its public hearing of 20 July 1994 conducted the
vestigation of Case No 18/94 subsequent to the petition submitted to the Court by a group of Seimas members requesting to
vestigate if the provisions of items 1, 9, 12 and 39 of the Law "On Amending and Appending the Law of the Republic of Lithuania on Referendum", adopted 15 June 1994, by which Articles 1, 9, 12 and 32 of the Law on Referendum have been amended or appended, are consistent with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania The Constitutional Court has established: 1. The Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania on 15 June 1994 adopted the Law "On Amending and Appending the Law of the Republic of Lithuania on Referendum" (Official Gazette "Valstybës Þinios", No 47-870, 1994). The petitioner requests to
vestigate if the part of item 1 of this Law, by which Article 1 of the Law on Referendum has been amended; the part of item 9, by which the first and the third parts of Article of the Law on Referendum have been amended; the part of item 12, by which Article 12 of the Law on Referendum has been appended by Parts 2 and 3; and the part of item 39, by which the second part of Article 32 the Law on Referendum became Part 5 after the new formulation of said Article of the Law on Referendum, are
compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.
the new edition of Article 1 that "provisions of laws on economic issues may be adopted by referendum only after economic examination of possible consequences". Thus, the right to referendum is related to the economic examination, and, moreover, experts appointed by no one knows whom are entitled to the right to decide whether to permit or not to permit the People to exercise the supreme sovereign power, whether to permit or not to permit to directly participate
the government of their State. Therefore, not only Articles 4 and 33 of the Constitution have been violated but also Article 6 of the Constitution, stating that the Constitution shall be an
tegral and directly applicable statute, has been denied without any conclusions made by the experts. 2.
the amendments to Article 9 of the law on Referendum it is required that a citizen while signing a list for
itiating a referendum should
dicate his passport number. This contradicts Article 4, the third part of Article 9 and the first part of Article 33 of the Constitution, because, while carrying out this provision, those citizens who due to their physical handicap or semi-literacy cannot write all the data, are deprived of the constitutional right to demand the announcement of a referendum, and the right to directly participate
the government of their State. Moreover, a citizen has all the rights, irrespective of the fact, whether or not he has always a passport with him. 3. Articles 9, 282 and 29 of the Law on Referendum are not co-ordinated among themselves and, therefore, restrict the constitutional rights of citizens to require the announcement of a referendum, because
Articles 282 and 29 it is established, that a voter may submit to the district electoral committee not only a passport but also another document confirming his personality or citizenship, or ask another person to fill
the ballot-paper
case he cannot do it himself. 4.
the second part of the newly formulated Article 12 of the Law on Referendum it is determined that the Seimas' duty shall be to decide whether a draft of the provisions of the law submitted for referendum is
conformity with the Constitution. This provision violates Articles 67 and 102 of the Constitution. Said Articles of the Constitution do not provide the right for the Seimas to adopt decisions as to the conformity of the legal acts or their drafts with the Constitution. It is the prerogative of the Constitutional Court to decide whether the legal acts do not violate the Constitution. 5.
the third part of the newly formulated Article 12 of the Law on Referendum it is set forth that the announcement of a referendum may be postponed provided that the Seimas decides to consider and adopt submitted provisions of the law, however, the referendum should be called at the same Seimas sitting
which the Seimas fails to adopt the submitted provisions of the law. This period of consideration until the adoption or non-adoption of the provisions of the law is not limited
any way. The consideration can be artificially prolonged, for example failing to write the issue under consideration on the agenda. This, however, contradicts Articles 4, 9 and 33 of the Constitution. 6.
the fifth part of the newly formulated Article 32 of the Law on Referendum it is established that the provisions of the law or other decisions shall be deemed adopted by referendum if more than half of citizens
cluded
the lists of voters approve of them during referendum. This provision restricts the implementation of the constitutional right of citizens to participate
the government of their State directly as compared to their participation
the government through their freely elected representatives, because, under the provisions of the Law on Elections to the Seimas (Articles 75 and 76) and Article 69 of the Constitution, laws shall be deemed adopted
the Seimas if at least 10 per cent of democratically elected People's representatives vote affirmatively. Such restriction of the right to directly participate
the government of the State is not stipulated
3. The petitioner's representatives have explained that, while adopting the Law "On Amending and Appending the Law of the Republic of Lithuania on Referendum", the Constitution was violated because the Seimas concentrated on the approaching referendum on the adoption of the Law "On Unlawful Privatization, Devaluated Accounts and Shares as well as Transgressions of Legal Protection". The petitioner's representatives have submitted the following reasoning concerning the compliance of specific articles of the Law
dispute with the Constitution. 1.
