Document Nr.3
MINISTRY OF JUSTICE OF THE
Legal entities register. Code 188604955. Gedimino pr. 30/1, LT-01104
Fax (8 5) 262 5940. E-mail tminfo@tic.lt
Settl. Account LT267044060000269484 PubLLC SEB Vilniaus Bank, bank code 70440
To: Seimas Member Algimantas Matulevičius No. (1.23)-7R-7436 of 23 10 2006
To request of 18 09 2006
RE: YOUR REQUEST
Having considered the request of 24 08 2006 of Zenonas Jurgelevičius sent by your letter No. 03-14 of 18 09 2006 in which Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter Seimas) is asked to establish a working group for the investigation of Republic of Lithuania Law on the Restoration of the Ownership Rights of Citizens to the Existing Real, Republic of Lithuania Law on Land Reform or other legal acts regulating the restoration of citizen ownership rights to the existing real property, provisions legitimacy and conformity with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and international treaties of the Republic of Lithuania indicated by the applicant we inform that according to the Republic of Lithuania Constitution (hereinafter – Constitution) Art. 102 part 1 only the
According to Constitution Article 106 part 1 the right to address the
As for the opinion of the applicant that after the restoration of the independence of the Republic of Lithuania the state authorities proclaimed all the real estate inherited by the people as the property of the state we inform that Republic of Lithuania Law on the Restoration of the Ownership Rights of Citizens to the Existing Real (hereinafter Law) establishes restoration of ownership rights to the existing real property, acknowledgement of the continuation of ownership rights evaluating the formed objective public property relations.
In the preamble of the law it is emphasized that after the Republic of Lithuania Supreme Soviet – Restorational Seimas by acts of 11 March 1990 restored the independence of the Republic of Lithuania the laws enforced to us by an alien state by which the occupant authorities illegitimately seized owned real estate from the citizens of the Republic of Lithuania lost their validity and that the ownership rights acquired by the Republic of Lithuania citizens before occupation have not been cancelled and have continuance, that the restoration of continued ownership rights is based by the provision of 18 June 1991 Republic of Lithuania law „On the Procedure and Conditions of the Restoration of the Rights of Ownership to the Existing Real Property“ – to Republic of Lithuania citizens the remaining real estate is returned and if there is no such opportunity – it is justly compensated for.
Attention should be drawn to the fact that Constitutional Court decided regarding many provisions of law „On the Procedure and Conditions of the Restoration of the Rights of Ownership to the Existing Real Property“, and Republic of Lithuania Citizen Ownership Rights to the Existing Real Property Restoration Law correspondence to the Constitution.
The Constitutional Court in resolution of 20 06 1995 stated that the law “On the Procedure and Conditions of the Restoration of the Rights of Ownership to the Existing Real Property“ is special., i.e. having limited validity. Its special character manifests itself first of all by the fact that it is applied not for all property relations but only for those which appear regarding ownership rights to the restoration to the nationalized or otherwise illegally communized existing real estate during the years of occupation. Secondly, it is applied not to all former owners and their descendants –Lithuanian residents, but only the former estate owners – Lithuanian citizens who correspond to the conditions established by law. By choosing limited restitution way, the aim of the establishment of the conditions and procedure of restoration of ownership rights was to take into account the changed social and legal realia, also to ensure that by restoring the rights of some persons the rights of other persons were not violated.
The Constitutional Court marked that the law “On the Procedure and Conditions of the Restoration of the Rights of Ownership to the Existing Real Property“ assists in restoring the ownership rights violated during the years of occupation, so there is no legal basis to state that by it in general the natural rights are violated (Constitution Article 18).
The Constitutional Court in resolution of 02 04 2001 stated that in the manner established by the Law the ownership rights to the existing real estate nationalized by the occupational authorities are being restored at the same time taking into account the essential social and economical, other relations related with property which took place during the period which passed since illegitimate nationalization of this property. Due to mentioned essential changes and also taking into account the real opportunities of Lithuanian state it is impossible to restore all the ownership rights violated by occupational authorities by completely returning in kind all of the remaining real estate. The Constitutional Court marked that the provision that if is not possible to return the property in kind a compensation must be awarded does not contradict the principles of property immunity and ownership right defence principles, as just compensation also ensures the restoration of ownership rights (27 May 1994, 22 December 1995, 18 June 1998 resolutions). So the fact that in the Law the real estate redemption is provided for by itself does not violate the principle of property immunity.
Regarding possible violations of legal acts by the employees of Land Possession Department we explain that according to the Law the decisions of the institutions considering citizens requests to restore the ownership rights regarding the ownership rights to the existing real estate restoration can be appealed against to court.
According to the
Regarding possibly criminal actions of employees of Land Possession Department we inform that according to the Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 164 part 1 out-of-court investigation is carried out by out-of-court investigation officials. The public prosecutor organizes out-of-court investigation and heads it.
According to Public Prosecutor‘s Office Law Article 11 part 2 public prosecutor is independent while performing his functions and obeys only to Constitution and laws. According to Public Prosecutor‘s Office Law Art. 11 part 3 state institutions, their officials and employees are prohibited to give to Public Prosecutor‘s Office commissions or obligations not established in the laws or otherwise interfere into public prosecutors activity.
We inform that according to the Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 62 part 1 the process participants can appeal out-of-court investigation officials process actions (failure to act) and decisions to public prosecutor controlling out-of-court investigation official. If the public prosecutor refuses to satisfy the appeal his decision can be appealed against to out-of-court investigation judge.
We also inform that
Following the above and taking into account that the Republic of Lithuania and international legal acts establish the means of defence of person‘s ownership rights (their restoration) in the opinion of Ministry of Justice there is no necessity to form a Seimas working group to investigate the legitimacy of the circumstances indicated by the applicant. At the same time we mark that it is under the competence of Seimas to decide regarding the formation of Seimas working group, so Seimas ought to decide regarding the formation of working group for the investigation of legitimacy of the circumstances indicated by the applicant.
Minister of Justice (signature) Petras Baguška
Petras Grigalis, 266 29 78, e-mail p.grigalis@tic.lt
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą