RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/ACC/LTU/48
13 June 2000
(00-2354)
Working Party on the
Accession of LithuaniaOriginal:  English
ACCESSION OF LITHUANIA
Questions and Replies
The Permanent Mission of the Republic of Lithuania has submitted the following replies to
questions raised by Members of the Working Party at the Working Party Meeting held on
14 April 2000.
_______________
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page Question
Number
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING POLICIES
5. Law and Legal Acts 31 - 3
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS
1. Import Regulations
Trading Rights 5 4-9
Customs Code 8 10
Fees and Charges for Services Rendered 9 11
Application of Internal Taxes to Imports 10 12Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions, Quotas and
Licensing Systems10 13-15
Customs Valuation 12 16-17
Specific comments on Lithuania's implementation of the WTO
Agreement on Customs Valuation15 Comments
1-9
Rules of Origin 18 18
Anti-dumping, Countervailing Duties and Safeguard Regimes 19 19
2. Export Regulations
Export Subsidies 19 20-21
3. Internal policies affecting foreign trade in goods
Technical Barriers to Trade, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 20 22-26
State-Trading Entities 23 27-30
Government Procurement 25 31-38WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 2
Transit 28 39
Agricultural Policies 29 40
Trade-Related Intellectual Property Regime 30 41-55
Trade Agreements 42 56WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 3
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING POLICIES
5. Law and Legal Acts
Question 1.
The Members would appreciate the additional information provided in the text of document
WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5 on the hierarchy of laws.
In a bilateral communication, in response to questions tabled at the last meeting, Lithuania has
stated that after that all WTO provisions will become part of the national legislation and if
necessary they will then be implemented by resolutions/orders (secondary legislation) which
define concrete details or set appropriate orders prescribing how to implement the legislation.
After accession to the WTO all its provisions will be  integral part of the national legislation and
be directly applied in Lithuania. If any conflict of law appears an importer would have a right
to appeal to the administrative court.  Lithuani a also lists international treaties and agreements
in the legal hierarchy described in paragra ph 26.  In light of this, the Members would
appreciate a statement by Lithuania be included in paragraph 26 clarifying, one way or the
other, the status of the provisions of the WTO Agreement vis-à-vis laws in Lithuania that may
not be in conformity with WTO provisions.
Reply:
As it was already explained in Lithuania’s answ ers to U.S. Questions, presented in September
1999, one of the basic principles of international law determines that international agreement/treaty is
superior to national legislation. With no doubt Lithuania follows this rule. Furthermore, the status of
the WTO Agreement as an international agreemen t in the hierarchy of national legislation of
Lithuania was clearly determined in paragraph 26 of Working Party Report(WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5). Also, as  it was mentioned in the same paragraph, relevant legislation
contains a special provision that in case some prov isions of the national legislation differ from the
international one, the latter are applied. In fact such the provision only repeats applicability the above-
mentioned principle of international law in Lithuania.
After fulfilling internal legal procedures (this mean the ratification by the Parliament in most
cases) provisions of international laws are incorporated into the national legal system. If an
international agreement/treaty itself requires further implementation (e.g. to implement reduced
import duties, etc.) such a requirement would be executed by the appropriate Government Resolution,
which always will be based on the corresponding agreement.
The results of the accession negotiations and the WTO Agreements have to be ratified by the
Parliament. After that, all WTO provisions will become  part of the national legislation and if necessary
they will then be implemented by resolutions/orders (secondary legislation) which will define concretedetails or set the appropriate orders prescribing how to implement the legislation.
Referring to the wording if necessary underlined above, it should be stressed, that it does not
imply, that Lithuania expects to implement WTO provisions only after membership. In fact, the
relevant resolutions/orders (secondary legislation) which define concrete details or set appropriate
orders prescribing how to implement the relevant legislation will be adopted only in case of adoptionof new supplements and amendments to the Laws that are subject of WTO notifications.
Moreover, Lithuania has demonstrated its ability to fulfill WTO requirements before its
accession to the WTO and already made the corresponding commitments in the Working Party
Report. Lithuania has also presented on a constant  basis the Synoptic Table showing the progress in
the adoption of legislation (WT/ACC/LTU/36 - the latest version submitted in April 2000). Anyregulations subsequently enacted by Lithuania to gi ve effect to the Laws enacted to implement anyWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 4
Agreement constituting part of the WTO Agreement would also conform to the requirements of that
Agreement. (See also WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5; paragraph 172.)
Question 2.
In addition, Lithuania has also stated that At the latest upon entry into force of the Protocol of
Accession, Lithuania will submit any notification required by any Agreement constituting partof the WTO Agreement.  Any regulations subsequently enacted by Lithuania to give effect to
the laws enacted to implement any Agreement co nstituting part of the WTO Agreement would
also conform to the requirements of that Agreement.  This would seem to imply that Lithuania
will not be able to pass all required legislation prior to accession and that it still expects to
implement WTO provisions after membership, not before.  The Members would appreciate
Lithuania’s further clarification of this point and the inclusion of this information in this section
of the Working Party report.
Reply:
We understood that this question was addressed to the paragraph 172 of Working Party Report
(WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5). Referring to the fi rst part of the question and mentioned para,
Lithuanian delegation would like to add, to what was explained there, by emphasizing, that paragraph
172 is a commitment paragraph and the text there is standard and identical to the relevantcommitment paragraphs in the Working Party Reports on the accession of Estonia, Georgia, Kyrgyz
Republic, Latvia, etc. Moreover, such wording was proposed by WTO Members themselves, but not
by Lithuania.
Referring to the wording in paragraph 172 any regulation subsequently enacted, it should be
emphasized once again, that this wording does not imply that Lithuania will not be able to pass allrequired legislation prior to accession and that still expects to implement WTO provisions after
membership, not before. In fact, the relevant resolutions/orders (secondary legislation) which define
concrete details or set appropriate orders prescribing how to implement the legislation will be adopted
as was already indicated in the previous answer only in case of the adoption of new supplements and
amendments to the Laws, which are subject of WTO notifications.
Moreover, Lithuania has demonstrated its ability to fulfill WTO requirements before its
accession to the WTO and already made the appropriate commitments in the Working Party Report.
Lithuania has also presented on a constant basis the Synoptic Table showing the progress in the
adoption of legislation (WT/ACC/LTU/36 - the latest version submitted in April 2000). Also
Lithuanian delegation would like to invite to pay a specific attention to the document Summary
description of the adoption by Lithuania of the remaining legislation as envisaged during the
accession negotiations presented to the WTO Secretariat in April 2000, which also shows that allrequired legislation is already adopted.
Question 3.
In addition, the Members would appreciate in formation on how an importer could invoke WTO
provisions if conforming legislation is not yet in place or if contradictory legislation is still in
force after accession.  Both these eventualities would still appear to be possible.
Reply:
As it was already explained in Lithuania’s answ ers to US Questions presented in September
1999, and to the questions above, after accession all WTO provisions will be integral part of the national
legislation and be directly applied in Lithuania. If  any conflict of law appears an importer would have a
right to appeal to the administrative court and the or der of such is explicitly explained in paragraph 27 of
Working Party Report (WT/ACC/SPEC/ LTU/8/Rev.5). At present the WT O provisions in Lithuania are
applied de facto, but not directly and importers have the right to appeal to international arbitration or
judicial bodies.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 5
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS
1. Import Regulations
Trading Rights
Question 4.
Concerning paragraphs 32 to 33, Lithuania has stated that the Law on Alcohol Control of10 December 1998 has repealed the ban on the importation of strong alcoholic beverages.
Lithuania now reserves the production of bev erages with an alcoholic strength greater than
22 per cent to special firms.  Is this a reference to firms that produce mead?  Does the monopoly
of these firms extend to the importation of beverages with an alcoholic strength greater than
22 per cent?
Reply:
Firstly, Lithuanian delegation would like to note, that the reference to paragraphs 32  to 33 is
made incorrectly. In fact, in paragraphs 63, 64 and 127 of Working Part Report
(WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5) is written the La w on Alcohol Control of 10 December 1998 has
repealed the ban on the importation of strong alcoholic beverages.
As it was already mentioned in paragraph 127 of Working Part Report alcoholic beverages
strength greater than 22 per cent in Lithuania can produce state or special enterprises and currently twoprivate companies (companies having this right (license), including also mead company Lietuviskas
Midus. It should be also noted, that Lithuania ha s already notified to the WTO Secretariat explained
in detail the operation of such enterprises as State Trading on 4 June 1999 (WT/ACC/LTU/35).
Besides, such an order in any way does not c ontradict with any WTO requirement. The fact,
that production of alcoholic beverages strength greater than 22 per cent is reserved for someenterprises, is a limitation for domestic production of alcohol products, but does not by any means
restrict the import of the same alcohol products. As it is already explained in paragraph 126 of
Working Part Report, the State does not maintain  any form of distribution monopoly with respect to
alcohol, nor does it play a controlling role. The import system is entirely different, described many
times, and, in Lithuania’s view, in full conformity  with WTO requirements. Moreover, we can say,
that Lithuania puts more restrictions on domestic production of alcohol beverages than on imported
ones. (see also Working Party Report, Synoptic Table showing the progress in the adoption of
legislation (WT/ACC/LTU/36 - the latest version submitted in April 2000), the document Summary
description of the adoption by Lithuania of the remaining legislation as envisaged during the
accession negotiations presented to WTO Secretariat in April 2000).
Question 5.
How do licensing requirements for the importat ion of such beverages differ from those for
alcoholic beverages of a lower alcoholic content?
Reply:
In document WT/ACC/LTU/19 of 10 February 1998 was provided all relevant information,
how licensing requirements for the importation of such beverages differ from those for alcoholic
beverages of a lower alcoholic content. Thus, the same requirements for importation apply to all kindsof alcoholic beverages. Moreover, the Government Resolution No. 559 of 5 June 1997 On Licensing
of Importation, Wholesale and Retail Trade in Alcoholic Products, in which are provided all licensing
requirements for importation of alcoholic beverages, was submitted to WTO Secretariat.
