  of the official gazette "Valstybės žinios" is in   various
aspects  related to other provisions of the Law on Elections   to
the Seimas. Thus, in the aspect of counting of the  corresponding
time periods, this provision is related to Paragraph 5 of Article
86  o  f  the Law on Elections to the Seimas,  under  which   the
parties  which  have nominated candidates for Seimas Member,   as
well  as  the  candidates  for  the  Seimas  Member,  may   lodge
complaints  against  the  decisions  of  the  Central   Electoral
Commission  or  against  the refusal of  the  Central   Electoral
Commission to investigate complaints about the violations of  the
Law  on  Elections  not  later than within 24  hours  after   the
official  announcement of the election results, to the Seimas  or
the  President  of  the Republic; in such cases, the  Seimas   or
President of the Republic shall, not later than within 48  hours,
apply to the Constitutional Court with the inquiry concerning the
violation  of the Law in Elections to the Seimas. The   aforesaid
provision  is related with Paragraph 1 of Article 94 of the  same
law, under which, after the proclamation of election results  the
Central  Electoral Commission shall issue certificates of  Seimas
Member  to the elected candidates within 3 days, and it is   also
related  with  Paragraph 1 of Article 95 of the same law,   under
which, not later than within 3 days of the official  announcement
of  the election results, the Seimas as well as the President  of
the  Republic  may  apply to the Constitutional Court  with   the
inquiry  whether  the  Law on Elections to the Seimas  has   been
violated.  In  the said aspect, the provision of Paragraph 2   of
Article  93 of the Law on Elections to the Seimas is related   to
Paragraph 1 of Article 77 of the Law on the Constitutional Court,
under which the Seimas or the President of the Republic may apply
to  the Constitutional Court with inquiries concerning   possible
violations  of the laws on elections during the elections of  the
President  of the Republic or the Seimas elections within 3  days
of  the  publication of the official election results.  In   this
context,  one is to mention Paragraph 4 of Article 95 of the  Law
on  Elections  to the Seimas, under which, basing itself on   the
conclusions  of the Constitutional Court, the Seimas shall  adopt
the  final  decision  concerning  the violation of  the  Law   on
Elections  to  the  Seimas, as well as Paragraph 5 of  the   same
article,  under  which,  if  the Constitutional  Court  makes   a
conclusion  that  the  Law on Elections to the Seimas  has   been
severely  violated or election documents have been tampered   and
this  has had an essential influence on the establishment of  the
election  results,  the Seimas may adopt one of the   resolutions
provided  for  in  this  law, while under Paragraph  6  of   this
article,  the Seimas shall also pass a resolution on legally  and
illegally  elected  Seimas  Members.  One  is  also  to   mention
Paragraph 3 of Article 77 of the Law on the Constitutional Court,
whereby the inquiry concerning possible violations of the laws on
elections  during the elections of the President of the  Republic
or  the  Seimas shall be examined within 72 hours of its   filing
with the Constitutional Court; the time periods specified in this
article  shall  also  include  non-working  days.  Thus,    while
construing  the  said provisions of the Law on Elections to   the
Seimas and the Law on the Constitutional Court in the context  of
the  provision  of  Paragraph  2 of Article 93  of  the  Law   on
Elections  to  the Seimas that the Central Electoral   Commission
shall first of all announce the final results on the Internet and
in  the  next issue of the official gazette "Valstybės   žinios",
there may arise certain obscurities regarding the counting of the
corresponding  time  periods,  since  it is  possible  that   the
announcement  of  the  final  results of the  elections  on   the
Internet  and  the announcement thereof in the official   gazette
"Valstybės žinios" happen at different time.
     It  needs  to  be mentioned that Decision  of  the   Central
Electoral  Commission No. 191 "On the Final Results of  Elections
to the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania of 12 October 2008" of
2 November 2008 was announced on the Internet on 2 November 2008,
and  in  the official gazette "Valstybės žinios"—on  6   November
2008, even though after the announcement of this decision of  the
Central  Electoral  Commission  on the  Internet,  the   official
gazette "Valstybės žinios" was issued on 4 November 2008.
     In the context of the constitutional justice case at  issue,
it  needs to be noted that the provision "the Central   Electoral
Commission  shall first of all announce the final results on  the
Internet and in the next issue of the official gazette 'Valstybės
žinios'" of Paragraph 2 of Article 93 of the Law on Elections  to
the Seimas is lex specialis with regard to the provisions of  the
Law on the Procedure of Publication and Coming into Force of Laws
and   Other  Legal  Acts  which  establish  the  procedure     of
announcement of acts of the Central Electoral Commission.
     The  essence  of the principle lex specialis  derogat   legi
generali is that when there is a competition between general  and
special norms, the special norm shall be applied  (Constitutional
Court  rulings of 18 October 2000, 21 January 2008 and 15   March
2008).
