On Accepting the Petition of a Petitioner


Published: 2006-11-01

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now for only USD$20 per month, or Get a Day Pass for only USD$4.99.
 
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA
 
DECISION
 
ON ACCEPTING THE PETITION OF A PETITIONER
 
11 January 2006
Vilnius
 
The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, composed of the Justices of the Constitutional Court Armanas Abramavičius, Toma Birmontienė, Egidijus Kūris, Kęstutis Lapinskas, Zenonas Namavičius, Ramutė Ruškytė, Vytautas Sinkevičius, and Romualdas Kęstutis Urbaitis,
with the secretary of the hearing—Daiva Pitrėnaitė,
at a procedural sitting of the Constitutional Court considered the petition of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, the petitioner, set forth in the Seimas Resolution “On the Application to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania with a Request to Investigate whether Paragraph 3 of Article 73 of the Statute of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania is not in Conflict with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania” of 20 December 2005, requesting to investigate whether the provision “if a group of at least one-fourth of the members of Seimas shall submit a written demand to form an ad hoc control or investigation commission, the Seimas must form such a commission in the course of its nearest sitting” of Paragraph 3 of Article 73 of the Statute of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania is not in conflict with the principle of the unrestricted mandate of a Seimas member, entrenched in Paragraph 4 of Article 59 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.
 
The Constitutional Court
has established:
 
On 20 December 2005, the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, the petitioner, adopted the Resolution “On the Application to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania with a Request to Investigate whether Paragraph 3 of Article 73 of the Statute of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania is not in Conflict with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania”. This Seimas resolution was published in the official gazette Valstybės žinios on 6 January 2006 (Official Gazette Valstybės žinios, 2006, No. 1-1).
In the Seimas Resolution “On the Application to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania with a Request to Investigate whether Paragraph 3 of Article 73 of the Statute of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania is not in Conflict with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania” of 20 December 2005 a request to the Constitutional Court to investigate whether the provision “if a group of at least one-fourth of the members of Seimas shall submit a written demand to form an ad hoc control or investigation commission, the Seimas must form such a commission in the course of its nearest sitting” of Paragraph 3 of Article 73 of the Statute of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania is not in conflict with the principle of the unrestricted mandate of a Seimas member, entrenched in Paragraph 4 of Article 59 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania is set forth.
The Seimas resolution of 20 December 2005 with a request to investigate whether the provision “if a group of at least one-fourth of the members of Seimas shall submit a written demand to form an ad hoc control or investigation commission, the Seimas must form such a commission in the course of its nearest sitting” of Paragraph 3 of Article 73 of the Statute of the Seimas is not in conflict with the principle of the unrestricted mandate of a Seimas member, entrenched in Paragraph 4 of Article 59 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania, was received at the Constitutional Court on 9 January 2006.
 
The Constitutional Court
holds that:
 
The request set forth in the Seimas Resolution “On the Application to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania with a Request to Investigate whether Paragraph 3 of Article 73 of the Statute of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania is not in Conflict with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania” of 20 December 2005 meets with the requirements established in the Constitution and the Law on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania.
 
There are no grounds provided for in the Law on the Constitutional Court to refuse to investigate the petition or to return the petition to the petitioner.
 
 
 
Conforming to Paragraph 1 of Article 105 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and Articles 26, 28 and 63 of the Law on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania has adopted the following
 
decision:
 
To accept the petition of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania set forth in the Seimas Resolution “On the Application to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania with a Request to Investigate whether Paragraph 3 of Article 73 of the Statute of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania is not in Conflict with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania” of 20 December 2005 requesting to investigate whether the provision “if a group of at least one-fourth of the members of Seimas shall submit a written demand to form an ad hoc control or investigation commission, the Seimas must form such a commission in the course of its nearest sitting” of Paragraph 3 of Article 73 of the Statute of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania is not in conflict with the principle of the unrestricted mandate of a Seimas member, entrenched in Paragraph 4 of Article 59 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.
 
Justices of the Constitutional Court:                                Armanas Abramavičius
Toma Birmontienė
Egidijus Kūris
Kęstutis Lapinskas
Zenonas Namavičius
Ramutė Ruškytė
Vytautas Sinkevičius
Romualdas Kęstutis Urbaitis