As it was already explained in document WT/ACC/LTU/19 and Lithuania’s answers to U.S.
Questions, presented in September 1999, to obtain a licence to import alcoholic beverages (of a lowerWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 6
and higher alcohol content), an applicant must pr ovide the following documents to the State Tobacco
and Alcohol Control Service:
- motivated application with names and addresses of company founders, managing
staff, whose nominal value of share makes up more than 10 per cent of authorized
capital, description of the commercial-economic activity for which a licence isrequested, names of countries and companies from which the company intends to
import alcoholic beverages, description of alcoholic beverages to be imported,
addresses of warehouses from which the wholesale trade will be executed;
- the notarized duplicates of contract establishing enterprise, certificate of registration
and statutes (excluding enterprises functioning without statutes);
- the approval of the major (board) of the city (district) where the company is
registered [if the enterprise has subdivisions (branches, storage's) which practicewholesale of alcohol products in other cities (districts), the permission of the major
(board) is needed];
- a tax inspection certificate confirming all income declared and taxes paid during the
last 3 years period, also information if any cheating in the payment of taxes during
the same period was determined;
- a certificate from the Customs office regarding compliance with customs obligations;
- a certificate of State Social Insurance that taxes have been paid;
- originals of the authorization of foreign companies producing alcoholic beverages to
represent them (to sell their production) with translation into Lithuanian;
- a certificate (original) issued by the foreign register that foreign company-producer
from which alcoholic beverages will be supplied, has been registered in that country
(company’s activity should be also indicated), and its translation into Lithuanian;
- samples of the labels of beverages planned to be imported or catalogues;
- the original of the quality certificate (issued separately for each kind of alcoholic
beverages) issued by a foreign company producing alcoholic beverages;
- a certificate of a foreign company producing alcoholic beverages (except beer) that
for alcoholic beverages planned to be imported in Lithuania retail sale is also allowed
in that country (the certificate should be confirmed by the institution which regulates
trade in that country);
- he notarized duplicate of contract for storage or warehouse rental (in the case of rent)
or notarized duplicate of storage or warehouse legal registration (if storage's belongs
by property right); and
- confirmation of payment of Stamp taxes.
Question 6.
Paragraph 33 of document WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8 /Rev.5 states that domestically-produced
alcohol was subject to the same restrictions and regulations as imported products.  The revised
law on stamp taxes (Resolution No. 601 of 18  May 1999), however, states the following:
Enterprises producing beverages included in paragraph 17.2 and engaged in wholesale trade
thereof shall not pay the stamp tax specified in  this paragraph.  This appears to exempt
domestic alcohol producers who engage in wholesale trade from the 100,000 litas tax applied to
wholesalers of imported alcoholic beverages.   How is this provision consistent with Article III of
the GATT?
Reply:
The mentioned wording Enterprises producing beverages included in paragraph 17.2 and
engaged in wholesale trade thereof shall not pay the stamp tax specified in this paragraph does not
mean any discrimination of alcohol importers. The producers of alcohol products with more than
22 per cent of alcohol content are paying stamp tax for production activity licence of 20,000 litas(US$ 5,000) exactly as importers are paying for importation activity licence of 80,000 litas (US$
20,000). In both cases there is no need to pay additionally for wholesale activity. The tax for the mainWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 7
activity is different, but this is well grounded, taking into account the specificity of the production
sector. Moreover, the production itself is not a subject of the WTO and all the producers have a right
to sell freely their production all over the globe. What concerns wholesale alone of domestically
produced alcoholic beverages, the stamp tax for activity licence is 80,000 litas (US$ 20,000) and
could be considered being discriminated versus importation activity licence stamp tax, having in mindthat importer pays only 80,000 litas (US$ 20,000) for importation, and does not pay additionally for
wholesale. Furthermore, it is necessary to bear in mind that such importation/wholesale licenses also
include the larger range of products than wholesale licenses for domestically produced goods only.
From 1 May 2000 stamp taxes for the activity licenses for importation/wholesale and
wholesale of alcohol and alcoholic  beverages have been equalized in accordance with Government
Resolution No. 366 of 31 March 2000 (Government Resolution 601 of 18 May 1999 is not longer
valid). Under the new order, an activity licence to import and engage in wholesale of imported vodka
and other spirits costs 80,000 litas (US$20,000); for wine and beer - 40,000 litas (US$10,000); beer only
- 10,000 litas (US$2,500).  The same taxes are charged for activity licenses to engage in wholesale trade
of alcohol produced in Lithuania. The new system, in our view, is consistent with the national treatment
obligation.
Question 7.
Table 4 in document WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5 indicates that the fee structure for
importation and wholesale of alcohol and tobacc o products differs from the fee structure for
wholesaling alone.  The text of Resolution N o. 601 appears to state that a licence to engage in
wholesale trade in imported alcoholic bever ages with an alcoholic strength of less than
22 per cent is 100,000 litas, while the licence to wholesale such domestic products is 50,000 litas.Please explain how these differences meet the cri teria of Article III.2 which states that products
of the territory of any contracting party import ed into the territory of any other contracting
party shall not be subject, directly or indirectl y, to internal taxes or other internal charges of
any kind in excess of those applied, directly or indirectly, to like domestic products.
Reply:
Firstly, referring to the fee structure for importation and wholesale of alcohol and tobacco
products and the fee structure for wholesale alone, it should be noted that it is fully, in our view,
consistent with Article III of GATT. Contrary to what was claimed in the question, the Table 4
(Working Part Report, WT/ACC/SPE C/LTU/8/Rev.5) and indicates that the stamp taxes for a licence
to engage in importation/wholesale of alcoholic beverages with an alcoholic strength of less than
22 per cent are 50,000 litas (US$12,500) and the same stamp taxes are for the wholesale licenses of
such domestic products. In the text of Government Resolution No. 601 it was only slight difference incategories titles (i.e. alcoholic beverages with less than 22 per cent of alcohol content; and wine with
less than 22 per cent of alcohol content and beer), however the essence of the matter was the same and
the stamp taxes are equal in both cases.
Moreover, it should be recalled, that from 1 May 2000 stamp taxes for the activity licenses for
importation/wholesale and wholesale of alcoholic beverages have been further reduced in accordancewith Government Resolution No. 366 of 31  March 2000 (Government Resolution 601 of
18 May 1999 is not longer valid). Under the new order, the stamp taxes for an activity licence to import
and engage in wholesale of alcoholic beverages with an alcoholic strength of less than 22 per cent (wine
and beer) are 40,000 litas (US$ 10,000). The same taxes are charged for activity licenses to engage in
wholesale trade of domestic alcohol beverages. Th e translation of the Government Resolution No. 366
was submitted to the WTO Secretariat in May 2000.
In Table 4 (Working Part Report) it is also indicated, that the licence fee for
importation/wholesale of tobacco products - 15,000 lita s per year - was equal to the corresponding fee
for wholesale trade in tobacco products according to Government Resolution No. 180 of
13 February 1998. It is not understandable, why for the US representatives the stamp taxes licensesWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 8
system on tobacco is differs. The Table 4 exactly indicates, that the stamp taxes system for the
wholesale and wholesale/importation of tobacco is completely the same.
Question 8.
With respect to paragraphs 37 to 38 concerning the activity fees applied for importation of
petroleum products, Lithuania has indicated to us bilaterally that it intends to unify those forimporting and wholesaling petroleum products.  Paragraph 38 states that stamp taxes for
activity licence in importation/wholesale a nd wholesale of oil and oil products would be
equalized through a Government Resolution [expected to be approved in February/March
2000].  Has the Government Resolution been enacted?  If so, an appropriate citation and date
should be provided.  May the Members have a copy of the resolution in translation?
Reply:
Stamp taxes for activity licence in importation/w holesale and wholesale of oil and oil products
as well as of motor oils have already been e qualized through the Government Resolution No. 366 of
31 March 2000 (presented to the WTO Secretariat in May 2000): the activity licenses for
importation/wholesale of oil and oil products cost 120,000 litas (30,000 US$) and completely the same
stamp taxes are for the wholesale of oil and oil products; the stamp taxes for the licenses to engage in
importation/wholesale of motor oil are 5000 litas (1250 US$) and the stamp taxes for wholesale of the
motor oil also cost 5000 litas (1250 US$). The new equalized stamp taxes have been applied from 1
May 2000. The new system is fully consistent with the national treatment obligation.
Question 9.
The Members also note that the tariff on petrol eum products was increased, in Resolution No.
641 of 19 May 1999, from five  per cent to fifteen  per cent.  Please update the Working Party onLithuania’s activity fees for importing and wholesaling petroleum products and on the
relationship between the increased import tariff to the equalization of activity fees.
Reply:
Duty tariff increase on petroleum products from 5 per cent to 15 per cent (Resolution No. 641
of 19 May 1999) was related to the privatization agreement on 29 October 1999, when the USA
company Williams International had bought 33 per cent of the shares of the State-owned oil refinery,
joint stock company Mazeikiu Nafta.
This increase of duty tariffs on petroleum has no relationship with the equalization of activity
fees exactly as duty tariffs, for example on alc ohol or tobacco products have no relationship with
relevant activity stamp taxes.
Customs Code
Question 10.
Have the implementing regulations to th e Customs Code referred to in document
WT/ACC/LTU/12 and in the previous draft report been adopted?  What, if any, additional
implementing regulations are still necessary?
