THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF                                    
                  THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA                                     
                                                                                
                                                                                
                          DECISION                                              
                                                                                
                                                                                
   Concerning the compliance of the Law of the Republic of                      
 Lithuania "On Partial Amending and Appending of the Law of                     
 the Republic of  Lithuania on Elections to the Seimas", 16                     
    March 1993, with the Constitution of the Republic of                        
                          Lithuania                                             
                  8 November 1993, Vilnius                                      
                                                                                
                                                                                
      The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania,                    
composed  from  the  Justices of  the  Constitutional  Court                    
Algirdas  Gailiūnas,  Kęstutis Lapinskas,  Zigmas  Levickis,                    
Vladas   Pavilonis,  Pranas  Vytautas  Rasimavičius,  Stasys                    
Stačiokas, Teodora Staugaitienė, Stasys Šedbaras and  Juozas                    
Žilys,                                                                          
     the secretary of the hearing - Rolanda Stimbirytė,                         
      the petitioner - Zita Šličytė,  representative of  the                    
group of  the Seimas,                                                           
      the  party concerned -  Juozas Bernatonis, the  Seimas                    
representative, deputy Chairman of the Seimas,                                  
      pursuant  to part 1 of Article 102 of the Constitution                    
of  the Republic of Lithuania and part 1 of Article 1 of Law                    
on the Constitutional Court, the Court in its public sitting                    
of  4 November 1993 conducted the investigation  of Case  No                    
6,  subsequent to the petition submitted to the Court by   a                    
group of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania members  to                    
investigate  the  conformity of the Law of the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania "On Partial Amending and Appending of the  Law  of                    
the  Republic of Lithuania on Elections to the  Seimas",  16                    
March  1993,  with  the  Constitution  of  the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania.                                                                      
                                                                                
     The Constitutional Court                                                   
                         established:                                           
                                                                                