of the Law on Referendum it is prescribed that the provisions of laws may be submitted for referendum. A provision of a law is only a part of a law - its article or norm - and not the whole law, therefore such restriction of the citizens' right to call a referendum contradicts Articles 4, 9, 33 and the third part of Article 71 of the Constitution. The Seimas, while adopting this norm, conformed only to Article 69 of the Constitution and left out of account the third part of Article 71, which runs about the signing and promulgation of laws adopted by the Seimas and says nothing about that of the provisions of laws. If the provisions of laws were adopted by referendum, the Seimas, by way of implementing them, would have to adopt a law distorting the People's will. 2. The norm of the Law on Referendum, having related the referendum on economic issues to the economic examination of possible consequences, implies that the citizens' right to participate
the government of their State is related to additional procedures without specifying what
stitution shall carry out these procedures. The
itiative group, while calling a referendum, shall perform official or non-official examination on its own responsibility. 3. The requirement of amended Article 9 of the Law on Referendum that a citizen shall himself fill
a ballot-paper and
dicate his passport number violates the constitutional civil right
cases when a person is semiliterate or has physical handicap, etc. While voting
referendum, he or she shall be able to
vite another person
to the ballot booth, to submit another document confirming person's identity, whereas while implementing the right to call a referendum this right is restricted. The request to
dicate the passport number is some sort of compulsion, as a person is forced to have a passport with him all the time. That means lack of confidence
a person. The truthfulness of signatures must be verified by an
stitution prescribed by law. 4. The duty of the Seimas is to act
conformity with the Constitution while adopting laws. However,
cases when the
itiative to call a referendum is expressed by the citizens, the Seimas may not prevent the citizens from the implementation of their
itiative. While assuming the duty to verify the constitutionality of the issue submitted for referendum, the Seimas violates the Constitution. The citizens may directly amend the Constitution as well. 5. The provision of the third part of amended Article 12 of the Law on Referendum, which provides the Seimas with the possibility to consider the draft law submitted for referendum, has not been finally regulated. It is obscure, how the
itiative of the citizens shall be implemented, whether the announcement of referendum shall not be delayed for a long time ignoring the citizens' will. 6. The norm of the fifth part of Article 32 of the Law on Referendum that the provisions of the law or another decision shall be deemed adopted by referendum if more than half of the citizens
cluded
the lists of voters approve of them, is very different from the requirements set for the formation of the Seimas. Pursuant to the Constitution, the majority by which decisions shall be deemed adopted, should correspond to the majority by which the People shall delegate their rights to the People's representatives. The petitioner's representatives have requested to recognize that Article 1, amendments and supplements to the first and third parts of Article 9, the second and third parts of Article 12 and the fifth part of Article 32 of the Law on Referendum, contradict the Constitution. 4. The representative of the party concerned has expressed the opinion, that the petitioner had submitted no grounded arguments proving the contradiction of the Law on Referendum to the Constitution, and proposed the following explanations. 1. Article 1 of the Law on Referendum contains the norms established
the first part of Article 9 and the fourth part of Article 69 of the Constitution. The third part of Article 71 of the Constitution determines the procedure of the promulgation of laws and not of their adoption. Neither Constitution nor the Law on Referendum restricts the number of provisions submitted for referendum; the provisions of the law ready for adoption may also be submitted for referendum. Upon adoption, signing and promulgation of these provisions
the established procedure, they acquire the power of law. Therefore,
the opinion of the representative of the party concerned, the norm of Article 1 of the Law on Referendum that the provisions of the law may be submitted for referendum, does not contradict Constitution. 2. The fourth part of Article 9 of the Constitution determines that the procedure for the announcement and execution of a referendum shall be established by law, whereas Article 69 of the Constitution prescribes the main rules for the adoption of laws. Thus, the Seimas itself may establish the procedure for the announcement and execution of a referendum according to the Constitution. The Statute of the Seimas establishes what an
itiator of a draft law must do while submitting the draft, whereas the Law on Referendum does not prescribe that exhaustive conclusions must be presented along with the draft submitted for referendum. Therefore, there was adopted the norm of Article 1 of the Law on Referendum, specifying that the provisions of the laws on economic issues may be adopted be referendum only after the economic examination of possible consequences. This shall be only an extra measure helping a citizen to make a decision. From the point of view of jurisprudence, this norm perhaps is not distinctly formulated, however,
practice this is no obstacle for the announcement of a referendum. 3. The Law on Referendum valid until now established the witnessing of citizens' signatures by a notary.