Reply:
As it was already indicated in the paragraph 42 of the Working Part Report
(WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5), a number of implementing regulations to the Customs Code have
already been adopted starting from year 1997. The implementation of the provisions of the Code was
fully based on the Implementing Provisions of th e Community Customs Code (Commission Regulation
No. 93/2454/EEC and its amendments). These regulations are mainly based on the Commission
Regulation (EEC) No. 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down the provisions for the implementation ofCouncil Regulation (EEC) No. 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 9
The following regulations already adopted, in our view, are most important:
- Government Resolution No. 848 of 31 July 1997 On Approval of the Order of
Application of Customs Formalities in Connection with Fishing Products Taken
(Obtained) and Processed (Produced) by Fishing Vessels Flying the State Flag of
Lithuania;
- Government Resolution No. 863 of 1 August 1997 On Approval of the Order of
Declaration for Customs Purposes of Returned Goods;
- Government Resolution No. 980 of 11 September 1997 On Approval of the Order of
Ensuring of the Fulfilment of Debtor’s Obligations to Customs;
- Government Resolution No. 1077 of 1 October 1997 On the Order of Determination
of Origin of Goods and on Certificates of Origin (General Form);
- Government Resolution No. 748 of 9 June 1999 On the Approval of Order of
Customs Valuation of Goods (which repl aced the Temporary Order of Customs
Valuation of Goods adopted by Government Resolution No. 897 of 11 August 1997);
and
- Order of the Minister of Finance No. 3 of 13 January 2000 On Approval of
Regulation on Goods’ Declaration Procedure and Customs Control.
The drafts of some other still necessary implementing regulations are prepared and submitted
for the Government for its consideration (e.g. Draft Law on Free Warehouses, Draft Government
Resolution On Approval of the Order of Destructi on of Goods under Customs Control). Also in year
2000 the draft regulations (revised versions of the some existing regulations) concerning the operation
of Customs warehouses, Customs transit procedure and temporary admission procedure should beprepared and submitted to the Government.
It should be stressed that aforementioned implementing regulations are not related to the
implementation of WTO Customs Valuation Agreement itself and that current Lithuania’s legal acts
on customs valuation are, in our view, already in  full conformity with the Agreement (See also
paragraphs 73, 74, 75 and 76 of the Working Part Report, and Summary description of the adoptionby Lithuania of the remaining legislation as envisaged during the accession negotiations of 6 April
2000).
Fees and Charges for Services Rendered
Question 11.
Table 5 in document WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5 lists the stamp tax charges for customs
services rendered.  It indicates that to im port colour copying machines for commercial
purposes, an import permit costing 4,000 litas must  be obtained, while the permit for importing
other color copying machines is 40 litas.  How is the difference in the cost of the permit related
to the cost of issuing it for the two types of machines?  Are such permits required for domestic
machines?  How does this permit preven t use of the machines for counterfeiting?
Reply:
As it is already indicated in the Table 5 in Working Party Report
(WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5),  the Police Department to the Ministry of Interior issues two types of
permits to natural persons and enterprises for import (export) of colour copy machines, the stamp
taxes are as follows:
- for their own needs, which costs 40 litas;
- for commercial purposes, which costs 4,000 litas.
The aim of these stamp taxes is to cover expenses of issuance of permits and to control the
use of colour copy machinery. The tax for permit to import (export) colour copy machines forWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 10
commercial purposes is much higher because the persons (natural or legal) who are engaged in sale of
colour copy machinery usually import not only one colour copy machine. In addition, imported colour
copy machines are sold to the third persons and expenses of their control become even more higher.
Referring to the question, whether such permits are required for domestic machines, it should
be stressed that Lithuania does not produce colour copy machines.
With reference to the question, how do these permits prevent use of the machines for
counterfeiting, it should be noted, that stamp taxes has not a direct effect on the prevention, but it
surely has an indirect one: the financial means from collection of stamp taxes are used for the relevant
policy actions to block up illegal printing of counterfeit documents. For these purposes, the Police
Department keeps the collection of copies made with legally imported colour copy machines. If the
cases of counterfeited documents are established, these documents are compared with the copies of
aforementioned collection. Therefore, the cases of counterfeit documents made with legally importedcolour copy machines are promptly disclosed and the permits for their owners to keep colour copy
machine are repealed.
Application of Internal Taxes to Imports
Question 12.
Concerning the information provided in paragraph 58, would imported beverages with thesame level alcohol strength as mead be taxed at the same rate as mead, or would there be other
factors in determining their eligibility?
Reply:
As it was already stressed in the paragraph 58 of the Working Party Report
(WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5) that products under  HS Code 2208.90.69.1 included mead of foreign
origin but not the beverages of the same level strength, i.e. under the Law on Excise Tax Article 51
eligible beverages are mead beverages (kind of liqueur, produced on mead basis) (domestic orforeign).
We would like to explain, that the different taxation of the mead beverages (domestic or
foreign) from the other beverages is due to the costs of the special production technology of the meadbeverages: the raw materials used in such production are 10   to 12 times more expensive (the most
important ingredient of these beverages is mead), than the spirit raw material used in the production of
the other alcohol beverages. That is why, the prices of the alcohol beverages produced on mead basis
are much higher than the prices of the other alcohol beverages.
Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions, Quotas and Licensing Systems
Question 13.
Lithuania maintains import licensing on several types of goods, both through activity licensingand product licensing.  In document WT/ACC/LTU/19, most licensing for imports is
categorized as automatic.  To obtain an licence to import alcoholic beverages and alcoholic
products, however, it appears necessary to approach more than three administrative bodies in
connection with an application.  Firms must have the approval of the mayor of the district
where the company is registered, a tax inspection  certificate, a Customs Office certificate, a
certificate of State Social Insurance, among several other requirements.
While the licence required is, technically, an ac tivity licence to import and/or wholesale
alcoholic beverages, the requirements act as a barrier to providing the goods for sale, and act in
the same way as traditional goods licensing  requirements.  The requirements for the
importation of alcoholic beverages cannot accu rately be termed automatic because the firm
must meet the requirements of other agencies to meet the criteria for the licence.  In addition,WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 11
the Members wonder if these requirements exist for the domestic production or distribution of
domestic production of alcoholic beverages, raising the issue of conformity with Article III.
Does Lithuania intend to streamline these requirements further to accurately meet the
definition of automatic licensing? If so, the Memb ers would like to see information on this point.
If not, the Members would appreciate an explanation on how these requirements are consistentwith the provision of the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures and Article III of
the GATT 1994.
Reply:
As it was already explained in pa ragraph 32 of Working Party Report
(WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5), certain activities in L ithuania were subject to licensing in accordance
with the Law on Amendments and Supplements of the Law on Enterprises of 25 September 1997.
Lithuania maintained the same criteria and procedures  for reviewing applications for licenses to engage
in trade or production of goods, whether the applican ts intended to deal in domestic or imported goods,
or a combination thereof, including and engagement  in trade of alcohol beverages, except the rest
activities noted in paragraph 35 of document WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev 5.
Referring to the wording it appears necessary to approach more than three administrative
bodies in connection with an application , it should be stressed, that there is no need for firms or
companies to approach to these aforementioned institutions, i.e. Tax Inspection, Customs Office, State
Social Insurance Office, because the responsible institution – the Ministry of Economy - issuing the
licence, is collecting this data by itself. Therefore, the procedure is simple and, in our opinion, can not
be considered as restrictive.
Also it should be emphasized, that, in our view, licensing requirements for the importation of
alcoholic beverages in Lithuania are in full conformity with GATT Article III, taking into account that
the same licensing requirements are applied to importation and domestic production, except of some
specific reasonable requirements for domestic production, such as quality, technical and hygiene
conditions and other, which can be applied only to production, not for importation. Moreover, it
should be recalled, that the production is not the subject of WTO Agreements.
With reference to the question, whether Lithuania intend to streamline these requirements
further to accurately meet the definition of automatic licensing, Lithuanian delegation would like to
stress, that Lithuania has never had any intention to abolish non-automatic licencing, the requirements
of which are fully consistent with the requirements of WTO Agreement on Import Licensing
Procedures, having in mind, that the same criteria and procedures are applied in Lithuania for
reviewing applications for licenses to engage in trade or production of goods, whether the applicants
intended to deal with domestic or imported goods.
Question 14.
In addition, there is no information in document WT/ACC/LTU/19 on the length of time
required to obtain import licenses.  How long do es it take for requests for automatic licenses to
be acted on?  How long does it take for requests for non-automatic licenses to be acted on?
Finally, the Members would ask what became of the licensing requirement on electric fishingtackle, listed in document WT/ACC/LTU/19, but missing from the list in paragraph 65.
Reply:
The length of time required to obtain import licenses is up to 30 days.
Referring to electric fishing tackle, it should be emphasized that they were not missed from
the list in paragraph 65 of Working Party Report (WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev 5). As it was alreadymentioned in document WT/ACC/LTU/19, it should be recalled once again, that there are no defined
requirements on electric fishing tackle, because until this time there were no applications to obtain
licence to import electric fishing tackle. As far as the criteria for granting permission to import usedWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 12
tires, upon the requests by the Members, were provided in the same paragraph 65, it might have an
impression raised, that the requirements for electric fishing tackle were missing.
Question 15.
The Members seek information on how Lithuania operates its licensing system described in
paragraph 66 of the Draft Report of the Working Party.
Reply:
We understand that the paragraphs 64 and 65 mentioned in paragraph 66 of the Working
Party Report (WT/ACC/SPE C/LTU/8/Rev.5) were ke pt in mind. However, paragraph 64 does not
contain information about the licensing system. If the alcohol import licensing was kept in mind, then
it was broadly explained in many places previous ly. The licensing procedures mentioned in the
paragraph 65 were already in detail outlined in  the document WT/ACC/LT U/19, what is once again
mentioned in paragraph 65 and we truly do not know what can be added more.
