REPORT According to the Letter Sent to the Seimas Ombudsmen's Office

REPORT

According to the letter sent to the Seimas Ombudsmen’s Office of the of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter referred to as the Seimas Ombudsmen’s Office) on 3 April 2014, we are grateful to provide you some information regarding the implementation of recommendations made to Lithuania at the Human Rights Council in 2011, during the UPR process.

Firstly, it should be noted that Lithuania is an independent democratic republic. In Lithuania, State power is executed by the Seimas (Parliament), the President of the Republic and the Government, and the Judiciary. The activities of state government authorities are based on the Constitution of Lithuania, laws, international treaties, and the principles of the rule of law and respect for human rights and freedoms. The main fundamental human rights are laid down in the Constitution of Lithuania. Under Article 6, the Constitution shall be an integral and directly applicable act. Everyone, whose constitutional rights or freedoms are violated, can protect their rights based on the Constitution by applying to courts. The constitutional provisions on the protection of human rights are also detailed in the laws and regulations of Lithuania. All public authorities are obliged to follow constitutional and detailed legal provisions on the protection of human rights.

Article 73 of the Constitution stipulates that the Seimas Ombudsmen examine complaints of citizens concerning the abuse of powers by, and bureaucracy of, the state and local government officers (with the exception of judges).

The powers of the Seimas Ombudsmen are established by the Law on the Seimas Ombudsmen. The purpose of activities of the Seimas Ombudsmen is to protect a person’s right to good public administration securing human rights and freedoms, to supervise fulfilment by state authorities of their duty to properly serve the people.

There are two Seimas Ombudsmen in the Republic of Lithuania. One Seimas Ombudsman investigates activities of officials of state institutions and agencies and the other Seimas Ombudsman investigates activities of officials of municipal institutions and agencies.

The Seimas Ombudsmen investigate complaints about the abuse of office by and bureaucracy of officials or other violations of human rights and freedoms in the sphere of public administration. The activities of the President of the Republic, members of the Seimas, the Prime Minister, the 1

Government (as a collegial institution), the State Controller and judges of the Constitutional Court and other courts, municipal councils (as collegial institutions) are outside the Seimas Ombudsman’s powers of investigation.

The legality and validity of procedural decisions of the prosecutors, pre-trial investigation officials also are outside the Seimas Ombudsmen’s powers of investigation, however, complaints about the actions of the prosecutors, pre-trial investigation officials, which violate human rights and freedoms, are within the investigative jurisdiction of the Seimas Ombudsmen. What is more, the Seimas Ombudsmen do not investigate complaints arising from the labour legal relations and about the legality and validity of court decisions, judgements and rulings. When performing his duties, the Seimas Ombudsman has the right to: 1) request immediate provision of information, material and documents required for the discharge of his functions, be granted access in the manner prescribed by laws to the documents which constitute a State, professional, commercial or bank secret as well as documents which contain information about personal data protected by law. Should it be necessary to execute the right, the assistance of police officials shall be enlisted and an appropriate statement of the seizure of documents shall be drawn up; 2) having produced the certificate of employment, enter the premises of institutions and agencies (enterprises, services or organisations), and at any time of the day, if persons are kept in the premises for 24 hours or more, and unrestrictedly meet and interview persons present in the premises. The territory and premises of institutions and agencies the activity of which are regulated by a statute shall be entered with the officials of the institutions and agencies accompanying; 3) request written or oral explanations from the officials whose activities are under investigation; 4) question the officials and other persons; 5) attend the meetings of the Seimas, the Government, other state and municipal institutions and agencies when the issues under consideration are related to the activities of the Seimas Ombudsmen or the matter investigated by the Seimas Ombudsman; 6) enlist the services of officials of the government agencies, ministries and local authorities, as well as officials and experts of municipal institutions and agencies; 7) inform the Seimas, the Government and other state institutions and agencies or the appropriate municipal council of the gross violations of law or deficiencies, contradictions of or gaps in laws or other legal acts; 8) recommend to the Seimas, state or municipal institutions and agencies to amend the laws or other statutory acts which restrict human rights and freedoms; 2

