LRKT 30 en
Titulinė skaidrė
Teismo sudėtis
Salė
Vytis
Lt Fr

News

Content updated: 28-09-2022 11:37

The provision of the Law on the Protection of Objects of Importance for Ensuring National Security, under which the reasons posing a threat to national security interests specified therein are considered irremovable, was not in conflict with the Constitution

22-09-2022

The Constitutional Court, having examined the case following an individual constitutional complaint, in its ruling of 22 September 2022, has declared paragraph 15 of Article 12 of the Law on the Protection of Objects of Importance for Ensuring National Security (wording of 12 January 2018) (hereinafter referred to as the Law) to have not been in conflict with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania, insofar as, under this paragraph, the reasons posing a threat to national security interests, which are specified in item 2 of Article 11 of this law, are considered irremovable.

The Constitutional Court has noted that item 2 of Article 11 of the Law consolidates the criterion for the assessment of compatibility of investors (seeking to invest in objects important to national security) with the interests of national security – the existing relations or the relations maintained by the investor in the past with institutions of foreign states or natural or legal persons from those states which pose a threat to national security. Such relations are, under the impugned paragraph 15 of Article 12 of the Law, considered irremovable reasons posing a threat to national security interests; however, as held by the Constitutional Court, this does not mean that an investor having such relations shall in all cases be prohibited from investing. The Constitutional Court interpreted that if a person maintains or, in the past, maintained relations with institutions of foreign states or natural or legal persons from those states which increase the risk or pose a threat to national security, the threats to national security arising from them will always be considered remaining; however, the legal regulation, which is consolidated in the impugned provision, when interpreted in a systematic manner in conjunction with other provisions of this law, does not deny the possibility of assessing the individual situation of each investor and, if it is possible to manage possible threats to national security, to allow him/her to invest. Having assessed the nature of an investor’s existing relations or the relations maintained by the investor in the past with institutions of foreign states or natural or legal persons from those states and the potential impact on national security interests in the context of the specific planned investment, recommendations may be made regarding the binding requirements or conditions to be established under which the investment (part of it) could be carried out and would not pose a threat to national security interests. Therefore, even an investor who maintains the above-mentioned relations or maintained them in the past may be allowed to invest.