Besides, it was not once noted already that the indicated paragraphs 64 and 65 of the Working
Party Report in paragraph 66 should be crossed out because Lithuania is not prepared to forego the
right to control import/export of goods provided in paragraphs 64 and 65 (narcotics, goods and loads
of dual purposes, etc.). These exceptions provid ed in mentioned paragraphs are justified, and
Lithuania will exercise its rights in this respect in conformity with WTO provisions. Therefore, the
text of paragraph 66, in our view, should be corrected as follows:
66. The representative of Lithuania conf irmed that Lithuania would, from the
date of accession, eliminate and would not introduce, reintroduce or apply quantitative
restrictions on imports or other non-tariff m easures such as [licensing,] quotas, bans,
permits, prior authorization requirements, li censing requirements and other restrictions
having equivalent effect that cannot be justified under the provisions of the WTO
Agreement.  He added that import licenses required for importation described in
paragraphs [64 and 65] would be granted in conformity with WTO provisions.  He
further confirmed that the legal authority of  the Government of Lithuania to suspend
imports or exports or to apply licensing re quirements that could be used to suspend.
Customs Valuation
Question 16.
Unfortunately, an exhaustive review of the avail able documents, i.e., the Customs Code which
came into effect on 1 January 1998 and Govern ment Resolution No. 748, even after using the
checklist in Table 9, the Members find that cer tain provisions of the Agreement are not
reflected in these laws.  The Members have prov ided Lithuania with a list of our remaining
questions and would like the opportunity to discus s them with a view to resolving our concerns.
In addition to these specific points, the Me mbers have a more generalized concern that the
Members would like to discuss in the Working Party.  First, the Members think it would be
helpful if Lithuania could provide a copy of the Temporary Order of Customs Valuation of
Goods, adopted by Government Resolution No. 897 of 11 August 1997.  The Members cannot
find a reference that indicates it was ever provided  to the WP, but it is referred to extensively in
the text as relevant to Lithuania’s implem entation of the WTO Agreement on Customs
Valuation.  While paragraph 74 states that G overnment Resolution No. 748 contains all of the
provisions of Resolution No. 897 relevant to implementing the Customs Valuation Code, the
Members note that these appear to line up wi th some of the provisions the Members are
missing.    In the same sense, Article 29 of the Customs Code provides that the value of imported
goods is to be determined in accordance with th e provisions of Chapter VI (customs valuation),
but also in accordance with other import taxes, import prohibitions and restrictions related to
the value of the goods.  If the provisions of Ar ticle 29 have not been specifically repealed, itWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 13
would appear to continue to permit customs valuation to be based on measures that are
inconsistent with the WTO Valuation Agreement.   Has it been repealed?
Reply:
In Working Party Report (WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/ 8/Rev.5) mentioned Temporary Order of
Customs Valuation of Goods adopted by Gove rnment Resolution No. 897 of 11 August 1997 was
temporary and is not longer valid. Therefore, in our view, there is no sense of translating it into
English and, more importantly, it was not relevant to implementation of the WTO Customs Valuation
Agreement. Moreover, the new Order of Customs Valuation of Goods fully conforming with WTO
requirements, i.e. Government Resolution No. 748 of 9 June 1999, which came into force on
1 April 2000, was submitted to WTO Secretariat even in July 1999.
As regards Article 29 of the Customs Code, the concern expressed in Questions 16 and 17 as
it was already explained in paragraph 73 of Working Party Report is a misunderstanding arising from a
translation error. We would like assure once again, Article 29 is fully consistent with WTO provisions
and requires that the rules of Customs valuation laid down by the Customs Code (detailed customs
valuation rules and procedures are laid down in the secondary legislation, namely in the Government
Resolution Nr.748) have to be used in all cases when import duties and other import taxes, orvalue-based import prohibitions (for such products as snuffing and chewing tobacco or nuclear products)
or restrictions (that actually mean licen ses or certificates procedures) are applied.
Lithuania’s legislation on customs valuation, in our view, is fully consistent with WTO
provisions. As it was already explained in the paragraph 74 of Working Part Report, other documents
and Replies to Comment 1, Comment 3 and Comment 6, Lithuania has incorporated the InterpretativeNotes set forth in Annex I of the WTO Valuation Agreement. There are missing only some examples
of customs valuation methods (provided in the Agreement only as the examples) that are not essential.
Nevertheless, they will be also incorporated in th e Methodics of Customs Valuation to be approved by
the Customs Department in the nearest future. The new customs valuation Order that ensured full
conformity with WTO requirements had entered into force on 1 April 2000. A comparison of the newOrder with the provisions of the Customs Valuati on Agreement, on an article-by-article basis, is
presented in Table 9 of Working Party Report.
Question 17.
If Lithuania removed its price-in-checking system on 1 April 2000, it would appear that this
provision is no longer necessary.  What is the use and intent of Article 29 of the Customs Code
under current circumstances?   More seriousl y, the Members are concerned with various
provisions found in Resolution No. 748 which conflict with the WTO Valuation Agreement.
− For example, §2.1 sets forth situations where the transaction value of identical or similar
goods cannot be used.  This would seem to be inconsistent with the WTO ValuationAgreement.
− §2.2 and §2.3.  §2.4, §2.5 and §55 describe the use of price list and a database and
disclosure of information contained in the database which appears to be inconsistentwith the WTO Valuation Agreement.  The use of databases or price lists to establish
customs value is strictly prohibited as se t forth in Article 7 of the WTO Valuation
Agreement.
− The customs value of imported goods is base d on the transaction value and hierarchical
value methods established in Articles 2 to 7.  The Members wish to stress the following
with regard to price data bases:
− The technical accuracy of price data bases is very questionable, given that the
information will not be contemporaneous to an imported sale.
− The use of data bases also presents issues related to transparency to the private sector.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 14
− One effect of the use of data bases is that it places an incorrect presumption of doubt on
every import transaction – a presumption that creates an unwarranted burden onimporters and exporters.
− The use of data bases can result in unacceptable market access barriers.
− §51, 52 and 53 in Resolution No. 748 concern the use of a value declaration.  The
Technical Committee on Customs Valuation recently concluded that value declarationforms should only be used on a short term basis while risk management and post
importation audit systems are developed and established within a CustomsAdministration.  Thus, the Members do not encourage the use of value declarations.
However, if value declaration are to be used, they should be used for a limited period of
time.
 Reply:
 As it was already explained in document Summary description of the adoption by Lithuania
of the remaining legislation as envisaged during the accession negotiations, presented to WTO
Secretariat in April 2000, the former customs valuation system (including minimum import prices and
price-in-checking prices) expired on 31 March 2000 and was replaced by the new Order on
1 April 2000. The price-in checking system as well as reference or minimum value system was a
transitional measure. The new legislation is fully consistent with WTO requirements.
 As regards Article 29 of the Customs Code, the concern expressed in Questions 16 and in
Question 17 as well as it was already explained in paragraph 73 of Working Party Report is amisunderstanding arising from a translation error. We would like assure once again, that Article 29 is
fully consistent with WTO provisions. It is applie d to the customs valuation procedures (transaction
value method or to the procedures, that applied when a concrete customs valuation method is not
possible to determine), laid down in the Section III of Customs Code. The Article 29 foresees that the
rules of Customs valuation laid down by the Customs Code have to be used in all cases when import
duties and other import taxes, or value-based import prohibitions (for such products as snuffing and
chewing tobacco or nuclear products) or restricti ons (that actually mean licenses or certificates
procedures) are applied.
 The provisions of paragraph 2.1 of Government Resolution No. 748 were introduced after
strengthening of value control as a temporary measure in order to avoid situations when extremelylow values of identical or similar goods earlier imported mainly by natural persons could effect the
valuation of consignments imported later. The present situation allows us to repeal this paragraph as
no longer necessary. Therefore, the Resolution amendment is under preparation and will be presented
to the Government for consideration in the nearest future.
 As regards to the list of comparative (reference) prices, the Customs authorities only as a
source of information use them in order to find out whether additional examination of the declared
value of goods by valuation specialists is necessary. The list of goods subject to this value control
regime mainly contains the goods sensitive to under-valuation. The Customs valuation database
contains data collected from import declarations cleared in three previous months and is mainly used
as a tool to find the information necessary. In fact that does not create any unacceptable market access
barriers and, in our view, does not contradict to the Article 7 of the WTO Valuation Agreement.
 Regarding the disclosure of the information, according Article 8 of the Customs Code, the
Customs authorities have no right to disclose the information that by its nature is confidential.
Therefore, the printouts from the Customs valuation database do not contain confidential information.
It is obvious, that this does not create any possibility of information disclosure.
 The provisions of the Government Resolution No. 748 of 9 June 1999 On the Approval of
Order of Customs Valuation of Goods governing the use of value declaration are harmonised with theWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 15
corresponding provisions (Articles 178 and 179)  of the Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 2454/93
of 2 July 1993 that lay down the provisions for th e implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No.
2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code. Presently the amendment to Government
Resolution No. 748, which foresees to decrease the number of cases when it is required to present the
value declaration in support of the normal Customs declaration, is under preparation and will bepresented to the Government for consideration in the nearest future.
 Specific comments on Lithuania's implementation of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation
Comment 1
In the Members view, Lithuania has not fully implemented Article 5 of the WTO Valuation
Agreement, concerning deductive value.  It appears that Lithuania has not adequately
distinguished the three different methods of applying deductive value under Article 5 of theWTO Valuation Agreement.  In addition, many of  the Annex 1 Interpretative Notes are missing,
including Note 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.6-first sentence, 5.7, 5.8, 5.10 and 5.11.
Reply:
According to the Article 31.2.3. of the Customs Code the expression at or about the time of
importation but not more than 90 days prior or after covers the first and the second methods of
applying deductive value under Article 5.1.(a) and Article 5.1.(b) of the WTO Valuation Agreement.The detailed rules for the application of both methods are laid down in paragraph 21 of the Order of
Customs Valuation of Goods approved by the Government Resolution No. 748 of 9 June 1999. So, in
fact, according to the legislation which now is in force in Lithuania the first and the second methods
of applying deductive value under Article 5 of the WTO Valuation Agreement are merged. In our
point of view this problem is purely technical, nevertheless, the amendment of the above-mentionedOrder (taking into account also Note 5.10) is under preparation and will be presented to Government
for consideration in the nearest future.