such a case, a passport, or a document certifying the person's identity had to be presented. After the procedure for the witnessing of citizens' signatures by a notary had been given up, and seeking to prevent the cases when the citizens' will might be distorted or falsified, the first part of Article 9 of the Law on Referendum was amended establishing that, along with other data, a passport number must be specified while signing a list for
itiating a referendum. It is possible to do so without carrying a passport all the time. This entirely conforms to the third part of Article 9 of the Constitution that the announcement of a referendum may be
itiated only by the citizens of the Republic of Lithuania. It is not necessary to establish the citizenship of a person before his or her voting, as such data are written on the list of voters. It is sufficient only to establish the identity of a voter. 4. The second part of appended Article 12 of the Law on Referendum is not a norm. It contains only the repetition of the appropriate Article of the Statute of the Seimas which prescribes the procedure for the co-ordination of the draft legal acts considered by structural units of the Seimas with the Constitution. The supplement to the Law on Referendum commission the whole Seimas to do this.
the fourth part of Article 59 of the Constitution it is established that,
office, Seimas members shall act
accordance with the Constitution. If Seimas members were obliged to submit for referendum a draft law contradicting the Constitution, they would be compelled to break their oath. Neither Articles 102 and 105 of the Constitution nor the Law on the Constitutional Court entitle the Constitutional Court to the right to decide whether draft legal acts are
conformity with the Constitution. 5.
accordance with the provisions of the third part of amended Article 12 of the Law on Referendum, the adoption of the decision on the issue of the announcement of a referendum may not be delayed, because the Statute of the Seimas establishes the possibility to consider draft laws
speed-up procedure.
the Statute of the Seimas it is also determined which issues shall be obligatorily put on the agenda of a plenary sitting. 6. The norm of the fifth part of Article 32 of the Law on Referendum that the decision
referendum shall be deemed adopted if more than half of the registered voters vote
the affirmative, does not contradict the Constitution either. The Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania has been adopted conforming to this principle; other referenda have also been conducted
accordance with the same rule. The establishment of another than the majority vote principle may not find motivation
the rules of the election of Seimas members, because the People's elected representative represents the whole People and not the voters who voted
favour thereof. The representative of the party concerned requested to recognize that said amendments and supplements to the Law on Referendum did not contradict the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania. The Constitutional Court holds that: 1. Article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania establishes that the People shall exercise the supreme sovereign power vested
them either directly or through their democratically elected representatives. Thus, the Constitution prescribes the possibility for the citizens of the State to implement the People's sovereignty
the form of direct democracy, i. e. by referendum.