     It  has  been  mentioned that under Item 7 (wording  of   10
December  2002)  of Paragraph 1 (wording of 16 January 2007)   of
Article  3 of the Law on the Procedure of Publication and  Coming
into  Force  of Laws and Other Legal Acts, the decisions of   the
Central  Electoral Commission regarding the final results of  the
elections to the Seimas must be announced in the official gazette
"Valstybės  žinios". Because of the fact that the provision  "the
Central  Electoral  Commission shall first of all  announce   the
final  results  in  the Internet and in the next  issue  of   the
official gazette 'Valstybės žinios'" of Paragraph 2 of Article 93
of  the  Law  on Elections to the Seimas is lex  specialis   with
regard  to  the  provisions  of  the Law  on  the  Procedure   of
Publication  and Coming into Force of Laws and Other Legal   Acts
which  enshrine  the  procedure of publication of  acts  of   the
Central  Electoral Commission, therefore, while establishing  the
exact  date  of  the  announcement of the  official  results   of
elections,  after  such  results were published  either  on   the
Internet or in the official gazette "Valstybės žinios", one  must
follow lex specialis, i.e. the provisions of the Law on Elections
to the Seimas. 
     19.  Taking  account of the arguments set forth, one is   to
hold that the results of elections to the Seimas were  officially
announced  on  2 November 2008, when they were announced on   the
Internet. It also needs to be noted that the fact that when there
is  a  competition  between the general and special  norms,   the
special norm is applied, does not deny the duty of the legislator
to  harmonise  the  provisions of the Law on  the  Procedure   of
Publication  and Coming into Force of Laws and Other Legal   Acts
with the legal regulation established in Paragraph 2 (wording  of
11 May 2004) of Article 93 of the Law on Elections to the Seimas.
     20.  In this context, it needs to be noted that, as it   has
been  mentioned,  under Paragraph 1 of Article 95 of the Law   on
Elections  to  the Seimas, not later than within 3 days  of   the
official announcement of the election results, the Seimas as well
as the President of the Republic may apply to the  Constitutional
Court with an inquiry whether the Law on Elections to the  Seimas
has been violated, and under Paragraph 1 of Article 77 of the Law
on  the  Constitutional  Court, the  institutions  specified   in
Article 74 of the same law apply to the Constitutional Court with
inquiries concerning possible violations of the laws on elections
during  the  elections of the President of the Republic  or   the
Seimas elections within 3 days of the publication of the official
election results.
     Thus,  while  construing  Paragraph  2 of  Article  93   and
Paragraph  1 of Article 95 of the Law on Elections to the  Seimas
and  Paragraph 1 of Article 77 of the Law on the   Constitutional
Court in a systemic manner, one is to draw a conclusion that  the
beginning  of  the  time period established in  Paragraph  5   of
Article 86, Paragraph 1 of Article 95 of the Law on Elections  to
the Seimas and Article 77 of the Law on the Constitutional  Court
within  which one must present an inquiry regarding violation  of
the  Law  on  Elections  to the Seimas is counted  as  from   the
announcement  of the final results of elections to the Seimas  on
the Internet.

II
     1.  By  his  Decree  No. 1K-1564 "On  the  Inquiry  to   the
Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania" of 5  November
2008 (hereinafter also referred to as the 5 November 2008  decree
of the President of the Republic), the President of the  Republic
applied  to the Constitutional Court with an inquiry regarding  a
conclusion  whether the provisions of Paragraph 2 of Article  77,
Paragraphs  2  and 4 of Article 79, Paragraph 1 of  Article   80,
Paragraph  1 of Article 81 and Paragraph 2 of Article 82 of   the
Law on Elections to the Seimas were not violated during the  2008
elections to the Seimas. 
     2.  In  the 5 November 2008 decree of the President of   the
Republic,  it  is  specified: "By Central  Electoral   Commission
Decision  No.  198  'Regarding the Complaint of  the   Lithuanian
Social Democratic Party Whereby It is Requested to Recognise  the
Results  of  the  Elections as Invalid' the  complaint  from   J.
Jurginis, the representative of the Lithuanian Social  Democratic
Party  at  the Central Electoral Commission for  the   elections,
whereby  it is requested to recognise the results of the  initial
counting of votes in Šeškinė Single-member Constituency No. 6  as
final or to recognise the results of recounting as invalid and to
call repeat elections, was rejected". The circumstances specified
in  the  said  complaint,  according to  the  President  of   the
Republic,  may  be  assessed  as  violation  of  the   provisions
regarding  counting  of  votes and record  of  ballot-papers   of
Paragraph 2 of Article 77 and Paragraphs 2 and 4 of Article 79 of
the Law on Elections to the Seimas, as violation of the provision
regarding recognition of ballot-papers as invalid of Paragraph  1
of Article 80 of the same law, and as violation of the provisions
regarding  presentation  of  ballot-papers  and  ensuring   their
security of Paragraph 2 of Article 82 of the same law. 