As regards Interpretative Notes, Notes 5.6-first sentence and 5.7 form the part of paragraph
21.1 of the Order of Customs Valuation of Goods, Note 5.8 is incorporated in paragraph 21.3 and
Note 5.11 in paragraph 22.1 thereof. Notes 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4 (examples) are incorporated into the DraftMethodics of Customs Valuation to be approved by the Customs Department authorized by the
Government according to the paragraph 2.6 of the Government Resolution No. 748 of 9 June 1999 in
the nearest future.
 Comment 2In the Members view, Lithuania has not fully implemented Article 7 of the WTO Valuation
Agreement, concerning the fall back method or valuation using reasonable means.  Article 7.3
concerning written notice at the importer’s request has not been implemented.
Reply:
The provisions concerning written notice at the importer’s request are already incorporated
into paragraph 59 of the Order of Customs Valuation of Goods approved by the Government
Resolution No. 748 of 9 June 1999.
 Comment 3
In the Members view, Lithuania has not implemented fully Article 8 of the WTO Valuation
Agreement, concerning the additions to the pri ce actually paid or p ayable in determining
transaction value.  Annex I, Note to Article 8.1( b)(ii), Point No. 4 and Annex I, Note to Article
8.1(b)(iii) are not implemented.  Additionally, §29 in Resolution No. 748 appears to incorrectly
implement Annex I, Note to Article 8.1(c).  Lithuania should re-examine the language of §29
and make any necessary correction.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 16
Reply:
Annex I, Note to Article 8.1(b)(ii), Point No. 4 of the WTO Valuation Agreement is already
incorporated into the Draft Methodics of Customs Valuation to be approved in the nearest future by
the Customs Department authorized by the Government according to the paragraph 2.6 of the
Government Resolution No. 748 of 9 June 1999.
Annex I, Note to Article 8.1(c) is already im plemented by Article 33.1(3) of the Customs
Code.
The text of paragraph 29 of the Order of Customs Valuation of Goods approved by the
Government Resolution No. 748 of 9 June 1999 corresponds to the text Article 157.1 of the
Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down the provisions for the
implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs
Code.
 Comment 4
In the Members view, Article 11 of the WTO Valuation Agreement concerning the right of
appeal is only partially implemented, as it la cks assurance that such an appeal is without
penalty.  Please let the Members know where the rest of these provisions can be found.
Reply:
According to the Article 7 of the Administrative Law any person can be penalized for the
administrative offence only if the grounds and procedure for it is established by the Law. Lithuanian
legislation has no provisions according to which any person could be subject to a fine or threat of fine
merely because he chose to exercise his right of appeal (see the explanation of the meaning of
expression without penalty provided in Note 2 to Article 11 of the WTO Valuation Agreement).
Therefore, in our view, there is no need to repeat this general legal principle in the Customs
legislation or legislation governing the order of Customs valuation of goods.
 Comment 5In our view, Lithuania has not implemented Article 12 of the WTO Valuation Agreement,
concerning transparency.
Reply:
According to the Law on the Order of Publishing and Entry into Force of Legal Acts of 6 April
1993 all laws, regulations and administrative rulings of general application shall be officially published
in the Official Gazette, as it is already expl ained in paragraph 170 of Working Part Report
(WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5). Having been published in the Official Gazette, legal acts enter into
force on the following day, or on a later date stipulated in the published legal act. Therefore, in our
view, again there is no need to repeat this general principle in the Customs legislation or legislationgoverning the order of customs valuation of goods.
 Comment 6As noted above, concerning Article 14 of the WTO Valuation Agreement, Lithuania has failed
to implement some of the Interpretative Notes set forth in Annex I of the WTO Valuation
Agreement.  Article 14 of the WTO Valuation Agreement stipulates that the InterpretativeNotes to the Agreement form an integral part of  the Agreement and the Articles are to be read
in connection with the Interpretative Notes.  Th us, the text of the Interpretative Notes must
form part of the implementing legislation.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 17
Reply:
As it was already explained in the paragraph 74 of Working Part Report
(WT/ACC/SPEC/LT U/8/Rev.5) and mentioned in the answer  of the Question 16, other documents and
Replies to Comment 1 and Comment 3, Lithuania has incorporated the Interpretative Notes set forth
in Annex I of the WTO Valuation Agreement. There are missing only some examples of customsvaluation methods (provided in the Agreement only as the examples) that are not essential.
Nevertheless, they will be also incorporated in th e Methodics of Customs Valuation to be approved by
the Customs Department in the nearest future.
 Comment 7Lithuania has not implemented fully Article 15 of the WTO Valuation Agreement, which
concerns definitions.  Specifically, Lithuania ha s failed to implement Articles 15.1 and 15.2 (d),
and Annex I, Note to Article 15.4.
Reply:
Article 15.1(a) of the WTO Valuation Agreement is implemented in Article 29 of the
Customs Code. According to the Article 2.14 of the Customs Code importation is the act of bringing
goods into the Customs territory of the Republic of Lithuania. Taking into account that the term
Customs territory of the Republic of Lithuania is used in Articles 29 to 37 of the Code, in our view,there is no need to define Lithuania or the Customs territory of Lithuania as a country of importation
(Article 15.1(b) of the WTO Valuation Agreement). Article 15.1(c) of the Agreement is implemented
in paragraph 2 (1
st definition) of the Order of Customs Valuation of Goods approved by the
Government Resolution No. 748 of 9 June 1999. Article 15.2(d) of the Agreement is also
implemented in paragraph 2 of the same Order (definitions of identical gods and similar goods).Article 15.4 is implemented in Article 30.8 of the Customs Code and the term person is defined in
Article 2.1 thereof.
 Comment 8Article 37 of Lithuania's Customs Code does not appear to be based on the WTO Valuation
Agreement.  It contains a provision on the valuation of perishable goods shipped onconsignment which allows the importer to request valuation under a simplified procedure.  This
is inconsistent with the WTO Valuation Agreement.  Goods shipped on consignment should be
valued in accordance with Articles 2 through 7 of the WTO Valuation Agreement, which
provide methods of determining the customs va lue of imported goods in those situations in
which a value can not be determined under the provisions of Articles 1 and 8 of the WTO
Valuation Agreement.
Reply:
Lithuania as an EU associated country has taken an obligation to harmonize its Customs
legislation with the Community Customs legislation.  Therefore, Lithuania’s Customs Code is based
on the corresponding provisions of the European Community Customs Code and, consequently,
Article 37.2 of the Lithuania’s Customs Code corresponds to the Article 36.2 of the Council
Regulation (EEC) No. 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code. TheArticle 37 of Lithuania’s Customs Code foresees a possibility, that upon the request of the declarant
(the WTO Valuation Agreement does not restrict the usage of such procedure) a simplified procedure
can be applied to customs valuation of perishable goods, however, as far as it is still necessary to
adopt secondary legislation, indicated in the Article 37, the simplified procedure is not applied in
Lithuania at the moment. Whenever the simplified procedure is introduced, it will be based onArticles 173 to 177 of the Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down the
provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2913/92 establishing the
Community Customs Code.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 18
 Comment 9
The Members also note that Lithuania has not fully implemented the Committee on Customs
Valuation Decision 3.1 on the Treatment of Inte rest Charges in the Customs Value of Imported
Goods.  As drafted the text does not incorporate paragraph (c) of Decision 3.1.  The Members
encourage Lithuania to fully implement Decision 3.1.
Reply:
Decision of the Committee on Customs Valuation No. 3.1 on the Treatment of Interest
Charges in the Customs Value of Imported Goods is already implemented in Article 34.3 of the
Customs Code.
 
 Rules of Origin
Question 18.
 Lithuania has responded bilaterally to our questions on its implementation of Annex II of the
Agreement, and has indicated that, in some cases, its law does not provide for the specific
procedural guarantees incorporated in thos e provisions. The Members urge Lithuania to
develop regulations to meet these provisions.
 Reply:
 Despite of that the information on Rules of Origin was provided so many times in different
documents, Lithuanian delegation would like once to present relevant information, hoping, that it will
make clearer all questionable issues.
 As far as some questionable issues were already explained in Lithuania’s answers to U.S.
questions, presented in September 1999 and also Working Party Report(WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5), herewith is additional information, where the specific procedural
guarantees enumerated in Annex II of the WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin in fact are
incorporated in the following provisions of Lithuania’s legislation:
- According to the Law on Order of Publishing  and Entry into Force of Legal Acts of
6 April 1993 all laws, regulations and administrative rulings shall be officiallypublished in the Official Gazette. Having been published in the Official Gazette, legal
acts enter into force on the following day, or  on a later date stipulated in the published
legal act (it means that legal acts are not applied retroactively). That is applicable to all
legal acts of the Republic of Lithuania. Therefore, in our view, there is no need to
repeat this general principle in the Customs legislation or legislation governing the
order of application of preferential rules of origin
- According to Article 4 of the Customs Code where request for a decision (including
decisions concerning the preferential origin) is made in writing the decision should be
made within eight working days, unless laws and other legal acts provide for another
term, and a decision requiring additional information or inquiries should be made
within 30 working days. Exceptionally, the Customs authorities could exceed the
stipulated period by up to 10 working days. The applicant shall be informed inwriting of the decision or the extension of the period necessary for the examination of
the request. Therefore, the longest term allowed by the law for the examination of the
request is much shorter than 150 days allowed under Annex II of the WTO
Agreement on Rules of Origin.
- According to Articles 226 to 233 of the Customs Code, legal and natural persons have
the right to appeal against all decisions taken by the Customs authorities including the
determination of preferential origin to the Customs Department and/or to the Court.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 19
- According to Article 8 of the Customs Code, all information which is by nature
confidential or which is provided on a confidential basis is covered by the obligation
of the professional secrecy. The Customs authorities have no right to disclose it
without the express permission of the direct presenter of information – the person or
authority. Information is communicated in accordance with the established procedure,where the Customs authorities are authorised or obliged to do so pursuant to the laws
and other legal acts.