accordance with jurisprudence and constitutional traditions, a referendum is understood as the popular vote on the issues concerning the adoption of the Constitution, laws or provisions of laws, as well as home and foreign policy. The essence of this
stitution of democracy is defined by two main criteria: 1) direct definition of the People's sovereign powers ( suprema potestas ) and 2) the legal significance of the acts adopted
the process of implementation of direct democracy. Referenda are divided
to decisive, consultative and ratifying. Decisive referenda, when the People adopt laws by popular vote, as a political legal
stitute are rarely met
countries with democratic traditions. Consultative referenda, when the most important issues concerning the life of the state are submitted for consideration, are more widely spread, as well as ratifying referenda, when people express their approval or disapproval of the law adopted by the parliament. Article 9 of the Constitution establish that the most important issues concerning the life of the State and the People shall be decided by referendum; the procedure for the announcement and execution of a referendum shall be established by law. The implementation of the principles of referenda determined
the Constitution is particularized
the Law on Referendum, adopted 3 November 1989; and on 15 June 1994 the Seimas enacted the Law "On Amending and Appending the Law of the Republic of Lithuania on Referendum". 2. Item 1 of the Law
dispute has amended Article 1 of the Law on Referendum. It sets forth that "the most significant issues concerning the life of the State and the People shall be decided, and the provisions of laws may be adopted by referendum". According to the former edition of this Article, it was determined that only laws might be adopted by referendum. Article 69 of the Constitution prescribes the fundamental rules of legislation.
the fourth part of said Article it is established that the provisions of laws may be adopted by referendum.
the Constitution and the Law on Referendum, while regulating the right of the
itiative to announce a referendum, the number of provisions to be submitted for referendum is not determined. Therefore, the notion "provisions of laws" used
the Constitution may be understood equally as an
tegral law as well as separate norms of a law. A law as well as its constituent parts always consist of certain provisions that become legal norms only
the process of legislation. However, it does not mean, that a law and provisions of laws have different legal power
the stage of their submittal for referendum as well as after their adoption by referendum. A law is a primary legal act passed
the procedure prescribed by the Constitution and other laws. Citizens, while exercising their right established
the Constitution to participate directly
the government of their State, shall be legislators of laws adopted by referendum (Article 33 of the Constitution).
the third and fourth part of Article 71 of the Constitution it is stipulated that the President of the Republic must, within five days, sign and officially promulgate laws and other acts adopted by referendum;
the event that the President of the Republic does not sign and promulgate such laws within the established period, said laws shall become effective upon being signed and officially promulgated by the Chairperson of the Seimas. Thus, provisions of laws acquire the supreme legal power and the status of law only upon their adoption by referendum. They must be signed and promulgated as laws
the procedure prescribed by the Constitution. Therefore, the amendment to Article 1 of the Law on Referendum, establishing that "provisions of laws" may be adopted by referendum, is consistent with the Constitution. 3. Item 1 of the Law
dispute has also amended Article 1 of the Law on Referendum appending it by the norm that "provisions of laws on economic issues may be adopted by referendum only after economic examination of possible consequences". By way of implementing the right vested
citizens to participate
the government of their State, it is prescribed
the Constitution that
cases established by laws referenda shall be announced by the Seimas (Article 9). Thus, the Constitution does not provide for the possibility to relate the implementation of this norm to any additional conditions or decisions by any persons.
the first part of Article 3 of the Constitution it is established that no one may limit or restrict the sovereignty of the People. Without denying the citizens their right to be
formed about economic and other consequences of the laws and other provisions adopted by referendum, various
terpretations of issues submitted for referendum may be given during election campaign, however, these may not predetermine the announcement and execution of a referendum. Therefore, while relating the right to call and execute a referendum on economic issues to the economic examination of possible consequences, sovereign powers of the People are restricted, which contradicts Articles 3, 4, 9 and 33 of the Constitution. 4. Item 9 of the Law
dispute has amended the first part of Article 9 of the Law on Referendum by establishing that a citizen, while signing a list for
itiating a referendum, must specify, among other data, the number of a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania passport.
the third part of Article 9 of the Constitution it is determined that a referendum shall be announced if no less than 300, 000 of the electorate so request. Citizenship is a permanent political-legal relationship of an
dividual with a specific state, based on mutual rights and duties as well as trust, loyalty and protection (Constitutional Court ruling of 13 April 1994). No one may enjoy civil and political rights and duties prescribed by the Constitution, except the citizens of their State.