     3.  The  5  November 2008 decree of the  President  of   the
Republic   is  substantiated  by  these  doctrinal     provisions
formulated  in the Constitutional Court conclusion of 5  November
2004:  in  a constitutional democracy, special requirements   are
raised to the formation of political representative institutions;
these institutions may not be formed in a way so that there might
arise doubts as to their legitimacy and legality, inter alia,  as
to  the fact whether the principles of a democratic state   under
the  rule of law were not violated in the course of election   of
persons  to  political representative  institutions;   otherwise,
people's   trust   in  the  representative   democracy,     state
institutions,  and  the  state  itself,  would  be    undermined;
democratic   elections  are  an  important  form  of    citizens'
participation  in  governing  of the state, as well as it  is   a
necessary   element   of  the  formation  of  state     political
representative  institutions;  elections may not be regarded   as
democratic,  nor  their results as legitimate and legal, if   the
elections  are held by trampling on the principles of  democratic
elections  established  in  the Constitution, and  by   violating
democratic electoral procedures.
     4. The following was attached to the 5 November 2008  decree
of  the President of the Republic: the 4 November 2008  complaint
of  the  Lithuanian  Social Democratic Party,  Decision  of   the
Central Electoral Commission No. 198 "Regarding the Complaint  of
the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party Whereby It is Requested to
Recognise the Results of the Elections as Invalid" of 2  November
2008 and the 1 November 2008 statement of the Local  Prosecutor's
Office  of  the  Vilnius  City to the Chairman  of  the   Central
Electoral  Commission  that  after no criminal  deeds  had   been
established,  a  decision was adopted to dismiss  the   pre-trial
investigation  which  had  been  instituted  subsequent  to   the
petitions of the Chairman of the Central Electoral Commission  Z.
Vaigauskas and J. Jurginis, the representative of the  Lithuanian
Social  Democratic Party at the Central Electoral Commission  for
the  elections, in order to investigate whether in the course  of
counting  the  results of elections to the Seimas of the   repeat
voting in Šeškinė Single-member Constituency No. 6 there were not
any  criminal deeds provided for in Articles 173 and 174 of   the
Criminal Code.
     5. Item 1 of Paragraph 3 of Article 105 of the  Constitution
provides that the Constitutional Court shall present  conclusions
whether  there were violations of election laws during  elections
of  the President of the Republic or elections of members of  the
Seimas.
     In  Paragraph  2 of Article 102 of the Constitution  it   is
enshrined  that  the status of the Constitutional Court and   the
procedure for the execution of its powers shall be established by
the Law on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania.
     Under Article 77 of the Law on the Constitutional Court, the
Constitutional Court shall examine and assess only the  decisions
made  by the Central Electoral Commission or the refusal  thereof
to  examine  complaints  concerning  the violation  of  laws   on
elections  in  cases when such decisions were adopted  or   other
deeds  were  carried  out  by  the  said  commission  after   the
termination  of voting in the elections of Members of the  Seimas
or the President of the Republic.
     6.  Decree of the President of the Republic No. 1K-1564  "On
the  Inquiry  to  the Constitutional Court of  the  Republic   of
Lithuania" of 5 November 2008 requesting for a conclusion whether
the provisions regarding counting of votes and record of  ballot-
papers  of  Paragraph  2 of Article 77, Paragraphs 2  and  4   of
Article  79  of the Law on Elections to the Seimas, whether   the
provisions  regarding recognition of ballot-papers as invalid  of
Paragraph  1  of  Article 80 of the same law,  and  whether   the
provisions  regarding presentation of ballot-papers and  ensuring
their  security of Paragraph 1 of Article 81 and Paragraph 2   of
Article  82  of the same law were not violated during  the   2008
elections  to the Seimas is related to the said 4 November   2008
complaint of the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party and  Decision
of  the  Central  Electoral Commission No.  198  "Regarding   the
Complaint of the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party Whereby It is
Requested  to Recognise the Results of the Elections as  Invalid"
of 2 November 2008, which rejected the complaint of J.  Jurginis,
the  representative of the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party  at
the Central Electoral Commission for the elections, whereby it is
requested  "to recognise the results of the initial counting   of
votes  (of  the repeat voting of elections to the Seimas  of   26
October  2008)  as final or to call repeat elections in   Šeškinė
Single-member Constituency No. 6".
     7. It has been mentioned that under Article 77 of the Law on
the Constitutional Court, the Constitutional Court shall  examine
and  assess  only  the decisions made by the  Central   Electoral
Commission   or  the  refusal  thereof  to  examine    complaints
concerning the violation of laws on elections in cases when  such
decisions  were  adopted or other deeds were carried out by   the
said commission after the termination of voting in the  elections
of Members of the Seimas or the President of the Republic.