 Anti-Dumping, Countervailing Duties and Safeguard Regimes
Question 19.
The Law on Antidumping of 23 June 1998 is mentioned in the Synoptic Table on progress in the
adoption of legislation (document WT/ACC/LTU/36/Rev.3).  Paragraph 88 of the Draft Report
if the Working Party also refers to the Regulation s that concern the implementation of this Law.
Please submit this implementing legislation to Working Party Members for review.
 Reply:
 Non-official translation of secondary legi slation of the implementation of the Law on
Antidumping, namely:
 - The procedure for determination of the normal value, the export price, their
comparison and the margin of dumping;
 - The procedure for the determination of domestic procedures and damage;
 - The procedure for the execution of dumping investigation in a foreign country;
 was submitted to WTO Secretariat in May 2000.
 2. Export Regulations
 Export Subsidies
Question 20.Regarding the information provided in paragraphs 97 and 98 of the Draft Report, please
provide more detailed information on the type of loan programmes (LDA & LEID), e.g., what
are the specific terms of the loans and who are th e recipients of the loans.  In addition, please
describe whether the loans are contingent upon export performance or on the use of domestic
over imported goods, as detailed in Article 3 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures.
 Reply:
 Firstly, Lithuanian delegation would like to stress, that in paragraphs 97 and 98 of Working
Party Report (WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/ Rev.5) there is no reference made to Lithuanian Development
Agency (LDA) as a provider of loans. Factually, as it was explained in paragraph 98 of Working PartyReport, the objective of LDA was to provide comprehensive information on investment opportunities,
conditions and procedures and to promote exports  of Lithuanian goods and demand for Lithuanian
services. The LDA’s main functions, as it was mentioned in the same paragraph 98 of Working Party
Report were to facilitate business partnerships and a ssist in contracts with Lithuanian authorities and
business organizations; to analyze and provide in formation to Lithuanian exporters and service
providers on foreign market conditions;  to establish Lithuania's trade representation offices abroad;  to
prepare, implement and monitor trade development programmes to ensure their consistency with WTO
rules;  to study issues affecting trade activiti es and formulate recommendations to Lithuanian
authorities;  to consult State, public and private institutions on foreign trade issues;  and to provide
education and training to the foreign trade community in Lithuania.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 20
 Further, referring to Insurance of Lithuanian Export and Import (LEID), it should be noted,
that LEID’s only activity is insurance of loans (not granting of loans) for small and medium business
investment projects and insurance of short term loans for replenishment of working capital. The
recipients of insurance of loans are business entities  registered in Lithuania. Terms of the insurance
are the following: the duration of insured loan mu st be up to 12 months; the business entity shall
invest not less than 15 per cent of its own assets into the investment project; the insured loan must be
used only for the purposes for that it was insured; insurance premium depends on the insurance risk
factors and insurance rate can vary from 1.1 to 11 per cent.
 In addition, Lithuanian delegation would like to stress that aforementioned insured loans are
not contingent upon export performance or on the use of domestic over imported goods.
Question 21.
Please provide more detailed information on th e Export Promotion referred to paragraph 99 of
the Draft Report.  What exactly are the programmes offered and what type of benefits is
provided?
 Reply:
 Additionally to what was already explained in the paragraph 99 of Working Party Report
(WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5), we can add, that the export promotion programmes could be
described as an assistance in developing product image, participating in trade fairs and exhibitions,
presenting Lithuanian food products in new markets, providing information on existing markets,
analysis of the production of agricultural and f ood products in Lithuania and abroad, information on
trade regulation and business opportunities, conducting feasibility studies for Lithuanian products
entering foreign markets, finding potential importers and sourcing local suppliers, national brandingfor segmented and targeted markets, export marketing, etc.
 3. Internal Policies affecting Trade in Goods
 Technical Barriers to Trade, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
 Standards and certification
Question 22.The Members note that work is further ahead on TBT than SPS, and the Members look
forward to receiving the rest of the documentation in the SPS area to complete our review.
Concerning TBT issues, in the check list of TBT requirements contained in document
WT/ACC/LTU/42 (in Lithuania's delegation opinion check list of TBT requirements contained
in document WT/ACC/LTU/41) Lithuania states that non-discrimination language is being
developed for point 5 and 6 of the Procedures for Information Exchange within the Field of
Standards, Technical Regulations and Conf ormity Assessment Procedures.  When does
Lithuania anticipate submitting this language for review by members?
 Reply:
 As it was already indicated in Working Party Report (WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5),
Lithuania’s answers to U.S. questions, presented in September 1999, and document Summary
description of the adoption by Lithuania of the remaining legislation as envisaged during theaccession negotiations, provided in April 2000, Lithuania’s legal acts fully comply with the
requirements of WTO Agreements on SPS and TBT. All necessary legislation has been adopted and
all the obligations imposed by these two Agreements were implemented. Furthermore, the translation
of all necessary legislation was submitted to WTO S ecretariat, with the exception of Law on Food and
Law on Standardization that were adopted in April 2000. However, the draft laws were submitted toWTO Secretariat correspondingly in October 1999 in August 1999.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 21
 It should be stressed, that all necessary WTO TBT requirements are already fully
incorporated in Lithuania’s legal acts and Lithuanian legal acts, in our view, are fully compliant with
the requirements set in the WTO Agreement on TBT.
 However, important to note that the supplement to Procedures for Information Exchange
within the Field of Standards, Technical Regulations and Conformity Assessment Procedures wasalready submitted to the Government for consideration, while after confirmation it will be submitted
to the WTO Member countries in a due course. Herewith, we present the draft supplement of the point
5 of the Procedures: Lithuanian Standardization Department and other State institutions shall ensure,
that the standards, technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures to the products
imported from the WTO Member countries shall be applied no less favorably, than to the products of
the Lithuanian producers or to the products imported from any other third country.
Question 23.
 Concerning Law on Products Safety: Who are th e experts who will determine product safety?
 Reply:
 As it is explained in paragraph 118 of Work ing Party Report (WT/AC C/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5),
Law on Products Safety determined the general requirements for food and non-food products safety,
the basis for imposition of SPS regulations, and the general principles for the operation of marketsurveillance system.
 The National Nutrition Centre at the Ministry of Health is responsible for approval of safety
limits for foodstuffs. The State Veterinary Service approves the safety limits for veterinary products
and raw materials as well as foodstuffs of animal origin. The State Plant Protection Service at the
Ministry of Agriculture approves the statutory limits for phytosanitary.
 The above mentioned institutions are responsible for safety control that is carried out in the
market, enterprises and on the border.
 The samples of food products are checked in the laboratories. Seven laboratories at the
Ministry of Health, one laboratory at the State Veterinary Service and independent laboratory
Labtarna perform food analyses.
 The samples of non-food products are checked in the State Quality Inspection and the State
Public Health Centre.
 Question 24.
 Apart from the legislation already in place, will  additional implementing legislation be needed
to meet TBT obligations?  If so, please identify them and indicate when they will be
implemented.
 Reply:
 As it was already indicated in Working Party Report (WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5),
Lithuania’s answers to U.S. questions, presente d in September 1999, document Summary description
of the adoption by Lithuania of the remaining legislation as envisaged during the accession
negotiations, provided in April 2000, and the Synoptic Table showing the progress in adoption of
legislation (last version of 5 April 2000) Lithuania’s legal acts, in our view, fully comply with therequirements of WTO Agreement on TBT. The Law on Standardization in April 2000 had finalized
the adoption of TBT legislation. No additional implementing legislation is needed to meet TBT
obligations.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 22
 Question 25.
 Concerning shelf life requirements applied to impo rts, the Members have reviewed the shelf life
regulations contained in Resolution No. 137 a nd seek clarification on the following points:
 Please describe the history and purpose of this Government Resolution.
 Please outline the provisions of the Resolution a nd describe how they are applied, in practice to
imports?  Is this intended to be a temporary or permanent measure?  Are these requirements
intended to provide assurances of food safety or product quality?  Are the food products listed
in table 11 of WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5 subject  to shelf-life requirements?  What other
products are covered?
 Given the arbitrary nature of the shelf-life requirements applied to shelf-stable products, pleaseexplain how this regulation is consistent with the WTO Agreements on TBT and SPS, e.g., what
studies has Lithuania undertaken to support the application of such requirements?
 The regulation also seems counter to Lithuania's movement towards harmonization with EU
food regulations.
 The Members would appreciate any information Lithuania has on its application of theserequirements.
 Reply:
 The Regulations on Labeling of Goods Sold in  Lithuania adopted by Order of Minister of
Economy on 16 April 1998 were developed aiming to secure the safety of products sold to consumer
in Lithuania and guaranteeing that consumer will be provided with the relevant information,
concerning the product safety and the risks inherent in a product throughout the normal and
reasonably foreseeable period of its use. The Regulations shall apply for all food and non-foodproducts sold to the consumer on the internal market of Lithuania.
 Under development of the Regulations, the EU legal acts were observed, among them –
Council Directive 79/112/EEC to the labeling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs for sale to
the ultimate consumer and its supplement directives.
 The Regulations came into force on 1 January 1999 and  this is supposed to be a permanent
measure, however, they may be supplemented and amended upon the necessity.
 Observing the Regulations, the shelf life for th e products whose quality specifications change
in the course of time must be indicated. The producer shall indicate the shelf life and it could be
indicated in two ways: i.e. by using words use before: and the date or best before: and the date. If
quality specifications of the product are not changing in the course of time, then the shelf life may not
be indicated.
 Question 26.
 Concerning the Lithuanian Law on Food (reference paragraph 118 of the Draft Report of theWorking Party) and the Law on the Amendment and Supplement to the Law on Veterinary
Activities the Members would like to know the status of the proposed Food Safety Law and the
Law on the Amendment and Supplement to the Law on Veterinary Activities.  Have these been
submitted for WP review?WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 23
 Reply:
 As it was already indicated in Synoptic Table showing the progress in adoption of legislation
WT/ACC/LTU/36 (the latest version submitted in April 2000), the Law on Food was adopted on
4 April 2000 and right now it is in the process of translation. However, the draft Law was submitted to
the WTO Secretariat in October 1999.