9) draw up a record of administrative violation of law for failure to comply with the demands of the Seimas Ombudsman or for interfering in any other with the fulfilment by the Seimas Ombudsman of the rights granted to him; 10) apply to the administrative court with a request to investigate conformity of an administrative regulatory enactment (or its part) with the law or Government resolution; 11) propose to the Seimas to apply to the Constitutional Court regarding the conformity of legal acts with the Constitution and laws of the Republic of Lithuania; 12) refer the material to pre-trial investigation body or the prosecutor, if elements of crime are detected; 13) apply to the court for the dismissal of officials guilty of abuse of office or bureaucracy; 14) recommend to the collegial body or official to repeal, suspend or amend the decisions which are contrary to the laws and other legal acts, or propose to adopt decisions the adoption whereof has bee precluded by abuse of office or bureaucracy; 15) recommend to the collegial body, head of the agency or a superior institution or agency to impose disciplinary penalties on the official at fault; 16) recommend to the prosecutor to apply to the court according to the procedure prescribed by law for the protection of public interest; 17) bring to the officials’ attention the facts of negligence in office, non-compliance with laws or other legal acts, violation of professional ethics, abuse of office, bureaucracy or violations of human rights and freedoms and recommend to apply measures to eliminate the violations of laws and other legal acts, their causes and circumstances; 18) propose that material and non-material damage sustained by a person due to the violations committed by the official be compensated in the manner prescribed by law; 19) notify the Seimas, the President of the Republic or the Prime Minister of the violations committed by the ministers or other officials accountable to the Seimas, the President of the Republic or the Government (except for those listed in paragraph 2 of Article 12); 20) recommend to the Chief Official Ethics Commission to evaluate whether or not the official has violated the Law on Adjustment of Public and Private Interests in the Public Service; 21) refraining from the investigation on the merits of a complaint falling outside the remit of the Seimas Ombudsman give proposals or offer commentaries to appropriate institutions and agencies on the improvement of public administration in order to prevent violations of human rights and freedoms.

The Seimas Ombudsmen seek that each person, who applies to them, is provided with correct and objective information on the matter raised in the complaint without undue delay. Every single person is important and so each complainant is given due attention and time in order to settle the raised issues effectively.

This report will be focused on the recommendations made during the UPR process that are most closely related to the Seimas Ombudsmen’s Office jurisdiction: 1) recommendations regarding ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; 2) recommendations regarding the establishment of a national human rights institution in compliance with the Paris Principles; 3) recommendations regarding living conditions in prisons in order to meet international standards as well as regarding prevention of ill-treatment.

Recommendations regarding ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

On 3 December 2013 the Seimas by an Act No XII-630 has ratified the Optional Protocol of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT) and approved amendments to the Law on the Seimas Ombudsmen that entrust the Seimas Ombudsmen‘s Office to implement national prevention of torture in places of detention and undertake regular visits. These amendments came into force on 1 January 2014. During this short period and after having started performing national prevention of torture, the Seimas Ombudsmen’s Office carried out 16 monitoring inspections of places of detention.

In June 2013, the Seimas Ombudsmen’s Office undertook organisational-structural and activity- related changes, after witch a new structure of the office was approved. Following these changes the Human Rights Division was formed on the basis of the group monitoring human rights in closed detention institutions with the aim of implementing the functions of the Seimas Ombudsmen’s Office, monitoring and analysing human rights and freedoms, and seeking to restore violated human rights, as well as preventing the emergence of new offences. Equally important are the newly assigned functions to promote human rights, education, and collaboration at nationals and international level.

According to these functions the Seimas Ombudsmen’s Office often organises various seminars regarding human rights mainstreaming in public administration and public services. The latest seminar organised by the Seimas Ombudsmen’s Office was held on 4 October 2013. The seminar “The Role of Local Self-government in Ensuring Citizen’s Rights to a Proper Public Administration” from the cycle of seminars for civil servants titled “Citizen’s Rights and Responsibilities of Public Administration Entities”

The implementation of the national prevention of torture has been one of the strategic goals of the Seimas Ombudsmen for a number of years already. It is gratifying to know that in 2013 this goal was achieved through joint efforts of the Seimas Ombudsmen, the Seimas Committee on Human Rights, the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and that the Seimas Ombudsmen can already be designated not only as the officials investigating complaints against state and municipal institutions, but also as the officials responsible for the national prevention of torture.

Recommendations regarding the establishment of a national human rights institution in compliance with the Paris Principles.

Another strategic goal of activities of the Seimas Ombudsmen – to become a national human rights institution – has not been achieved yet. Amendments to the Law on the Seimas Ombudsmen granting additional mandate to the Seimas Ombudsmen in the sphere of human rights (to carry out the monitoring of the situation of human rights and freedoms; to prepare annual reports on the situation of human rights and freedoms; to provide conclusions on draft legal acts from the perspective of human rights; to disseminate information about human rights and freedoms, to organise education of the public, state institutions and officials on the matters of human rights and freedoms, etc.) have already been drafted and the process of their alignment is under way. The main work – the adoption of the amendments of the Law – however, depends on the political will. We can only hope that the new version of the Law on the Seimas Ombudsmen will be adopted in the near future and the matters of human rights will be ultimately given the attention they deserve.

The Seimas Ombudsmen, according to their mandates, are carrying out the activities of the dissemination and monitoring of human rights within the extent of their possibilities, regardless of their limited financial and human resources. Therefore, the granting of the status of the national human rights institution to the Seimas Ombudsmen would undoubtedly be a well-earned outcome. 5

Furthermore, in 2013, certain specific organisational steps were taken to bring the activities of the Seimas Ombudsmen Office closer to the human rights institution complying with the Paris Principles. In June, a special structural unit of the Seimas Ombudsmen’s Office –Human Rights Division– was set up.

These measures contributed to a wider promotion and education of human rights, international and national cooperation on the issues of human rights, monitoring the situation of human rights, consulting on the matters of human rights, etc.