this case it implies the citizen's constitutional right to directly participate
the government of their State and the duty of State
stitutions to ensure the implementation of this right. The
itiative right to call a referendum is one of the guarantees for the implementation of the People's sovereignty, therefore, the legislator establishes the rules that would ensure the realization of this constitutional guarantee only for the electorate. A citizen's passport is a document confirming his or her citizenship and the personality of the owner. Thus, the provision of the second part of Article 9 of the Law on Referendum that a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania while signing a list for
itiating a referendum, must, among other data,
dicate his or her passport number, is one of the guarantees that the signature is by a proper person. Therefore, this norm of the Law on Referendum is
compliance with the Constitution. 5. Item 5 of the Law
dispute has amended the third part of Article 9 of the Law on Referendum which specified that "a citizen himself shall write all the data while signing a list for
itiating a referendum". By way of implementing the constitutional right vested
the citizens to participate
the government of their State (Article 33 of the Constitution), the laws should establish the guarantees for the implementation of this right.
cases established by laws, referenda shall be announced by the Seimas. Referenda shall be announced if no less than 300, 000 of the electorate so request (Article 9, Part 3).
accordance with Parts 1 and 3, Article 34 of the Constitution, only citizens who are under 18 on the day of election or those who are declared legally
capable by court shall not have the right to vote
the election (nor the right to request to call a referendum). The Constitution does not prescribe any other restrictions of the suffrage and its implementation. The provision of the Law
dispute that a citizen himself shall write all the data while signing a list for
itiating a referendum, is a deprivation of the right to call a referendum for those citizens who, due to their physical handicap, cannot fill
that list. Thereby, the citizen's constitutional right to participate
the government of their State is denied, which contradicts Articles 4, 9 and 33 of the Constitution. 6. Item 12 of the Law
dispute has appended Article 12 of the Law on Referendum by the second part which establishes: "
cases when, according to the Seimas, the draft of the provisions of a law submitted for referendum does not conform to the Constitution, the question of amending the Constitution must be primarily considered".
of the Constitution it is determined that the Constitution shall be an
tegral and directly applicable statute, whereas Article 7 thereof prescribes the principled provision that any law or other statute which contradicts the Constitution shall be
valid. The Constitutional Court shall decide whether the laws and other legal acts adopted by the Seimas are
conformity with the Constitution and legal acts adopted by the President and the Government, do not violate the Constitution or laws (Constitution, Article 102). However, the Constitution does not prescribe the prerogative to the Constitutional Court to decide the compliance of draft laws or other draft legal acts with the Constitution. The Seimas, as well as other participants of legislation process, must draft and adopt legal acts
conformity with the Constitution. This is one of the main measures ensuring the constitutional order and one of the basic principles of the law-governed State. A group of citizens, while expressing their
itiative to call a referendum, must also keep to this rule. Therefore, a draft law or a draft of the provisions of law submitted for referendum should also be co-ordinated with the Constitution. The Seimas, as People's representative and legislator may voice its opinion on the compliance of a draft law or a draft of the provisions of law, submitted for referendum, with the Constitution. Therefore, the provision of the second part of Article 12 of the appended Law on Referendum that the Seimas may state the contradiction of the draft of the provisions of law to the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania, is consistent with the Constitution.
cases when the draft of the provisions of law is submitted for referendum, the People shall be the legislator.
of the Constitution it is established that no one may limit or restrict the sovereignty of the people or make claims to the sovereign powers of the People. The adoption of any preliminary decisions not provided for by the Constitution and stipulating the announcement of a referendum would restrict the supreme sovereign power of the People. The provision of the second part of Article 12 of amended Law on Referendum, that upon the establishment of the contradiction of the draft legal act submitted for referendum to the Constitution "the question of amending the Constitution must be primarily considered", relates the announcement of a referendum to the condition not prescribed by the Constitution - the consideration of the issue concerning the amendment to the Constitution. This provision is flawed also due to the fact that the issue of amending the Constitution would be considered being unaware of the People's will to be stated during vote on the draft legal act submitted for referendum. Therefore, this provision contradicts Articles 3, 4 and 9 of the Constitution. 7. Item 12 of the Law
dispute has appended Article 12 of the Law on Referendum by Part 3, which reads: "
cases that the Seimas decides to consider and adopt submitted provisions of the law, the announcement of a referendum may be postponed, however the referendum must be announced
the same sitting which fails to adopt the submitted provisions of the law". The Seimas is the People's representative, whose prerogative is to enact laws and decide other issues concerning State power. The Seimas may adopt any law
the procedure prescribed by the Constitution and the Statute of the Seimas and without violation of the laws
force.