 Law on Veterinary Activities of 17 December 1991 (with amendments of 7 October 1999
regarding the activities’ compliance with the WTO requirements) was submitted to the WTO
Secretariat in June 1999 and March 2000.
 State-Trading Entities
 Question 27.
 Our distilled spirits industry is dismayed at the fa ct that only four Lithuanian state enterprises
and only one closed-stock company (private co mpany?) can produce ethyl alcohol products of
an alcoholic strength by volume of more than 22 per cent.  Such an action is contrary to the
WTO philosophy that those that seek membership are willing to open their markets to world
competition.  The limit on limit of privatizat ion of special purpose state enterprises in the
beverage alcohol sector to 30 per cent as indicated on Table 1 (c) on page 79 would effectively
freeze the current private/state owned ratio.  It appears that Lithuania is attempting to protectthe state sector from competition, and that it will be virtually impossible for a foreign firm to
establish a joint venture with a local, private firm.  This ratio of private/state participation in
the beverage alcohol sector puts the distilled non-Lithuania distilled spirits companies at a
distinct disadvantage versus every other industry.  The Members would appreciate an
explanation from Lithuania as to why it apparently is rejecting the possibility of economicinteraction with other countries’ alcoholic beverage producers and any future plans to liberalize
its regime in this area.
 Reply:
 Firstly, Lithuanian delegation would not like to agree with the statement, that Lithuania is
rejecting the possibility of economic interaction with other countries’ alcoholic beverage producersand is refusing from future plans to liberalize its regime in this area. Furthermore, Lithuania does not
think, that the established primary privatization percentage ratio contradicts to WTO philosophy. It is
necessary to keep in mind that the sector is being privatized in stages.
 As it was already noted answering the Question No. 4, alcohol beverages strength greater than
22  per cent in Lithuania can be produced by the enterprises having this right (licence). It should be
noted, that Lithuania has already notified to WTO Secretariat the operation of such enterprises as
State Trading on 4 June 1999 (WT/ACC/LTU/35). Su ch a system does not contradict with WTO
requirements. Currently, there are four state enterprises and already two (not one, as it was indicated
in the question) private companies producing alcohol beverages of strength more than 22 per cent.
Recently the second private company has been granted the right to produce alcohol beverages and this
is a good example, that alcohol industry is not restrictive, but only is regulated a bit stricter, what
could be considered as well-grounded for such industry as production of alcohol beverages.
Therefore, 2 private companies could not be considered as an exception. The establishment of the
second private company and indicates, that this is not a final possible number and always there is a
possibility, that this number can increase. Furthe rmore, the question mark that follows the words
private company? is a little bit confusing. In our view, the private establishment basis of these
companies does not allow us to question the private character of the companies.
 The fact, that the production of alcohol beverages of strength more than 22 per cent is
reserved for state and special enterprises is a limitation for domestic production of alcohol products,WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 24
but not for foreign companies. As it was already mentioned in the Reply of the Question 4, it has no
impact on the importation system of such alcoholic beverages.
 Moreover, Lithuania by no means is tempting in any way to protect the domestic producers
from the competition from the foreign producers in  this sector. We can even inform, that the
competition between the foreign alcohol beverages and domestically produced ones of the strengthmore than 22  per cent is very severe and, actually, often domestic producers are lagging behind in
this competition. Therefore, such a situation obviously does not allow to claim that non-Lithuanian
distilled spirits companies are discriminated or put in a worse position in Lithuania that the local ones.
 Furthermore, foreign firms can acquire shares of such enterprises and a foreign firm could
establish a joint venture with a local private firm. Currently, the limit of privatization of enterprises
producing alcohol beverages of strength more than 22 per cent is 30 per cent. Furthermore, it should
be stressed once again, that this 30 per cent rule for privatization is set up only for the firstprivatization stage, while in future this percentage will certainly be increased. Many sectors of the
Lithuanian economy were/are privatized in such a way. In Lithuania’s delegation opinion, the
determination of percentage for the first privatization stage is not a violation of WTO rules. Also it
should be recalled, that further privatization in this sector depends upon the decisions of Lithuanian
Government. It is necessary to keep in mind that this is a politically sensitive issue and decision ofthis kind of the issues can not be decided only in the framework of the WTO.
 Question 28.
 Does the 30 per cent rule also apply to the wine industry as well?
 Reply:
 It is necessary to keep in mind, that in Lithuania there are no companies producing wine only.
All companies producing wine also produce and alcoholic beverages with alcohol strength more than
22 per cent (and from the previous replies it is clear that 30  per cent rule for such companies is
applied). Therefore, it comes up, that the 30  per cent rule is also applied to the wine industry
indirectly.
 Question 29.
 Since four state enterprises, with the excepti on of one private company has sole rights in
manufacturing ethyl alcohol products of an alcoholic strength by volume of more than
22 per cent, the 30 per cent rule does not ap ply, except for possibly the one private sector
company.  Is this correct?  If that is correct, th en the Members reiterate the fact that the ratio of
private/state participation in the beverage alcohol sector puts the distilled non-Lithuania
distilled spirits companies at a distinct disadvantage versus every other industry, especially the
beverage alcohol sector.
 Reply:
 In Lithuania’s delegation opinion, the wording in the first line with the exception of one
private company  is used incorrectly. Adding to what was said in previous answers, it is necessary to
mention that all the production enterprises if they were established would have this right under
licensing, but as far as only six enterprises are currently functioning in the sector, only these havesuch right in manufacturing alcohol beverages strength by volume of more than 22 per cent. It should
be also stressed that for such small country as Lithuania six enterprises could be considered as many.
 Moreover, such a right is also reserved for two (not one), and that is already not an exception,
private enterprises (Sema and Lietuviskas Midus). Recently the second private company has been
granted the right to produce alcohol beverages and this is a good example, that alcohol industry is notrestrictive, but only is regulated a bit stricter, what could be considered as well-grounded for suchWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 25
industry as production of alcohol beverages. Therefore two private companies could not be considered
as an exception. The establishment of the second private company and indicates, that this is not a final
possible number of such companies and always there is a possibility, that this number can increase.
 30 per cent rule for privatization applies for stat e enterprises, not for private companies (it is
necessary to mention, that companies Lietuviskas Midus and Sema already have from 80 to 100  per
cent of private capital). And this ratio does not pu t the non-Lithuanian distilled spirits companies at a
distinct disadvantage versus every other industry (see Reply to Question 27). In addition, it should be
stressed once again, that 30 per cent rule for privatization of alcoholic beverages strength greater than
22 per cent sector is set up only for the first privatization stage, which in the future will certainly be
increased.
 Question 30.
 The Members remain convinced that Lithuania sh ould notify as State trading enterprises its
monopoly mead producers and any other firms with monopoly production privileges of
beverages with alcoholic strength above 22 per ce nt.  When combined with remaining activity
licensing requirements that exempt producers fr om the cost of wholesale licenses and provide
for higher costs for importers of such beverages,  the Members believe that these special benefits
justify the additional transparency requirements of Article XVII.
 Reply:
 Lithuania has already notified to WTO Secretariat the operation of such enterprises as State
Trading on 4 June 1999 (WT/ACC/LTU/35) and that was presented in paragraph 127 of Working
Party Report (WT/AC C/SPEC/LTU/ 8/Rev.5).
 Government Procurement
 General remark: Taking into account, that th e WTO Agreement on Government Procurement
is plurilateral, e.g. not obligatory for the accession  process, Lithuania is not obliged to meet the
requirements of this Agreement before the accession. As it is noted in paragraph 135 of
Working Party Report, Lithuania will be prepared initiate negotiations for membership in the
Agreement on Government Procurement by tablin g an entity offer only within three months
after the accession date. Therefore, in our view, to address these questions on Government
Procurement for Member country, not for acceding country, would be the right thing.
 Question 31.
 On implementation of the Law of the Republic of Lithuania on Public Procurement, regarding
Article 7, qualification of suppliers/contractors, do the provisions contained therein apply
equally to domestic suppliers and contractors as well as foreign?
 Reply:
 Yes, the requirements of the Law on Public Procurement for the qualification of
suppliers/contractors are equal for both domestic and foreign suppliers/contractors.
 Question 32.
 Please indicate how members of the Inde pendent Commission for the Examination of
Complaints Relating to Public Procurement are selected.  Is this a judicial body or are thedecisions rendered by this body subject to impartial judicial review?
 Reply:
 Following Article 40.3 of the Law on Public Procurement, the Public Procurement Office
under the Government makes and approves the list of the members of the Independent CommissionWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 26
for Examination of Complaints Relating to Public Procurement. Recently the list includes 63
members. The list is published in the Official Gazette.
 A concrete complaint is investigated by 3 members of the Independent Commission, each being
separately selected from the list by the supplier/contractor, procuring organization and the Public
Procurement Office. On the basis of the order established by the Law on Public Procurement theIndependent Commission investigates the submitted complaints of the suppliers/contractors against
the decisions or actions of the procuring organization by which the organization did not observe the
requirements of the Law and violated the rights or legal interests of the supplier/contractor. While
arranging its activities the Independent Commission observes the national legislation as well as
secondary legislation approved by Government Resolution No. 1467, adopted on 24 December 1999.
When fulfilling its functions the Independent Commission shall investigate the complaint of the
supplier/contractor and take a decision. This decision is not final.  Article 42 of the Law provides thatthe supplier/contractor or the procuring organization has the right to appeal against the decisions of
the Independent Commission in the court on the basis of the order established by the laws.
 Question 33.
 It is indicated that the Public Procurement Office  is designated to establish the requirements for
the members of the Independent Commission for the Examination of Complaints Relating toPublic Procurement.  Please elaborate upon this and provide information describing what these
requirements are.