     The petitioner - a group of the Seimas members requests                    
the  Constitutional  Court to investigate  if  the  Law  "On                    
Partial Amending and Appending of the Law of the Republic of                    
Lithuania on Elections to the Seimas", 16 March 1993, is  in                    
compliance   with  the  Constitution  of  the  Republic   of                    
Lithuania.   The  request  is  grounded  on  the   provision                    
established  in  Article  69  of  the  Constitution  of  the                    
Republic  of  Lithuania that "laws shall be enacted  in  the                    
Seimas in accordance with the procedure established by law".                    
The petitioner maintains that the law in dispute was enacted                    
by  the Seimas on 16 March 1993 neglecting the procedure  of                    
law enactment established by law, as:                                           
      1)  in  violation  of Article 216 of  the  Provisional                    
Statute  of the Seimas "the head of the Committee for  State                    
and  Law - the Commission for Drafting Laws did not announce                    
the  date  of the public sitting of the Committee  when  the                    
possibility  would  be provided for the  Seimas  members  to                    
submit  proposals and supplements for consideration.  During                    
the   consideration  no  conclusion  on  the  part  of   the                    
Committee for Budget was submitted";                                            
      2)  "the term for the third consideration was set  for                    
the  same  day  of the Seimas sittings in violation  of  the                    
procedure prescribed by law (i.e. in Articles 206 and 209 of                    
the  Provisional  Statute of the Seimas),  furthermore,  the                    
Seimas   majority  ignored  the  proposals  and  supplements                    
submitted  by the members of the Seimas and did  not  charge                    
the  legislators  to  edit the draft law  taking  them  into                    
consideration";                                                                 
      3)  "On  16  March  1993 applying  speed-up  order  of                    
consideration  of this law, the first, the  second  and  the                    
third  considerations were conducted on the same day of  the                    
Seimas sittings in violation of the procedure established by                    
law,  and,  for  this reason, factions and  members  of  the                    
Seimas  could not in due time, at least 24 hours before  the                    
consideration,  submit  their proposals  and  amendments  in                    
writing".                                                                       
     Furthermore, the petitioner in the request submitted to                    
the    Constitutional   Court   states   that   during   the                    
consideration of said draft law in the Seimas  on  16  March                    
1993  "the  Seimas  members of Homeland  Coalition  (Tėvynės                    
Santaros  frakcijų koalicija)  demanded in  compliance  with                    
Article  69  of  the  Constitution to establish  a  list  of                    
constitutional  laws.  This  demand  was  rejected  by   the                    
majority  of  the  Seimas and on the same day  the  Law  "On                    
Partial Amending and Appending of the Law of the Republic of                    
Lithuania on Elections to the Seimas was enacted by the vote                    
of 55 Seimas members".                                                          
      As it is specified in Article 7 of the Constitution of                    
the  Republic  of  Lithuania "any law which contradicts  the                    
Constitution shall be invalid."                                                 
     On 10 March 1993, the draft law "On Amending the Law of                    
the  Republic of Lithuania on Elections to the  Seimas"  was                    
submitted to the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania. On the                    
same  day the Seimas decided to include this draft law  into                    
the  session schedule of sittings and to apply the  speed-up                    
procedure of consideration.                                                     
      The  first and the second considerations of  this  law                    
were  conducted in 16 March 1993 morning sitting. The  third                    
consideration  was  carried out  and  the  law  "On  Partial                    
Amending  and  Appending  of the  Law  of  the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania  on  Elections to the Seimas" was enacted  in  the                    
evening sitting of 16 March 1993.                                               
      Upon  the  request  of   Homeland  Coalition  (Tėvynės                    
Santaros  frakcijų koalicija)  on 23 March 1993  the  Seimas                    
formed  the  Provisional Committee for the investigation  of                    
said violations.                                                                
      The  Provisional  Committee of the  Seimas,  upon  the                    
investigation   of  the  petition  submitted   by   Homeland                    
Coalition  have agreed that the petition points out  to  the                    
following  violations  of  the Provisional  Statute  of  the                    
Seimas:                                                                         
      1) the date of the public sitting of the Committee for                    
State  and  Law - the Commission for Drafting Laws  was  not                    
announced;                                                                      
     2) the conclusion drawn by the Committee for Budget was                    
not submitted during the consideration;                                         
      3)  the  discussion  time as well  as  the  number  of                    
participants was limited;                                                       
      4)  the third consideration was scheduled for the same                    
day  of  the  Seimas sitting when the first and  the  second                    
considerations were conducted;                                                  
     5) the procedure of amendments and supplements to draft                    
laws  established  in  Article 208 of the  Statute  was  not                    
observed.                                                                       
      The  Provisional  Committee has  drawn  the  following                    
conclusions pertaining to every fact:                                           
       1.   The  law  was  drafted  on  the  initiative   of                    
J.Bernatonis,  A.Kunčinas  and  V.Būtėnas,  members  of  the                    
Committee for State and Law. This draft was investigated  in                    
9  March 1993 sitting of the Committee for State and Law and                    
was  approved by the majority vote, however, the said  draft                    
law was submitted for consideration and was investigated not                    
upon the instructions of the Committee but on the initiative                    
of  the group of the members of the Seimas. Thus, the Seimas                    
did  not commission the Committee for State and Law  or  any                    
other Committee to draft the law. On the other hand, all the                    
sittings  of  the  Committee for  State  and  Law  with  the                    
exception of closed ones are public and there was no need to                    
inform   about  it  separately,  therefore,  in  this   case                    
requirements  set  forth in Article 216 of  the  Provisional                    
Statute  of  the Seimas are not applicable and this  Article                    
does not regulate the right of legislative initiative.                          
      2.  It  is specified in Article 216 of the Provisional                    
Statute  of the Seimas that law enactment should be preceded                    
by  the  conclusion drawn by the Committee  for  Budget  and                    
Finance pertaining to State means and their possible  source                    
necessary to implement a law or  decision. As in said  draft                    
law  the  tendency of saving the expenses is obvious because                    
it  contains a suggestion to diminish the composition of the                    
Central Electoral Committee, the conclusion of the Committee                    
for Budget and Finance would evidently have had no sense.                       
      3.  The  duration of discussions during the first  and                    
second   considerations  was  limited  to  40  minutes   and                    
speeches   to  5  minutes  respectively.  The  duration   of                    
discussions and the number of participants are interrelated,                    
therefore,  the  limitation of discussion  time  causes  the                    
limitation of the number of those who speak. In the  opinion                    
of the Committee, in this case there was no direct violation                    
of  Article  218 of the Provisional Statute of  the  Seimas.                    
The  Seimas members did not ask to prolong the consideration                    
of the draft law.                                                               
      4.  It  is specified in Article 218 of the Provisional                    
Statute  of the Seimas that the third consideration  can  be                    
conducted in one of the nearest sittings of the Seimas.  The                    
first  and  the second considerations were conducted  in  16                    
March 1993 morning sitting and the third consideration -  in                    
the  evening  sitting of the same day which is  in  absolute                    
compliance  with Article 218 of the Provisional  Statute  of                    
the  Seimas. It is established in Article 218 that the third                    
consideration  shall  be conducted in  conformity  with  the                    
requirements set forth in Chapter 23 of the Statute. In  the                    
opinion  of the petitioner, there was a violation of Article                    
206  of the Provisional Statute of the Seimas. However, this                    
Article  regulates not the course of the third consideration                    
