Lt

On refusing to consider part of a petition and returning part of the petition to the petitioner

Material No. 33/94

THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF
THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA

D E C I S I O N

On the refusal to investigate and on the return of the petition submitted by the Second Vilnius City Local Court requesting an investigation into whether Item 4.2 of the Procedure for the Establishment of Investment Joint-Stock Companies, confirmed by the 21 January 1992 resolution (No. 30) of the Government of the Republic of Lithuania, is in compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and Article 16 of the Republic of Lithuania’s Law on the Initial Privatisation of State Property, also whether Item 14 of the 2 February 1993 Law “On Supplementing and Amending the Republic of Lithuania’s Law on the Initial Privatisation of State Property” conforms to the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania

10 November 1994, Vilnius

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, composed from the Justices of the Constitutional Court: Algirdas Gailiūnas, Zigmas Levickis, Vladas Pavilonis, Pranas Vytautas Rasimavičius, Teodora Staugaitienė, Stasys Šedbaras, and Juozas Žilys

The court reporter—Rolanda Stimbirytė

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, in its procedural sitting, considered the report made by Justice Stasys Šedbaras pertaining to the results of the preliminary investigation of the material.

The Constitutional Court

has established:

By its ruling, the Second Vilnius City Local Court, the petitioner, suspended the investigation of the civil case concerning the restoration of infringed rights and addressed the Constitutional Court requesting an investigation into whether Item 4.2 of the Procedure for the Establishment of Investment Joint-Stock Companies, approved by the 21 January 1992 resolution of the Government of the Republic of Lithuania, is consistent with the Constitution and Article 16 of the Law on the Initial Privatisation of State Property valid then, also whether Item 14 of the 2 February 1993 Law “On Supplementing and Amending the Republic of Lithuania’s Law on the Initial Privatisation of State Property” complies with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.

The Constitutional Court

holds that:

  1. In Articles 63 and 64 of the Law on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania it is established that the grounds for the examination of a case concerning the compliance of a legal act with the Constitution shall be a legally justified doubt that the entire legal act or part thereof contradicts the Constitution or laws.

The petitioner, while requesting an investigation into the compliance of Item 4.2 of the Procedure for the Establishment of Investment Joint-Stock Companies with the Constitution, did not submit any arguments to justify the opinion on non-conformity of this norm with the Constitution. Under Article 70 of the Law on the Constitutional Court, this shall be grounds for the return of the petition to the petitioner.

  1. The petitioner also requests an investigation into the compliance of Item 4.2 of the Procedure for the Establishment of Investment Joint-Stock Companies with Article 16 of the Law on the Initial Privatisation of State Property which was in force earlier.

The Procedure for the Establishment of Investment Joint-Stock Companies was approved by the government resolution of 21 January 1992. The second paragraph of Article 16 of then valid Law on the Initial Privatisation of State Property was amended by the Law of 2 February 1993.

Thus, the petitioner requests an investigation into the conformity of the legal act to the invalid norm of the law. Article 102 of the Constitution and Article 63 of the Law on the Constitutional Court do not prescribe that the Constitutional Court shall examine cases concerning the compliance of legal acts with invalid laws. According to Item 2 of the first paragraph of Article 69 of the Law on the Constitutional Court, this shall be grounds for refusal to consider a petition.

  1. In addition, the petitioner requests an investigation into the constitutionality of Item 14 of the 2 February 1993 Law “On Supplementing and Amending the Republic of Lithuania’s Law on the Initial Privatisation of State Property”, which has amended Article 16 of the Law on the Initial Privatisation of State Property. The petitioner raises the question on what grounds said norm of the Law has been amended. The petition does not contain any arguments presenting the opinion on non-conformity of the amended norm of the Law with the Constitution, as it is prescribed by Item 5 of the second paragraph of Article 67 of the Law on the Constitutional Court. The petitioner’s argument may not be considered as a legal arguments, this being the grounds for refusal to consider the petition (Item 5 of Paragraph 1 of Article 69 of the Law on the Constitutional Court).

Conforming to Articles 25 and 28 of the Law on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania adopts the following

decision:

  1. To return the petition requesting an investigation into the constitutionality of Item 4.2 of the Procedure for the Establishment of Investment Joint-Stock Companies to the petitioner.
  2. To refuse to consider the petition requesting an investigation into the compliance of Item 4.2 of the Procedure for the Establishment of Investment Joint-Stock Companies with Article 16 of the earlier valid Law on the Initial Privatisation of State Property.
  3. To refuse to consider the petition requesting an investigation into the constitutionality of Item 14 of the 2 February 1993 Law “On Supplementing and Amending the Republic of Lithuania’s Law on the Initial Privatisation of State Property”.

Justices of the Constitutional Court:

Algirdas Gailiūnas                           Zigmas Levickis                               Vladas Pavilonis

Pranas Vytautas Rasimavičius         Teodora Staugaitienė                       Stasys Šedbaras

Juozas Žilys