     8.  Taking  account  of the fact that by his  decree  of   5
November 2008, the President of the Republic requests to  present
a  conclusion whether during the elections to the Seimas one  did
not  violate  the  provisions of Paragraph 2 of Article  77   and
Paragraphs  2 and 4 of Article 79 of the Law on Elections to  the
Seimas  regarding counting of votes and record of  ballot-papers,
the  provision  of  Paragraph 1 of Article 80 of  the  same   law
regarding  recognition  of  ballot-papers  as  invalid  and   the
provisions  of  Paragraph  1 of Article 80 and  Paragraph  2   of
Article  82 of the same law regarding presentation and   ensuring
the  security of ballot-papers, as well as taking account of  the
fact  that  this decree is related to the said complaint of   the
Lithuanian  Social  Democratic  Party  of 4  November  2008   and
Decision  of the Central Electoral Commission No. 198  "Regarding
the  Complaint of the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party  Whereby
It  is  Requested to Recognise the Results of the  Elections   as
Invalid"  of  2  November  2008, it needs to be  held  that   the
President  of  the  Republic requests to  present  a   conclusion
whether  by its decision No. 198 "Regarding the Complaint of  the
Lithuanian  Social  Democratic Party Whereby It is Requested   to
Recognise the Results of the Elections as Invalid" of 2  November
2008, the Central Electoral Commission lawfully refused to  grant
the  complaint  of  J.  Jurginis,  the  representative  of    the
Lithuanian  Social  Democratic  Party at the  Central   Electoral
Commission  for  the  elections,  whereby it  is  requested   "to
recognise  the results of the initial counting of votes (of   the
repeat  voting of elections to the Seimas of 26 October 2008)  as
final  or  to  call repeat elections  in  Šeškinė   Single-member
Constituency No. 6".
     9. In this case subsequent to the 5 November 2008 decree  of
the  President  of the Republic, the Constitutional  Court   will
investigate and assess whether Decision of the Central  Electoral
Commission  No.  198 "Regarding the Complaint of the   Lithuanian
Social Democratic Party Whereby It is Requested to Recognise  the
Results of the Elections as Invalid" of 2 November 2008  lawfully
refused to grant the complaint of J. Jurginis, the representative
of  the  Lithuanian  Social  Democratic  Party  at  the   Central
Electoral  Commission for the elections, whereby it is  requested
"to  recognise the results of the initial counting of votes   (of
the repeat voting of elections to the Seimas of 26 October  2008)
as  final  or to call repeat elections in Šeškinė   Single-member
Constituency No. 6".

                               III
     1. Article 2 of the Constitution enshrines that  sovereignty
shall belong to the Nation. The Nation shall execute its  supreme
sovereign  power  either directly or through its   democratically
elected   representatives  (Article  4  of  the    Constitution).
Paragraph 1 of Article 33 of the Constitution inter alia provides
that  citizens  shall  have  the right  to  participate  in   the
governance  of  their  state  both directly  and  through   their
democratically  elected  representatives.  One  of    fundamental
characteristics of a democratic state is democratic elections  of
representative  institutions  of  state  power.  It  is   through
elections   that  every  citizen  accomplishes  his  right     to
participate in running his country along with the other  citizens
(Constitutional  Court  conclusion of 23 November 1996), in   the
formation of the institution representing the Nation—the Seimas.
     The  constitutional  requirement that the Lithuanian   state
power would be organised democratically and that there would be a
democratic  political  regime  in  the state,  as  well  as   the
provision  of Paragraph 1 of Article 33 of the Constitution  that
citizens shall have the right to participate in the governance of
their  state  both  directly and  through  their   democratically
elected  representatives  are  inseparable from Paragraph  3   of
Article 5 of the Constitution that state institutions shall serve
the people, as well as from the provision of Paragraph 2 of  this
article  that  the  scope  of powers shall  be  limited  by   the
Constitution.  The Constitutional Court has more than once   held
that  the  responsibility  of  authority to society  is  one   of
elements  of  the principle of the state under the rule  of   law
which is established by the Constitution, upon establishing  that
state institutions will serve the people, that the citizens shall
have  the  right to run the country either directly  or   through
democratically elected representatives, to criticise the work  of
state  institutions  or  that  of  their  officials,  to    lodge
complaints against their decisions, as well as by guaranteeing an
opportunity  for  citizens to defend their rights in court,   the
right of petition, by regulating the procedure for  investigation
of requests and complaints of citizens, etc.
     2. While emphasising the importance of the elections of  the
representative  institutions, the Constitutional Court has   more
than  once  held  that in a  constitutional  democracy,   special
requirements   are   raised  to  the  formation  of     political
representative institutions. These institutions may not be formed
in a way so that there might arise doubts as to their  legitimacy
and lawfulness, inter alia, as to the fact whether the principles
of a democratic state under the rule of law were not violated  in
the  course  of election of persons to political   representative
institutions.  Otherwise,  people's trust in the   representative
democracy,  state  institutions, and the state itself, would   be
undermined.  Democratic  elections  are  an  important  form   of
citizens'  participation in governing of the sate, as well as  it
is  a  necessary  element of the formation  of  state   political
representative  institutions.  Elections may not be regarded   as
democratic,  nor their results as legitimate and lawful, if   the
elections  are held by trampling on the principles of  democratic
elections  established  in  the Constitution, and  by   violating
democratic  electoral procedures (Constitutional Court ruling  of
18  December 2004, conclusion of 5 November 2004 and ruling of  1
October 2008).