but  the  decisions  upon the second consideration which  in                    
case  of  application of speed-up order of consideration  is                    
regulated by Article 218. Thus, in this case, there  was  no                    
violation  of the Provisional Statute of the Seimas  as  the                    
third  consideration was conducted on the same day  applying                    
speed-up  procedure  of  law  consideration  established  in                    
Article 218.                                                                    
     5. Article 208 of the Provisional Statute of the Seimas                    
regulates not the course of  the third consideration but the                    
decisions  adopted  upon the second  consideration.  In  the                    
event of application of speed-up order of consideration, the                    
third consideration is  regulated by Articles 209, 210,  211                    
and  212 and as the third consideration in question met  the                    
requirements established in these Articles, it can be stated                    
that,   in  this  case,  there  was  no  violation  of   the                    
Provisional Statute of the Seimas.                                              
      The  Provisional Committee, upon the investigation  of                    
the  facts  submitted in the petition of Homeland  Coalition                    
(Tėvynės Santaros frakcijų koalicija) , have drawn a general                    
conclusion  that in the consideration of the draft  law  "On                    
Partial Amending and Appending of the Law of the Republic of                    
Lithuania  on Elections to the Seimas" there was  made  some                    
minor formal violation (the conclusion of the Committee  for                    
Budget  and  Finance concerning the State  means  and  their                    
possible source necessary to implement the law - Article 216                    
-  was not submitted), which did not influence the enactment                    
and  the  implementation of said law. On  this  ground,  the                    
Provisional Committee proposed to leave the enacted  law  in                    
force.                                                                          
      Three members of the Provisional Committee (The Seimas                    
members  P.Giniotas,  S.Pečeliūnas and V.Žiemelis)  did  not                    
agree  with the conclusions of the Committee and prepared  a                    
separate  certificate the main statements of  which  are  as                    
follows:                                                                        
      1.  The right of legislative initiative vested in  the                    
Seimas  members  in  compliance  with  Article  68  of   the                    
Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania was restricted  as                    
"the  head  of the Committee for State and Law -  Commission                    
for  Drafting  Laws did not inform about  the  time  of  the                    
public  sitting  of the Committee and when  the  possibility                    
would  be   provided for the Seimas members to submit  their                    
proposals  and  supplements for  consideration"  (as  it  is                    
required  by Article 216 of the Provisional Statute  of  the                    
Seimas)                                                                         
      2.  "The  Committee  for Budget and  Finance  did  not                    
consider this draft  law and did not submit any conclusions"                    
(the violation of Article 216 of the Provisional Statute  of                    
the Seimas).                                                                    
      3.  "In  the  consideration of  this  draft  law,  the                    
discussion  time  was  limited to 5  minutes  and  the  time                    
allotted  for  the  consideration of  this  issue  was  also                    
limited,  therefore,  the  majority  of  those  willing   to                    
participate in discussions could not do this which can  only                    
be qualified as the limitation of the number of participants                    
in  the  discussions.  It is specified  in  the  Provisional                    
Statute  that  only  one limitation  can  be  applied"  (the                    
violation of Article 218 of the Provisional Statute  of  the                    
Seimas).                                                                        
      4.  "The  first and the second considerations  of  the                    
draft  law  ended at 2.30 p.m. of 16 March 1993.  The  third                    
consideration  was  set for the next  Seimas  sitting,  i.e.                    
after  3  p.m. In this case the Seimas members did not  have                    
the  possibility to submit their suggestions and supplements                    
for   the  third  consideration"  in  conformity  with   the                    
requirements  established in Article 208 of the  Provisional                    
Statute of the Seimas.                                                          
      5. "In the process of consideration and voting of this                    
draft  law, an amendment of the title of the draft  law  was                    
submitted  in verbal form, which was not a formal  amendment                    
but  a key one altering the title of the law as well as  the                    
essence of the interpretation of its content. This amendment                    
was  applied  in violation of the  procedure established  in                    
item  4  of  Article 208 of the Provisional Statute  of  the                    
Seimas,  in  which it is specified that new  amendments  and                    
supplements are not accepted during the third consideration,                    
except   formal   amendments  which  are  not   subject   to                    
consideration and voting and are only submitted  in  writing                    
to the Commission for Drafting Laws".                                           
       The   above  mentioned  members  of  the  Provisional                    
Committee proposed to abrogate the Seimas decision to  enact                    
the Law "On Partial Amending and Appending of the Law of the                    
Republic of Lithuania on Elections to the Seimas".                              
      Two alternative draft decisions were submitted to  the                    
Seimas.  On  4  May  1993, the Seimas by the  majority  vote                    
confirmed  the  draft decision proposed by  the  Provisional                    
Committee  in  approval  of the conclusions  drawn  by  this                    
Committee.                                                                      
      In the process of the preliminary investigation of the                    
case,  the  representative of the petitioner submitted   the                    
following supplementary arguments and motives:                                  
      1.  "The  Seimas, by adoption of the  new  edition  of                    
Article  11  of  the  Law of the Republic  of  Lithuania  on                    
Elections  to the Seimas, renounced the provision that  "all                    
political    parties   and   public   political    movements                    
participating in an election shall have the right  to  equal                    
representation    in   all   electoral   committees".    The                    
renunciation of this provision contradicts Article 29 of the                    
Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania which  promulgates                    
that all people shall be equal before the law. As it is well                    
known,  people  can be physical and juridical persons,  thus                    
Article  29 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania                    
guarantees  not only the equality of all people  before  the                    
law  but  also the equality of political parties and  public                    
political  movements  registered as juridical  persons.  The                    
granting  of exclusive rights to the Society of  Lawyers  of                    
Lithuania  as  well  as  to  political  parties  and  public                    
political movements that won their mandate of members of the                    
Seimas  in  multi - candidate electoral area established  in                    
the  edition  of  Article  11 of  the  Constitution  of  the                    
Republic  of Lithuania, does not only contradict Article  29                    
of  the  Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania but  also                    
denies  the opportunity of active participation in elections                    
to   the  Seimas  to  those  political  parties  and  public                    
political movements that did not get seats in the Seimas  by                    
the elections in multi - candidate electoral area".                             
      "New  editions of Articles 13 and 14 of the Law of the                    
Republic   of   Lithuania  on  Elections  to   the   Seimas,                    
establishing  principles   of  the  formation  of  electoral                    
committees of electoral areas and districts, by analogy with                    
those  of  forming  the  Central Electoral  Committee,  also                    
contradicts  Article 29 of the Constitution of the  Republic                    
of Lithuania".                                                                  
      2.  The  newly  elected  Seimas  of  the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania   "had   primarily  to   establish   a   list   of                    
constitutional  laws  and only then  start  the  process  of                    
legislation. Unfortunately, this was not done either  within                    
3,5  months  before  the enactment of the  Law  "On  Partial                    
Amending  and Appending the Law of the Republic of Lithuania                    
on Elections to the Seimas" or later.                                           
      The  draft  Law  "On the Constitutional  Laws  of  the                    
Republic  of  Lithuania" was submitted to the Seimas  on  19                    
October 1993.                                                                   
      Article 2 of the draft Law establishes that the Law of                    
the  Republic of Lithuania on Elections to the Seimas  is  a                    