The strategic goal of the Ombudsmen for this year is the same – to become a national human rights institution.

Recommendations regarding living conditions in prisons in order to meet international standards as well as regarding prevention of ill-treatment.

In general, in 2013, the Seimas Ombudsmen’s Office received 2,897 complaints from natural and legal persons, of which 1,846 were new complaints. 1,382 complaints were related to the activities of the officials of state institutions and 628 complaints – to the activities of the officials of municipal institutions. 797 complaints were investigated on the merits. In the process of investigation of these complaints, 1,159 problems were identified and the decision was made with respect to each of them. It means that at least two different issues were raised in almost every second complaint investigated on the merits.

The percentage of justified complaints against the state institutions’ officials is considerably lower because the major part of these complaints comprises complaints from the imprisonment institutions about violations of human rights of inmates. Only a very small share of such complaints is confirmed and declared to be justified. Therefore, the total percentage of complaints against the state institutions’ officials declared to be justified is not high.

The percentage of justified complaints against the state institutions’ officials, without taking into account the complaints against actions of the officials of penal institutions, would be 32%.

The inmates of penal institutions very actively complain about the alleged violation of their rights. In 2013, the Seimas Ombudsmen opened as many as 490 cases of complaints concerning actions of the penal institutions’ officials, which represent almost one-third (28%) of all cases initiated by the Seimas Ombudsmen in 2013. However, justified complaints make up only a very small percentage of these complaints: only 12% of complaints against actions of the penal institutions’ officials were declared to be justified.

Lukiškės Remand Prison – Closed Prison (103 complaints) and Pravieniškės Correction House – Open Prison Colony (102 complaints) are in the first positions in terms of numbers of complaints received in 2013 against actions of the penal institutions’ officials. Vilnius Correction House (65 complaints) is in the third position.

However, the highest percentage of justified complaints is observed among complaints received against the Central Prison Hospital (57 complaints), which is in the fourth position according to received complaints. As much as 37% of complaints against actions of the officials of this institution had been declared to be justified and considerably exceed the total average percentage of the justified complaints (22%), being close to the share (42%) of decisions on justified complaints against municipal institutions.

Therefore, the largest number of complaints (as many as 565 complaints by ministries and institutions attributed to their management sphere) had been received with respect to the Ministry of Justice. All penal institutions are attributed to the management sphere of this Ministry, or, to be more precise – to the sphere of management of the Prison Department under the Ministry of Justice.

The area of restriction of liberty covers complaints about the conditions under which the inmates are kept in prisons or in police custodies, about meals, behaviour of the officers or wrong application of legal actions in these institutions, inadequate handling of applications of individuals whose liberty is restricted, access to health care, provision of necessary medical assistance, regime in penitentiaries, etc.

In case of complaints are found reasonable, the Seimas Ombudsmen give recommendations to the responsible authorities and control their implementation. It must be pointed out, that 91 per cent of recommendations are being implemented.

According to the new function under the OPCAT – national torture prevention – detention facilities are visited on a regular basis. During such visits, the condition and treatment of detainees, as well as implementation of CPT recommendations are evaluated in a written report which is submitted to the authorities with respected recommendations.

Moreover, the Law on the Seimas Ombudsmen entitles the Seimas Ombudsmen to open investigations on their own initiative when the signs of the abuse of office, bureaucracy or other violations of human rights and freedoms by the officials are established from reports of mass media or other sources.

Investigations initiated by the Seimas Ombudsmen are one of the most effective measures of the protection of human rights. This measure is of a special preventive type, because the Seimas Ombudsman may initiate the investigation even without having received a complaint about the particular problem, if he believes that human rights might have been violated in a certain case. These investigations enable to promptly and effectively respond to potential violations of human rights and, furthermore, they are usually related not to a single individual, but to a large group of individuals, or even to a big part of the society. As a rule, such investigations are particularly detailed and involve thorough analysis of a given problem. This enables to reveal gaps or imperfections in the regulatory framework and to propose the respective regulatory improvements.

In 2013, the Seimas Ombudsmen conducted 22 investigations on their initiative dealing with 37 problems and adopting decisions with respect to each of them. It should be emphasised that in 21 cases the facts of abuse, bureaucracy or other public maladministration had been disclosed, in 12 cases the facts of public maladministration had not been confirmed, and in another 4 cases the investigation had been discontinued.

In 2013, the Seimas Ombudsmen issued 903 recommendations to the officials of state and municipal institutions.

In the end of this report it should be mentioned that Lithuania makes efforts to increase protection of human rights in wide spectrum of areas. The activities of state government authorities are based on the Constitution of Lithuania, laws, international treaties, and the principles of the rule of law and respect for human rights and freedoms. All public authorities, having regard to their competences and functions, are responsible for the ensuring human rights. 8

What is more, Lithuania, however, is a state acting upon rule of law and legislative power belongs to the Seimas of Lithuania. All rights and duties of persons as well as authorities are established by laws.