     3.  It needs to be noted that the principles of election  of
the Representation of the Nation—the Seimas are enshrined in  the
Constitution, they may not be denied, deviated from or restricted
by any legal act of lower power. Under Paragraph 1 of Article  55
of  the Constitution, Members of the Seimas shall be elected   on
the  basis  of universal, equal, and direct suffrage  by   secret
ballot. 
     4. While construing the provision of Paragraph 3 of  Article
55 of the Constitution that the procedure for election of Members
of the Seimas shall be established by law, in its conclusion of 5
November   2004   the  Constitutional  Court  held  that     this
constitutional provision means that the legislator has a duty  to
consolidate,  by means of a law, a system of election of  members
of  the  Seimas,  to  establish the  grounds  and  procedure   of
arrangement  of  elections, inter alia including  nomination   of
candidates  to  Members  of the Seimas,  electoral   campaigning,
procedure  of voting, establishment of the results of   election,
procedures of settling electoral disputes, as well as  regulation
of  other relations of election of members of the Seimas.   While
doing  so, the legislator must pay heed to the Constitution;   he
may  neither  himself deny, distort or restrict  the   universal,
equal  and direct electoral right and secret ballot, nor   create
any  legal  preconditions  for  other entities  to  do  so,   as,
otherwise,  this would mean that the supreme sovereign power   of
the Nation through the representation of the Nation, the  Seimas,
is denied altogether.
     In  the Constitutional Court conclusion of 5 November  2004,
it  was also emphasised that a duty of the legislator stems  from
the  Constitution  to  establish, by means of a law,  the   legal
regulation  ensuring  honesty and transparency of  the   election
process to the Seimas, i.e. necessary preconditions for the trust
in  the  representation  of the Nation; in case  the   legislator
disregards  the said requirements arising from the  Constitution,
if  he does not establish a mechanism ensuring democratic,   free
and  honest  elections,  then there might always  arise   certain
doubts as for legality of election of members of the Seimas.

                                IV
     1.  It has been mentioned that in his Decree of 5   November
2008,  the  President  of  the Republic requests  to  present   a
conclusion  whether during the 2008 elections to the Seimas   one
did  not violate the provisions of Paragraph 2 of Article 77  and
Paragraphs  2 and 4 of Article 79 of the Law on Elections to  the
Seimas  regarding counting of votes and record of  ballot-papers,
the  provision  of  Paragraph 1 of Article 80 of  the  same   law
regarding  recognition  of  ballot-papers  as  invalid  and   the
provisions  of  Paragraph  1 of Article 80 and  Paragraph  2   of
Article  82 of the same law regarding presentation and   ensuring
the security of ballot-papers.
     1.1.  Paragraph 2 of Article 77 of the Law on Elections   to
the Seimas provides:
     "2.  Having  ascertained that the ballot box has  not   been
tampered with, in the presence of at least 3/5 of the members  of
the polling district commission as well as observers, it shall be
opened,  all  ballot-papers shall be placed on tables  on   which
there are no other documents and writing materials (except  black
lead  pencils),  and the commission shall start counting   votes.
Ballot-papers  shall  be sorted out according to   constituencies
(single-member  and multi-member), then - into valid and  invalid
ballot-papers.  Valid ballot-papers shall be divided into  groups
according  to  the marks made in them by voters. Each  group   of
ballot-papers  must  be  recounted at least two times.  For   the
second time ballot-papers must be counted by other members of the
commission. Ballot-papers which do not hold necessary  attributes
(irregular  ballot-papers,  unsealed  or sealed with a  seal   of
another electoral commission, etc.) must, if found, be  separated
from  the rest of the ballot-papers. The constituency   electoral
commission shall be immediately informed about such ballot-papers
and  such fact must be entered into the vote counting record   of
the  polling  district. Counting results must be  announced   and
entered into the record, counted ballot-papers put into a special
envelope  (envelopes) which is sealed and safeguarded. After  the
electoral commission establishes how many votes have been cast by
voters  who voted in the polling station of the polling  district
for lists of candidates in the multi-member constituency and  for
candidates  in  single-member constituencies, counting of   votes
received by post shall commence."