constitutional law.  Thus, amending and appending the Law of                    
the Republic of Lithuania on Elections to the Seimas without                    
having established a list of constitutional laws, the Seimas                    
has  grossly violated the provisions of Article  69  of  the                    
Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania".                                     
      3.  "The  essence  of  violations  enumerated  in  the                    
declaration (an appended document to the petition  submitted                    
to the Constitutional Court) of Homeland Coalition  (Tėvynės                    
Santaros  frakcijų  koalicija)  "is that the  constitutional                    
right of legislative initiative vested in the Seimas of  the                    
Republic of Lithuania members in accordance with Article  68                    
of  the  Constitution  of  the  Republic  of  Lithuania  was                    
restricted".                                                                    
       The   representative  of   the  petitioner  has  also                    
explained that "the declaration of Homeland Coalition  gives                    
far  from being exhaustive interpretation of Article 218  of                    
the  Provisional Statute of the Seimas and that the  joining                    
of  alternative  norms into one idea ensues from  inaccurate                    
citing  of the law. It also gives a misleading reference  to                    
Article  209, though, in reality, Article 208 was cited,  as                    
well  as  groundlessly  relies on  Article  208  instead  of                    
Article 218 of the Provisional Statute of the Seimas".                          
      The representative of  the party concerned stated that                    
the  petition  of  a  group of the  members  of  the  Seimas                    
submitted to the Constitutional Court on 23 March 1993  with                    
the  request  to investigate the compliance of the  Law  "On                    
Partial Amending and Appending of the Law of the Republic of                    
Lithuania  on Elections to the Seimas" with the Constitution                    
of  the  Republic of Lithuania does not contain any evidence                    
or  arguments confirming the contradiction of aforesaid  law                    
to  the  Constitution  of  the Republic  of  Lithuania.  The                    
Provisional  Committee  formed  by  the  Seimas   has   also                    
established    no    violations   mentioned    above.    The                    
representative  of  the party concerned,  approving  of  the                    
conclusions drawn by the Committee, in addition has made the                    
following retorts:                                                              
      1.  The petitioner states that the conclusions of  the                    
Committee  for Budget and Finance were not submitted  during                    
the  consideration  of said draft law. It  is  specified  in                    
Article  192 of the Provisional Statute of the Seimas  as  a                    
general norm that "if the implementation of the law requires                    
state  means,  the  initiators of draft laws  should  submit                    
their  proposals  as well as the Committee  for  Budget  and                    
Finance  along  with  the  Government  should  submit  their                    
conclusions  pertaining to possible source  of  means".  The                    
special norm established in Article 216 of the Statute  only                    
specifies  the  term for the submission of  the  conclusions                    
drawn  by the Committee for Budget and Finance but  it  does                    
not  define  the conditions when they are indispensable.  In                    
this  case  the initiators of the draft did not  submit  the                    
proposals  because after the consultations with the  members                    
of  the Committee for Budget and Finance they found out that                    
the  implementation  of the amended law  would  not  require                    
additional budget means.                                                        
       2.   The  petitioner's  statement,  that  the   third                    
consideration  of  the  draft law  could  not  be  conducted                    
earlier  than  on  the  other nearest  day   of  the  Seimas                    
sitting, is groundless. The petitioner presents an erroneous                    
and   too   extensive  interpretation   of   special   norms                    
established in Article 218 of the Provisional Statute of the                    
Seimas that define the application of the speed-up procedure                    
of  the  consideration of a law. As defined by special  norm                    
established in Article 218, in case when the speed-up  order                    
of  the  consideration of a law is applied, the Seimas  upon                    
the  first  and the second consideration decides to  conduct                    
the  third one in one of the nearest sittings of the Seimas.                    
In  item 1 of Article 206 of the Provisional Statute of  the                    
Seimas  an  analogous general norm is formulated  specifying                    
that  "the third consideration may not be conducted  earlier                    
than  on  the  other  nearest day of  the  Seimas  sitting",                    
however, it is applied in all cases with exception of  those                    
when  the Seimas decide to consider the law under the speed-                    
up  order  or emergency order of consideration.   Therefore,                    
the  Seimas  decision to conduct the third consideration  of                    
the  draft  law in the nearest sitting, i.e. in the  evening                    
sitting  of  the  same  day  was  in  compliance  with   the                    
Provisional Statute of the Seimas.                                              
      3.  The representative of the party concerned does not                    
agree  with  the petitioner's statement that in  the  period                    
between  the  first, the second and the third considerations                    
the  edited  draft  law  was not  submitted  to  the  Seimas                    
members. In fact, the first and the second considerations in                    
the  morning  sitting of the Seimas ended  about  1.30  p.m.                    
whereas  the third consideration started at the end  of  the                    
evening  sitting - i.e. after 7 p.m., and  by  this  time  a                    
newly edited draft law heeding the remarks and proposals  of                    
the  Seimas  members, had been submitted.  For  example,  an                    
amendment  of P.Papovas, member of the Seimas, was submitted                    
and  considered. However, it was rejected, as key amendments                    
to  the law were proposed. The remarks of the Seimas members                    
that Article 2 of the Law on Elections to the Seimas is  not                    
in  compliance  with   the  Constitution,  were  taken  into                    
account and an amended draft law was submitted for the third                    
consideration.                                                                  
      4.  The  petitioner maintains that by the adoption  of                    
this  law  procedure  of law enactment  established  in  the                    
Constitution was violated as this law had to be enacted as a                    
constitutional law. As a matter of fact, in the  process  of                    
the consideration of the above mentioned draft law, a number                    
of  the  Seimas  members suggested establishing  a  list  of                    
constitutional laws, however,  the suggestion was  submitted                    
in  violation of the Provisional Statute of the  Seimas  and                    
without preparation of necessary drafts. In conformity  with                    
Article  69 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania                    
the Seimas shall establish a list of constitutional laws  by                    
a three - fifths majority vote of the Seimas members. As the                    
Law on Elections to the Seimas did not have the power of the                    
constitutional  law,  the  Law  on  Partial   Amending   and                    
Appending  of  it could not be considered and enacted  as  a                    
constitutional law.                                                             
       Subsequent  to  the  above  mentioned  motives,   the                    
representative   of the party concerned is  of  the  opinion                    
that  the  Law  of  the  Republic of Lithuania  "On  Partial                    
Amending  and  Appending  of the  Law  of  the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania  on Election to the Seimas" is in compliance  with                    
the  Constitution  of the Republic of Lithuania,  thus,  the                    
petitioner's  request  should  not  be  complied  with.  The                    
representative of the party concerned has also  stated  that                    
he  would  not  be  against  the evaluation  of   additional                    
arguments   of  the  petitioner's  representative   by   the                    
Constitutional  Court.  The  representative  of  the   party                    
concerned  has  also explained, that universally  recognized                    
human  and  civil  rights and freedoms  are  established  in                    
Chapter  of the Constitution "The Individual and the State".                    
The  petitioner's  representative  gives  too  extensive  an                    
explanation   of   the  notion  "person"  and   groundlessly                    
maintains that equality of people established in Article  29                    
of  the Constitution is applicable to juridical persons. The                    
consideration  of  the constitutional  law  in  dispute  was                    
conducted  in speed-up order prescribed by  the  Provisional                    
Statute  of  the  Seimas in compliance  with  the  right  of                    
legislative  initiative established in  Article  68  of  the                    
Constitution.                                                                   
                                                                                
                                                                                
The Constitutional Court                                                        
                         holds that:                                            
                                                                                
      1.  Concerning the compliance of the procedure of  the                    
enactment  of  the  Law  of the Republic  of  Lithuania  "On                    
Partial  Amending and Appending of the Law of  the  Republic                    
of Lithuania on Elections to the Seimas, 16 March 1993, with                    
the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.                                  
      General  rules  of   law enactment are  formulated  in                    
Article 69 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.                    
It   is   specified  by  which  majority   vote   laws   and                    
constitutional  laws  shall be  adopted.  As  far  as  other                    
procedures  are concerned, it is established  in  the  first                    
part   of  said Article that laws shall be enacted   in  the                    
Seimas in accordance with the procedure established by  law.                    
At   present,  these  procedures  are  established  in   the                    
Provisional Statute of the Seimas - a legal act  having  the                    
power of law. The procedure of the submission of draft  laws                    
to  the  Seimas, of three considerations of those  laws,  of                    
discussions, voting and other significant issues  pertaining                    
to  the  process of legislation, are established in  it.  In                    
fact,  these  are  the  issues  of  the  structure  and  the                    
procedure  of  activities  of  the  Seimas  that  shall   be                    
determined  by  the Statute of the Seimas as  prescribed  by                    
Article 76 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.                    
The  self-dependence of the Seimas is within its  competence                    
established in the Constitution as well as is limited by its                    
duty  to  act in compliance with the Constitution and  valid                    
laws.   The duty of the Seimas to act in accordance with the                    
procedure of law enactment established by the Statute of the                    
Seimas not only may be but, in fact, must be interpreted  as                    
a  constitutional  duty  because it is  conditioned  by  the                    
provision  established  in part 1  of   Article  69  of  the                    
Constitution.                                                                   
      It  is  determined in the Provisional Statute  of  the                    
Seimas  how to verity the adherence to the procedure of  law                    
enactment  prescribed  by law and how  to  resolve  disputes                    
ensuing  from the violations of procedure (Article  2121  of                    
the Provisional Statute of the Seimas). It is also specified                    
in  the Statute that in cases when the Provisional Committee                    
formed  by the Seimas draws the conclusion pointing  out  to                    
gross  violations in the procedure of legislation, essential                    
violations in the order of voting as well as other  relevant                    
violations  of  significant provisions of the  Statute  that                    
predetermined  the decision of the Seimas on  the  law,  the                    
Seimas resolves by voting whether to abrogate or to leave in                    
force  the act in dispute. Thus, the conclusion can be drawn                    
that  the  Seimas itself states if there was a violation  of                    
the procedure of law enactment prescribed by the Statute  of                    
the  Seimas,  and  resolves the disputes  that  arise.   The                    
perfection  of the norms of  the Statute is also within  the                    
competence  of  the  Seimas. There  was  no  appeal  to  the                    
Constitutional Court on the constitutionality of  the  above                    
mentioned and other norms of the Provisional Statute of  the                    
Seimas  determining  the  procedures  of  consideration  and                    
adoption of draft laws.                                                         
       The  Seimas  formed  the  Provisional  Committee   to                    
investigate   the   said  procedural  violations.   In   the                    
conclusions submitted by the Committee, violations mentioned                    
in the declaration of Homeland Coalition   (Tėvynės Santaros                    
frakcijų  koalicija)  are  investigated  and  a  generalized                    
conclusion  is  drawn that during the consideration  of  the                    
draft  Law "On Partial Amending and Appending of the Law  of                    
the  Republic  of Lithuania on Elections to  the  Seimas"  a                    
minor  formal violation has been made (no conclusion of  the                    
Committee  for Budget and Finance pertaining to state  means                    
and  their  possible source necessary for the implementation                    
of  the  law  was submitted), which had no effect  upon  the                    
adoption  and implementation of the law in dispute.  On  the                    
basis  of this, the Provisional Committee proposed to  leave                    
the Law "On Partial Amending and Appending of the Law of the                    
Republic of Lithuania on Elections to the Seimas", 16  March                    
1993,  in force. Furthermore, the Provisional Committee  has                    
called attention to the fact, that the speed-up procedure of                    
the  consideration of law is not specified accurately enough                    
in the Provisional Statute of the Seimas, therefore, various                    
interpretations    of    norms,   causing    disputes    and                    
misunderstandings  are possible. On 4 May  1993  the  Seimas                    
adopted the decisions  in approval of the conclusions  drawn                    
by the Provisional Committee.                                                   
      The legal proceedings prove that the conclusion of the                    
Committee for Budget and Finance was not submitted  for  the                    
adoption of law, i.e. the requirement established in part  2                    
of  Article 216 of the Provisional Statute of the Seimas has                    
been  violated. The Court holds that the issue of  financing                    
the   elections  has  in  essence  been  resolved  upon  the                    
enactment  of  the Law on Elections. Thus, even  though  the                    
above  mentioned  procedural violation has  been  made,  the                    
Constitutional Court does not find a sufficient  ground  for                    
the   conclusion  that  the  enacted  law  contradicts   the                    
Constitution  in  accordance  with  the  procedure  of   its                    
enactment established by the Constitution.                                      
       The   legal   proceedings  also   prove   that   many                    
disagreements and disputes arose from inaccurate defining of                    
the  procedure  of the consideration of draft  laws  in  the                    
Statute  and the variety of interpretations of the norms  of                    
the  Statute.  In  the application of  these  norms  a  rule                    
specifying that, in case of the competition between  general                    
and  special norms, a special norm shall be valid,  was  not                    
always observed.                                                                
      On the  basis of item 4 of part 1 of Article 64 of the                    
Law  on  the Constitutional Court, the Constitutional  Court                    
investigates   the  compliance  of  legal   act   with   the                    
Constitution  in accordance with the procedure prescribed by                    
this law. The Constitutional Court draws the conclusion that                    
this  procedure  in  the adoption of  the  Law  "On  Partial                    
Amending  and  Appending  of the  Law  of  the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania  on  Elections to the Seimas"  was  not  violated.                    
Thus,  there is no ground for maintaining that  the  law  in                    
dispute contradicts part 1 of Article 69 of the Constitution                    
of  the  Republic  of  Lithuania in  the  procedure  of  its                    
enactment. The petitioner did not raise the question whether                    
in the adoption of the law in dispute the norms of part 2 of                    
said Article were violated.                                                     
                                                                                
