Seim – secret defenders of China’s interests? Four parliamentarians named themselves applicants to the Constitutional Court

According to M. Lingė, the lobbying of Chinese interests is more important to some in the Seimas than the country’s national security.

“At the time when Lithuania was laying the carpets for the summit meeting of the largest security alliance in Vilnius, a group of Seimas members quietly disputed Lithuania’s security interests in the Constitutional Court, in order to defend China’s interests in the right to widely install computer systems in Lithuania.

Government in 2022 in March on the 30th adopted a resolution by which China was added to the list of countries that produce, supply, and maintain unreliable software and computer systems, in accordance with the Law on Public Procurement and the National Security Strategy approved by the Seimas”, explained the head of the Seimas BFK in a post on Facebook.

They do not know who the applicants are

According to M. Lingė, some members of the Seimas did not like it, and they appealed to the Constitutional Court. Quietly, without any public announcements.

He explained that this is not typical – usually those who apply widely communicate the fact of their application.

Pauliaus Peleckis/BNS photo/Mindaugas Lingė

“Only not in this case, when they wanted to defend China’s interests, but at the same time remain unnoticed. It is more important than the protection of China’s interests that at the same time the interests of Lithuania’s national security, which are intended to protect the country from unreliable systems, are questioned.

The Constitutional Court did not accept the request for consideration, but it also does not announce who made the request. There were at least 29 such members of the Seimas, but we do not know who they are, because the appeal did not even reach the Constitutional Court through the Seimas document management systems. And this is a flawed practice. The public should have the right to know the public persons who want to initiate cases even in cases where the Constitutional Court does not accept to examine”, taught M. Lingė.

The application was publicly available

The Constitutional Court informed that the aforementioned request of M. Lingė was published on the Court’s website from the time it was received in July until the decision to return this request to the applicant was made, when it became irrelevant.

Žygimantos Gedvilas/BNS photo/Petras Gražulis

Four representatives of the applicants

As can be seen from the request of the members of the Seimas, four parliamentarians are named as the representatives of the applicants: Petras Gražulis and Mindaugas Puidokas representing the mixed group of members of the Seimas, “peasants” Valius Ėuolas and Dainius Kepenis.

They were represented by lawyer Gytis Kaminskas.

The appeal to the CT was signed by parliamentarians from the “peasants”, the Democratic Union “Vardan Lietuvos”, Labor Party factions, the Mixed group of Seimas members, including representatives of the “peasants” Juozas Varžgalys, Valius Ģžuolas, Algimantas Dumbrava, Vigilijus Jukna, Asta Kubilienė, Mixed groups representatives Jonas Pinskus, Petras Gražulis, Rita Tamašunienė, Artūras Skardžius, representatives of the Democratic Union “Vardan Lietuvos” Algirdas Butkevičius, Linas Kukuraitis, Vilija Targamadzė, “work girl” Ieva Kačinskaitė-Urbonienė.

Members of the Seimas requested to investigate the conformity of some provisions of the Law on Public Procurement with the Constitution.

Žygimantos Gedvilas/BNS photo/Valius Ažuolas

In the letter to the Constitutional Court, it is explained, among other things, that by the contested resolution of the Government, “voluntaristically, contrary to the international obligations undertaken by the Republic of Lithuania, without coordination with the legislator and the President of the Republic, a decision was made regarding the essential issues of foreign policy, – suppliers of the People’s Republic of China, their sub-suppliers, business entities whose capabilities are relied upon, manufacturers, persons carrying out maintenance and support of hardware or software or persons controlling them are not considered reliable”.

Pauliaus Peleckis/BNS photo/Mindaugas Puidokas

“In our opinion, such legal regulation does not provide an opportunity to assess the individual situation of each person and, taking into account the nature of the aforementioned connections, the threat they pose to the interests of the state or public security in a certain sector of the economy, and other important circumstances, to accordingly individualize the specific measures limiting his rights applicable to that person .

Also, such a decision, among other things, significantly distorts fair competition in the public procurement market”, says the Seimas members’ request to the Constitutional Court.