     1.2.  Paragraphs  2  and  4 of Article 79  of  the  Law   on
Elections to the Seimas provide:
     "2.   The  vote  counting  record  of  the     single-member
constituency shall include the following:
     1) the number of voters in the polling district;
     2)  the  number  of  ballot-papers  of  the    single-member
constituency received from the constituency electoral commission;
     3)  the number of ballot-papers delivered to each member  of
the commission, the number of ballot-papers delivered to  voters,
the   number  of  voters'  signatures,  the  number  of     voter
certificates,  the  number of arrival cards, and the  number   of
unused and spoiled ballot-papers;
     4) the number of annulled ballot-papers;
     5)  the  number  of voters who have voted  in  the   polling
station of the polling district;
     6) the time of the opening of the ballot box;
     7)  the number of invalid ballot-papers found in the  ballot
box;
     8)  the  number of valid ballot-papers found in the   ballot
box;
     9)  the number of votes found in the ballot box which   have
been separately cast for each candidate for Seimas Member;
     10) the number of postal voting envelopes of voters who have
voted at home, the number of postal voting envelopes received  by
post,  the  total number of postal voting envelopes received   by
post  and  at  home,  and  the  number  of  sealed   ballot-paper
envelopes;
     11)  the  number of invalid ballot-papers received by   post
(ballot-papers which are in unsealed and unopened envelopes shall
not be counted and shall not be indicated as invalid);
     12) the number of valid ballot-papers received by post;
     13) the number of votes received by post for each  candidate
for Seimas Member;
     14)  the  total  number of voters who participated  in   the
elections in the polling district;
     15) the total number of invalid ballot-papers in the polling
district; and
     16)  the total number of votes cast for each candidate   for
Seimas Member. <...>
     4. The number of the voters of the polling district shall be
established  according  to  the electoral rolls of  the   polling
district.  The number of the voters who have been delivered   the
ballot-papers  shall  be  established according to  the   voters'
signatures proving that the ballot-papers have been received. The
number of the voters who have voted in the polling district shall
be  established  according  to the number of  the   ballot-papers
lawfully delivered to voters by the electoral commission of  that
polling  district  and  found in the ballot box of  the   polling
station. The total number of the voters who have participated  in
the  election  in the polling district shall be  established   by
adding the number of the ballot-papers found in the ballot  boxes
to the number of the ballot-papers received by post and counted."
     1.3.  Paragraph 1 of Article 80 of the Law on Elections   to
the Seimas provides:
     "1. Invalid ballot-papers shall be:
     1) non-standard ballot-papers;
     2)  ballot-papers  sealed  with the seal of  the   electoral
commission of the wrong polling district (ballot-papers  received
by   post—without  the  seal  of  the  constituency     electoral
commission);
     3) ballot-papers of the wrong constituency;
     4)  in a single-member constituency, those ballot-papers  on
which  the  voter has marked more than one candidate for   Seimas
Member,  or has not marked any candidate, or it is impossible  to
ascertain the voter's will from the mark made thereon; and 
     5)  in the multi-member constituency, the ballot-papers   on
which  the voter has marked more than one list of candidates   or
has  not  marked any list of candidates, or it is impossible   to
ascertain the voter's will from the mark made thereon."
     1.4.  Paragraph 1 of Article 81 of the Law on Elections   to
the Seimas provides:
     "1.  The polling district commission shall put  all  ballot-
papers,  as  well  as invalid and  unused  ballot-papers,   other
election  documents into packages, inventory them and affix   the
seal  to them in the manner prescribed by the Central   Electoral
Commission.  The  packages shall be delivered together with   the
vote counting record and its annexes, electoral rolls, records of
the  polling district commission and financial documentation  for
the  whole  period  of its work to  the  constituency   electoral
commission  within 12 hours of the closing of the polls,   unless
the Central Electoral Commission provides otherwise."
     1.5. In Paragraph 2 of Article 82 of the Law on Elections to
the Seimas, it is established:
     "2. The constituency electoral commission shall  immediately
report  the  data  of  the vote counting  record,  its   comments
concerning  the  documents  submitted by  the  polling   district
commission  to  the Central Electoral Commission in  the   manner
prescribed  by  it,  and shall ensure the  safety  of   submitted
documents."
     2.  In  the context of this constitutional justice case   at
issue,  also  other  provisions of the Law of Elections  to   the
Seimas are to be mentioned, i.e. the provisions of Paragraph 6 of
Article  82 of the Law on Elections to the Seimas regarding   the
duty  to recount the ballot-papers, the provisions of Article  91
of  the same law regarding recognition of the elections as   null
and void, and those of Article 92 regarding the repeat elections.
     2.1.  Paragraph 6 of Article 82 of the Law on Elections   to
the Seimas provides:
     "6.  The  constituency  electoral commission must  adopt   a
decision to recount ballot-papers of all the polling districts of
a  single-member constituency when, prior to the signing of   the
vote  counting  record, this has been requested by at least   one
member  of  the  commission, a representative of a  party  or   a
candidate,  and  when the difference between the votes  for   the
candidates  who  came  first  or second  in  this   single-member
constituency in accordance with the preliminary election results,
is less than 50."