      2.  Concerning the issue whether the Law  "On  Partial                    
Amending  and  Appending  of the  Law  of  the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania  on the Elections to the Seimas", 16  March  1993,                    
had   to   be  enacted  in  accordance  with  the  procedure                    
established   by   constitutional  laws  and   not   general                    
procedure.                                                                      
       The   Constitution  of  the  Republic  of   Lithuania                    
establishes a variety of majority votes for the enactment of                    
laws.  in  compliance  with part 2  of  Article  69  of  the                    
Constitution  of the Republic of Lithuania,  laws  shall  be                    
deemed  adopted  if  the  majority of  the   Seimas  members                    
participating  in  the sitting vote in favour  thereof.  The                    
procedure  of  the  enactment  of  constitutional   laws  is                    
defined  in  part  3 of said Article: they shall  be  deemed                    
adopted if more than half  of all the members of the  Seimas                    
vote  in the affirmative and shall be amended by at least  a                    
three - fifths majority vote of all the Seimas members.                         
      Due to the above mentioned variety in the procedure of                    
the  adoption  of  laws,  the  classification  of  laws   in                    
accordance  with  constitutional norms is very  significant.                    
The constituent parts of the Constitution shall primarily be                    
laws  established  in Article 150 of the Constitution.  Only                    
the    Seimas   is   empowered   with   enumerating    other                    
constitutional laws. It is determined in part 3  of  Article                    
69  of  the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania:  "The                    
Seimas  shall establish a list of constitutional laws  by  a                    
three  -  fifths majority vote of the Seimas members". Thus,                    
a  list  of  constitutional laws being established  only  in                    
accordance  with  this procedure, laws  entering  this  list                    
shall be interpreted as constitutional laws, and the rule of                    
their  enactment and amendment by at least a three -  fifths                    
majority vote of all the Seimas members established  in  the                    
Constitution  shall be applied only to these  laws.  In  the                    
absence of such a list of constitutional laws, the aforesaid                    
procedure  of  law  enactment may  not  be  applied  to  the                    
adoption of any law, except the law on the establishment  of                    
the  list  of constitutional laws. Even more groundless  are                    
the arguments that amendments and supplements to an ordinary                    
law  may  be  adopted in accordance with the  rules  of  the                    
adoption of constitutional laws.                                                
      The  above  mentioned procedure of law  enactment  and                    
amendment  is  not applied to amendments to the Constitution                    
that  can also be called constitutional laws. The procedures                    
of  their amending, consideration and adoption are regulated                    
by  Chapter 14 of the Constitution of Republic of  Lithuania                    
"Amending the Constitution".                                                    
     Constitutional norms do not establish the priorities of                    
the   sequence  of  consideration  or  enactment  of   laws,                    
constitutional  laws included. These issues are  within  the                    
competence of the Seimas.                                                       
                                                                                