and the third item of Article 67 of the Constitution it is determined that the Seimas shall adopt resolutions for the organization of a referenda if no less than 300, 000 of the electorate so request. The Constitution, however, does not prescribe that the Seimas may do any other activities or accept for consideration the draft legal act submitted for referendum, thus restricting the citizen's right to
itiate a referendum and voice their will with regard to the submitted draft law or a draft of any other legal act. Therefore, the third part of amended Article 12 of the Law on Referendum contradicts Articles 4, 9 and item 3 of Article 67 of the Constitution. 8. Under item 39 of the Law
dispute, Article 32 of the Law on Referendum has been newly formulated and part 2 has become Part 5. The latter prescribes: "Provisions of laws of the Republic of Lithuania or any other decision shall be deemed adopted by referendum if more than half of registered voters vote
the affirmative". The Constitution establishes that sovereignty shall be vested
the People (Article 2). Citizens shall have the right to participate
the government of their State both directly and through their freely elected representatives (Article 33). The direct participation of citizens
the government of their state is a very important expression of the supreme sovereign power, therefore, referendum shall be a testimony of the real will of the people.
of the Constitution it is established that the State of Lithuania shall be an
dependent and democratic republic. One of the democratic principles
the adoption of decisions is the majority principle. This principle is also determined
the Constitution establishing the procedures for the activity and law enactment carried out by the Seimas and other authorised
stitutions, also regulating other questions. All referenda up to now,
cluding those when the present Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and the constitutional provision "the State of Lithuania shall be an
dependent and democratic republic" were adopted, have been organized under this principle and following the democratic legal traditions of the Lithuanian State. Therefore, the provision of the law that decisions shall be deemed adopted by referendum if more than half of the registered voters vote
the affirmative, does not contradict the Constitution. Conforming to Article 102 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania as well as Articles 53, 54, 55 and 56 of the Law on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, the Constitutional Court has taken the following ruling: To recognize that
the 15 June 1994 Law "On Amending and Appending the Law of the Republic of Lithuania on Referendum": 1) the norm of item 1 that "provisions of laws of the Republic of Lithuania may be adopted by referendum", does not contradict the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania; 2) the norm of item 1 that "provisions of laws on economic issues may be adopted by referendum only after economic examination of possible consequences", contradicts Articles 3, 4, 9 and 33 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania; 3) the norm of item 9 which amended the first part of Article of the Law on Referendum by establishing that "the passport number of a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania" shall be
dicated while signing a list for
itiating a referendum, does not contradict the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania; 4) the norm of item 9 which amended the third part of Article 9 of the Law on Referendum by establishing that "a citizen himself shall write all the necessary data while signing a list for
itiating a referendum", contradicts Articles 4, 9 and 33 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania; 5) the provision of item 12 which has appended Article 12 of the Law on Referendum by the second part establishing that the Seimas may state that the draft of the provisions of laws submitted for referendum is not
compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania, conforms to the Constitution; 6) the provision of item 12 which has appended Article 12 of the Law on Referendum by the second part, that "the question of amending the Constitution must be primarily considered", contradicts Articles 3, 4 and 9 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania; 7) the norm of item 12 which has appended Article 12 of the Law on Referendum by the third part, contradicts Articles 4 and 9 as well as item 3 of Article 67 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania; 8) the provision of item 39, which provided a new wording for Article 32 of the Law on Referendum and upon which the second part of said Article has become Part 5, does not contradict the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania. This Constitutional Court ruling is final and not subject to appeal. The ruling is promulgated on behalf of the Republic of Lithuania. Justices of the Constitutional Court: Algirdas Gailiûnas Zigmas Levickis Pranas Vytautas Rasimavièius Stasys Staèiokas Teodora Staugaitienë Stasys Ðedbaras Juozas Þilys
DI paaiškinimas pagal oficialų įstatymo tekstą. Orientacinis, nepakeičia teisinės konsultacijos.