     2.2.  Article  91  of the Law on Elections  to  the   Seimas
provides:
     "1.  The  Central  Electoral  Commission  may  declare   the
election  results  in the constituency null and void, if it   has
established that severe violations of Paragraph 1 of Article  5-1
of  this  Law  or  other  laws  which  were  committed  in    the
constituency or polling district, the falsification of  documents
or  the loss thereof had an essential influence on the   election
results, and the following essential results cannot be determined
from the vote counting records or other election documents:
     1)  in a single-member constituency—the candidate who   gets
the  mandate,  or the candidates who participate in  the   repeat
voting;
     2) in the multi-member constituency—the lists of  candidates
which take part in the distribution of mandates, or the number of
mandates  due to the list of candidates can be determined at  the
exactness of only more than one mandate.
     2.   The  election  cannot  be  declared  invalid  if    the
indisputably  determined  election  results allow  to   determine
essential election results."
     2.3.  Article  92  of the Law on Elections  to  the   Seimas
provides:
     "1.  Repeat  elections shall be held in  constituencies   in
which the elections did not take place or were declared invalid.
     2. Repeat elections shall be held not later than within half
a year, and after the repeat elections which have not been  held—
not later than within a year.
     3. The concrete procedure for holding repeat elections,  the
repeat  voting  to the Seimas according to the requirements   and
terms  set  in  this  Law shall be established  by  the   Central
Electoral  Commission  taking into consideration the  fact   that
repeat  elections,  the  repeat voting are held in  one  of   the
single-member constituencies. When establishing the procedure for
holding  the repeat elections, the Central Electoral   Commission
cannot  change  the boundaries of constituencies. The   citizens,
permanently  residing on the territory of a constituency who  are
aged  18  or  over on the day of the repeat elections  shall   be
additionally entered on the electoral roll of this  constituency,
and  only  the persons who have lost the right to vote shall   be
crossed  out. The voting shall not be conducted abroad, on  ships
(with  the exception of the case when the voters residing  abroad
or  the crews of ships are entered on the electoral rolls of  the
constituency  in  which repeat elections shall be held), in   the
post  offices  which  are not located on the territory  of   this
constituency (except the central post offices of towns, regions).
     4.  Repeat elections shall not be held if the election  date
planned to be announced falls within the period when less than  a
year remains before the date of the next election to the  Seimas,
as counted in compliance with the Constitution."

                                V
     1. It has been mentioned that in this case subsequent to the
5  November  2008 decree of the President of the  Republic,   the
Constitutional Court will investigate and assess whether Decision
of  the  Central  Electoral Commission No.  198  "Regarding   the
Complaint of the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party Whereby It is
Requested  to Recognise the Results of the Elections as  Invalid"
of 2 November 2008 lawfully refused to grant the complaint of  J.
Jurginis, the representative of the Lithuanian Social  Democratic
Party  at  the Central Electoral Commission for  the   elections,
whereby it is requested "to recognise the results of the  initial
counting  of  votes  (of the repeat voting of elections  to   the
Seimas  of 26 October 2008) as final or to call repeat  elections
in Šeškinė Single-member Constituency No. 6".
     2.  It  has  been mentioned that on 29  October  2008,   the
Central  Electoral  Commission received a complaint from   Julius
Jurginis, the representative of the Lithuanian Social  Democratic
Party  at  the Central Electoral Commission for  the   elections,
whereby it is requested to recognise "the results (of the  repeat
voting  of  elections to the Seimas of 26 October 2008)  of   the
initial counting of votes as final or to call repeat elections to
the  Seimas  in  Šeškinė Constituency No. 6". It has  been   also
mentioned  that  this  complaint is grounded on the  fact   that,
according  to J. Jurginis, the results of counting of the  repeat
voting could be determined by the deeds provided for in  Articles
173 and 174 of the Criminal Code.
     The commission of the said deeds, according to J.  Jurginis,
is  confirmed  by such circumstances: the seal of the  bag   with
ballot-papers received from Ozo Polling District No. 251 was  not
fully  tightened; according to him, the uncounted   ballot-papers
which  had  been cast for A. Ažubalis and which were found   when
recounting  the  votes, could be put in the bags  already   after
counting the votes on the day of elections.
     3.  It  has  been  mentioned  that  the  Central   Electoral
Commission  decided to reject the 29 October 2008 complaint  from
J.  Jurginis,  the  representative  of  the  Lithuanian    Social
Democratic  Party  at the Central Electoral Commission  for   the
elections, whereby it is requested to recognise "the results  (of
the repeat voting of elections to the Seimas of 26 October  2008)
of  the  initial  counting of votes as final or to  call   repeat
elections to the Seimas in Šeškinė Constituency No. 6".
     It  has  also  been mentioned that  the  Central   Electoral
Commission  has  grounded its decision on the fact that all   the
feasible  possibilities  have been used to verify and make   sure
that  during the time period between the counting of the  results
of voting and their recounting no unlawful actions were committed
in trying to swap the ballot-papers.