      3.  Concerning the Compliance of the Law  "On  Partial                    
Amending  and  Appending  of the  law  of  the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania  on Elections to the Seimas", 16 March 1993,  with                    
Article 68 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.                    
       The  petitioner  maintains  that  due  to  procedural                    
violations  made  in  the adoption of the  Law  "On  Partial                    
Amending  and  Appending  of the  Law  of  the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania  on Elections to the Seimas", 16 March  1993,  the                    
right  of  the  Seimas  members  to  submit  proposals   and                    
supplements  for  consideration  was  restricted,  i.e.  the                    
constitutional  right  of  legislative  initiative  of   the                    
members  of  the  Seimas established in Article  68  of  the                    
Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania was restricted  in                    
essence.                                                                        
      The  process  of legislation is the whole  complex  of                    
legally  significant  acts necessary for the adoption  of  a                    
law  and performed in rigid sequence of logic and time.  The                    
following   stages  of  the  process  of   legislation   are                    
universally  recognized: the realization  of  the  right  to                    
legislation, the consideration of a draft law, the  adoption                    
of  a draft law, the promulgation and the enforcement of the                    
enacted  law.  Only with the completion   of  one  stage  in                    
consecutive  order starts another. The aforesaid consecutive                    
order   of   the  process  of  legislation  is  in   essence                    
established   in  the  Constitution  of  the   Republic   of                    
Lithuania:  the  realization of  the  right  of  legislative                    
initiative  -  in  Article 68, the adoption  of  laws  -  in                    
Article  69, the promulgation and enforcement of laws  -  in                    
Articles  70-72.  The  stage of the consideration  of  draft                    
laws,  being  the stage which guarantees the application  of                    
principles  of  democracy in the process of legislation,  is                    
not  specified  in these articles.   However,  their  actual                    
presence is evident from other constitutional norms: Article                    
71 establishes the right of the President of the Republic of                    
Lithuania  to  refer  the  law  back  "to  the  Seimas   for                    
reconsideration", Article 72 - the right of the  Seimas  "to                    
reconsider and enact laws" which have been referred back  by                    
the  President of the Seimas. Upon this a conclusion can  be                    
drawn  that the stage of the consideration of draft laws  is                    
necessary  in the procedure of the Seimas legislation.  This                    
is  confirmed  in  the  wording of Article  72  that  "after                    
reconsideration of the Seimas, a law shall be deemed enacted                    
if the amendments and supplements submitted by the President                    
of  the  Republic were adopted, or if more than half of  all                    
the  Seimas members vote in the affirmative, and if it is  a                    
constitutional law - if at least three - fifths of  all  the                    
Seimas members vote in the affirmative".                                        
      The process of legislation starts with putting forward                    
an  initiative.  This  may  be  done  only  by  the  persons                    
specified  in  the Constitution, i.e. persons who  have  the                    
right of legislative initiative. The essence and purpose  of                    
this  right is to initiate the process of legislation.  This                    
right  is  practically realized by the  submission  of  some                    
concrete draft law to the Seimas or by written wording of  a                    
new   substantial  idea  concerning  legislation.  Upon  the                    
submission  of  the law project by the proper  subject,  the                    
duty  of  the Seimas - institution of legislation  -  is  to                    
initiate the consideration of the submitted draft law or the                    
idea  of  the  law  project. Then the second  stage  of  the                    
process  of  legislation, usually defined by regulations  of                    
the  Seimas  (Statutes),  starts. In  this  stage,  remarks,                    
proposals,  amendments  and supplements  on  the  draft  law                    
submitted by the members of the Seimas are relevant elements                    
of  the  stage  of consideration, however,  they  cannot  be                    
interpreted as legislative initiative because it has already                    
been  realized. Suggestions, amendments and supplements  are                    
practically submitted up to the moment of law enactment. The                    
order of their submission and consideration is regulated  by                    
regulation  norms of the consideration of draft laws. It  is                    
peculiar  that  the  order  differs  in  essence  from   the                    
realization  of  the  right of legislative  initiative.  The                    
right  of legislative initiative is also different from  the                    
submission of amendments and supplements to the draft  under                    
consideration  in  its  purpose and,  after  all,  they  are                    
different parts of the stages of the process of legislation.                    
      On  the  basis  of  the above mentioned  motives,  the                    
Constitutional  Court concludes that  the  Law  "On  Partial                    
Amending  and  Appending  of the Law   of  the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania   on Elections of the Seimas", 16 March 1993,  was                    
enacted  in compliance with the norms established in Article                    
68 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.                            
                                                                                