     4. While deciding whether Decision of the Central  Electoral
Commission  No.  198 "Regarding the Complaint of the   Lithuanian
Social Democratic Party Whereby It is Requested to Recognise  the
Results of the Elections as Invalid" of 2 November 2008  lawfully
refused to grant the complaint of J. Jurginis, the representative
of  the  Lithuanian  Social  Democratic  Party  at  the   Central
Electoral Commission for the elections, it needs to be held that,
as it is obvious from the material of the case:
     -  on  29  October 2008, a working group  composed  of   the
Chairman of the Central Electoral Commission Z. Vaigauskas, vice-
chairman  P. Kujalis and members V. Vaičaitis and Ž.   Verbylaitė
checked  the bags of the ballot-papers of Šeškinė   Single-member
Constituency  No.  6,  Šeškinės  Polling District  No.  258   and
Statybininkų  Poling  District  No.  305  and  it  drew  up   two
verification acts. In these acts it was held that in both polling
districts the number of ballot-papers sealed with the seal of the
constituency  is  not bigger than specified in the  protocol   of
counting of votes and that no ballot-papers sealed with the seals
of  electoral commissions of other polling districts were  found.
The 30 October 2008 verification would not essentially change the
recounting results of 29 October 2008;
     - the seals and envelopes of the bags with the ballot-papers
of the elections of Šeškinė Single-member Constituency No. 6 were
undamaged;  a side of one of the envelopes with  invalid  ballot-
papers which was in the bag received from in Statybininkų  Poling
District No. 305 was torn, however, the ballot-papers were in the
envelope;
     - the seal of the bag received from Ozo Polling District No.
251  of  Šeškinė Single-member Constituency No. 6 was not   fully
tightened (therefore, it was easy to take it off, even though  it
had  to  be  taken off only after breaking it),  however,   after
having  recounted the ballot-papers of the said polling  district
and having compared them with the results of the initial counting
of votes, no discrepancies were found;
     - the premises where the ballot-papers were kept were always
locked; no traces of break-in were found in the lock.
     In  this context, it needs to be noted that, as it has  been
mentioned,  by  the  1  November  2008  decision  of  the   Chief
Prosecutor   of   the  Second  Division  of  Organised     Crimes
Investigation  of  the Local Prosecutor's Office of the   Vilnius
City,  pre-trial investigation No. 01-2-150-08 was dismissed  and
it was held that no criminal deed provided for in Paragraph 1  of
Article  173 and Paragraph 1 of Article 174 of the Criminal  Code
had been committed.
     5.  Having assessed the said circumstances, it needs to   be
held that there is no legal ground to state that Decision of  the
Central Electoral Commission No. 198 "Regarding the Complaint  of
the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party Whereby It is Requested to
Recognise the Results of the Elections as Invalid" of 2  November
2008  unlawfully refused to grant the complaint of J.   Jurginis,
the  representative of the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party  at
the Central Electoral Commission for the elections.
     Therefore, one is to draw a conclusion that Decision of  the
Central Electoral Commission No. 198 "Regarding the Complaint  of
the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party Whereby It is Requested to
Recognise the Results of the Elections as Invalid" of 2  November
2008,  whereby  it  was  refused to grant the  complaint  of   J.
Jurginis, the representative of the Lithuanian Social  Democratic
Party  at  the Central Electoral Commission for  the   elections,
regarding  the results of the repeat voting of the Elections   to
the  Seimas of Šeškinė Single-member Constituency No. 6, did  not
violate the Law on Elections to the Seimas.
     Conforming to Paragraph 3 of Article 105 of the Constitution
of the Republic of Lithuania and Paragraph 2 of Article 1, Item 1
of  Article  73,  Article 77 and Article 83 of the  Law  on   the
Constitutional   Court  of  the  Republic  of  Lithuania,     the
Constitutional  Court of the Republic of Lithuania has  presented
the following
                           conclusion:
     Decision of the Central Electoral Commission of the Republic
of  Lithuania No. 198 "Regarding the Complaint of the  Lithuanian
Social Democratic Party Whereby It is Requested to Recognise  the
Results  of the Elections as Invalid" of 2 November 2008  whereby
it  was  refused  to  grant the complaint of  J.  Jurginis,   the
representative  of the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party at  the
Central  Electoral  Commission for the elections, regarding   the
results  of the repeat voting of the Elections to the Seimas   of
Šeškinė Single-member Constituency No. 6, did no violate the  Law
on Elections to the Seimas.
     
     This conclusion of the Constitutional Court of the  Republic
of Lithuania is final and not subject to appeal.
     
Justices of the Constitutional Court: Armanas Abramavičius
                                      Toma Birmontienė
                                      Pranas Kuconis
                                      Kęstutis Lapinskas
                                      Zenonas Namavičius
                                      Ramutė Ruškytė
                                      Egidijus Šileikis
                                      Algirdas Taminskas
                                      Romualdas Kęstutis Urbaitis