      4.  Concerning the compliance of the Law  "On  Partial                    
Amending  and  Appending  of the  Law  of  the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania  on Elections to the Seimas, 16 March  1993,  with                    
Article 29 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.                    
      The petitioner states that the amendment of Article 11                    
of  the  Law on Elections to the Seimas and the renunciation                    
of  the  principle of equal representation of all  political                    
parties and public political movements participating  in  an                    
election  in all electoral committees, established  in  this                    
law, violated the principle of equality of all people before                    
law  specified  in  Article 29 of the  Constitution  of  the                    
Republic of Lithuania.                                                          
      The  aforesaid  Article 29 is  in  Chapter  2  of  the                    
Constitution under the title "The Individual and the State",                    
therefore, the concept "person" can only be, in this case, a                    
synonym  of  "individual". This chapter of the Constitution,                    
Article  29, in particular, is about human and civil rights,                    
freedoms and duties, thus, there is no juridical ground  for                    
more extensive interpretation of the notion "person".                           
      The  variety of legal status is peculiar to collective                    
legal  persons (organizations and institutions),  therefore,                    
on the basis of typology of legal persons, groups of persons                    
with  the same special legal capacity may be discerned,  and                    
only these groups are comparable among themselves.                              
      On  the  basis  of  the above mentioned  motives,  the                    
Constitutional  Court concludes that  the  Law  "On  Partial                    
Amending  and  Appending  of the  Law  of  the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania on Elections to the Seimas", 16 March 1993, is  in                    
compliance  with  Article  29 of  the  Constitution  of  the                    
Republic of Lithuania.                                                          
      Conforming to Article 102 of the Constitution as  well                    
as   Articles  53,  54,  55  and  56  of  the  Law   on  the                    
Constitutional Court, the Constitutional Court has taken the                    
following                                    decision:                          
      The  Law  of  the  Republic of Lithuania  "On  Partial                    
Amending  and  Appending  of the  Law  of  the  Republic  of                    
Lithuania  on Elections to the Seimas", 16 March 1993,  does                    
not   contradict  the  Constitution  of  the   Republic   of                    
Lithuania.                                                                      
      This  Constitutional Court decision is final  and  not                    
subject to appeal.                                                              
      The  decision is promulgated on behalf of the Republic                    
of Lithuania.                                                                   
                                                                                
     Justices of the Constitutional Court:                                      
                                                                                
                                                                                
                                                                                
Algirdas Gailiūnas                 Kęstutis Lapinskas                           
                                                                                
Zigmas Levickis                    Vladas Pavilonis                             
                                                                                
Pranas Vytautas Rasimavičius       Stasys Stačiokas                             
                                                                                
Teodora Staugaitienė               Stasys Šedbaras                              
                                                                                
Juozas Žilys