 Reply:
 While observing the requirements of Article 40.4 of the Law on Public Procurement, the
Public Procurement Office approved the requirements for the members of the IndependentCommission for Examination of Complaints Relating to Public Procurement and their list formation
order by Order No. 53, adopted 12 November 1999.
 Candidates to the member list of the Inde pendent Commission are proposed by municipal
institutions, associations or other non-governmental organizations. The member list of the
Independent Commission is made and approved by the Public Procurement Office keeping in linewith requirements set to members and taking into account results of qualification examinations. The
list is published in the Official Gazette. The following requirements are set to candidate members of
the Independent Commission: a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania may be put on the list of
members of the Independent Commission, if he (she) has a university education; is not younger than
23; has a good command of the official state language; has a stainless reputation; has completed a
course of lectures on public procurement and procedure of dispute settlement according to the
program approved by the Public Procurement Office and has passed qualification examination of amember of the Independent Commission. A person may attempt to take the examinations without
having completed the aforesaid courses too. A ca ndidate member of the Independent Commission,
who meets the requirements set, signs a pledge in which he (she) undertakes commitments to keep
secret information that is considered as a secret by Lithuania’s legislation or any other piece of
information that is revealed in the process of dispute settlement. A person is excluded from the list ofmembers of the Independent Commission in the following cases: on a personal request; in cases
provided by our legislation and when a person is acknowledged incapable in conformity with the
order established by Lithuania’s legislation; after a court judgement is enforced; if a person has his
(her) reputation stained; if a person fails to pass repeatedly qualification examinations; if a person
fails repeatedly to attend a meeting without valid reasons and in case of a person’s death.
 Question 34.
 Article 22, Period of Effectiveness of Tenders; Modification and Withdrawal of Tenders, allowspurchasing entities to Prior to the expiry of  the period of effectiveness of tenders, the
contracting authority may request suppliers/contractors to extend the period of tenderWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 27
effectiveness until the fixed deadline, without ex ceeding the time limit specified in paragraph 1
hereof  [no more than 90 days after final deadlin e to receive tender offers].  Article 22 also
mentions that any supplier who fails to respond to the request to extend the period of
effectiveness of tenders, to extend the period of tender securities, or to provide a new tenders
securities within a six day period; shall be cons idered to have refused the request to extend the
period of effectiveness of its tender and to have withdrawn its tender.  Is this intended to be
applied equally to both domestic and foreign suppliers and contractors?
 Reply:
 Yes, provisions of Article 22 of the Law on Public Procurement concerning alteration of
periods of effectiveness of tenders as well as all other provisions of the Law shall be applied to both
local suppliers/contractor and suppliers/contractors from foreign states on equal terms.
 Question 35.
 The Members note that Article 21 allows for a minimum time period for the submission of
tenders of not less than 30 days from publication of the invitation to tender in the information
supplement of the Official Gazette and in cases where the tender is advertised in international
publications, a minimum of 52 days.  Please explain if foreign suppliers are eligible to bid upon
tenders advertised in the Official Gazette.
 Reply:
 Article 12 of the Law on Public Procurement provides for that the procuring organization
shall publish invitations to participate in the procurement procedure every time when wishing to
award a contract by an open, restricted or negotiated procedure or by request for quotations.
Therefore, in the case indicated in Article 21.1, when the notice of the prepared open tender ispublished in the Official Gazette, any potential supplier/contractor may participate in the tender,
including also suppliers/contractors from foreign countries. The procuring organization shall not have
the right to reject a tender only for the simp le reason that it has been submitted by the
supplier/contractor from a foreign country.  The reasons for rejecting tenders are defined in Article
26.2.
 Question 36.
 The Members note that Articles 27 and 32 allow for the use of restricted invitations and solesource bidding in the case where excessive numb ers of interested suppliers are known to be
bidding upon contracts.  In such cases, how is it determined which suppliers would receive
restricted invitations or be invited to bid?  How are determinations made regarding what is an
excessive number of bidders?
 Reply:
 When choosing the restricted procedure for the procurement tender Article 27, the procuring
organization shall have to evaluate whether the supply of the procured object is competitive in the
market and what costs will be required to execute evaluation of tenders. Information about
arrangements for the restricted procedure tender shall be published in the manner provided by the
Law. No less than ten suppliers/contractors meeting the qualification requirements are selectedaccording to the requirements set forth in the pr e-qualification documents. Where during the first
round of the procedure applications of less than ten suppliers/contractors are received, the procuring
organization shall invite to the second round all the suppliers/contractors who submitted applications
and meet the qualification requirements set forth by the procuring organization and shall send them
invitations to tender.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 28
 Contrary to the case of applying the restricted procedure of tender or any other method of
public procurement, the method of procurement from single source of supply shall not be openly
announced. The Law sets that procuring from the sole source (Article 32) shall be possible only under
the certain specific conditions, for example, if goods, works, or services shall be provided/performed,
exceptionally by the specific supplier/contractor or by the supplier/contractor, who shall be concededthe sole rights for the production/performance of goods, works or services hereof, and no other
alternative shall exist, etc.
 Question 37.
 Article 37 establishes a five day deadline for the submission, in writing, of a claim. In practice,
does the current five day time limit afford suppliers sufficient time to submit claims?
 Reply:
 In case the supplier/contractor shall not lodge or  shall be late in lodging the claim with the
procuring organization within the term, established in Article 37.1 (within 5 days from the day the
supplier/contractor learns or should have learned about the infringement of his legal interests), he
shall be conceded the right to lodge the claim with the Public Procurement Office, which shall arrange
it review in the Independent Commission.
 Question 38.
 Please provide clarification regarding the differences between what constitutes a claim inArticle 37 and complaints in Article 38.
 Reply:
 Under the Law on Public Procurement claims shall be reviewed by the procuring
organization. Article 37 sets that the claim may be  lodged with the procuring organization, which
shall aim at re-creation of the supplier's/contractor's rights or rehabilitation of the infringement of his
legal interests by mutual agreement. This meet s the requirements of the provisions of the EU
Directives, regulating the application of the review procedures - to take, at the earliest opportunity and
by way of interlocutory procedure, interim meas ures with the aim of correcting the alleged
infringement or preventing further injury to the interests concerned.
 Complaints, by which the supplier/contractor appeals against the actions and decisions of the
procuring organization, if he believes that his rights or legal interests have been infringed, shall be
reviewed by the Independent Commission for the Dispute Settlement in Public Procurement. The
aforementioned Commission observes the Order and Cond itions for the Review of Complaints and the
Removal of Representatives of the Independent Commission for the Dispute Settlement in Public
Procurement from the Dispute Settlement, adopted by the Government Resolution No. 1467 of
24 December 1999. The majority of votes shall adopt the decisions of the Independent Commission.
 Transit
 Question 39.
 The Members note that one of the customs charge s listed by Lithuania in Table 5 in document
WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5 is a 8 litas per kilometre charge for the security of goods carriage
through customs territory to cover the expenses of issuance of corresponding documents and for
the services of the police ensuring security of goods carriage.  Is this charge mandatory for all
trade in transit through Lithuania?  What type of trade, e.g., what type of products and in
transit to where, is normally covered by this charge?  What is the typical total cost of this
service fee for a single shipment of goods?WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 29
 Reply:
 Due to a high level of risk related to customs transit violations, a special regime is being
applied for certain goods. Alcoholic beverages, tobacco goods and sugar have to be carried by road
only by closed and sealed means of transport, with police escort, by the prescribed routes and only
through the prescribed frontier customs offices. These goods are subject to shorter transit terms.
 So, the fee for the police escort should be paid only in cases when alcoholic beverages,
tobacco goods and sugar are transported by road between two Customs offices. This requirement is
applied irrespectively of the location of offices of departure and destination (inland or frontier) and of
the route of transportation of the goods. However, if the goods are transported under cover of TIR
Carnet, the police escort is obligatory only in cas es when the amount of TIR guarantee (50,000 USD)
does not cover the amount of import duties and taxes to which the goods in transit are liable. Taking
into account that the distance to be covered crossing in transit the territory of Lithuania is not longerthan 200 to 300 kilometres, the total cost of the escorting of one lorry carrying above-mentioned
goods does not exceed 160-240 litas (40-60 USD).
 Agricultural Policies
 Question 40.
 Please provide the terms of the soft loans referred to in this section.  In addition, please describe
whether the loans are contingent upon export performance or on the use of domestic over
imported goods, as detailed in Article 3 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures.
 Reply:
 The soft credits and loans mentioned in the paragraph 141 of the Working Party Report
(WT/ACC/SPEC/LTU/8/Rev.5) were (at 5 per cent annual interest) allocated to farmers for the
purchase of equipment and machinery, and for improvement of animal breeds and their productivity.
 Since 1995 to 1996 the inflation was in a high level and this was related to the lack of
working capital in the processing enterprises of agriculture products. Therefore, processing enterprises
were not able purchase agriculture products from farmers. Soft credits were allocated to processors forthe purchasing of agriculture products also avoiding  bankruptcy of processing enterprises. Therefore,
processors used the soft credits to cover their debts to the farmers for the earlier purchased agriculture
products. In addition, soft loans were issued for agro-service enterprises that developed co-operation
and agro-service, for legal and natural persons who have made contracts with farmers concerning the
services rendered, and, finally, for co-operatives which produced, processed and sold agriculture
products and services rendered in the agriculture sector.
 Since 1997 the application of the soft credits and loans were ceased. Though, the order of the
Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of National Economy of 29 March 1999 On the payment
procedure of the interest rate was passed, the soft credits were used only to compensate part of interest
rate for the long-term loans allocated to farmers for purchase of inputs.
 The soft credits and loans were not contingent upon export performance or on the use of
domestic over imported goods.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 30
 Trade-Related Intellectual Property Regime
 Question 41.
 Page 3 and page 16 of document WT/ACC/LTU/42 provide citations to the provisions of various
intellectual property laws that provide for na tional treatment for foreign nationals.  No
information is provided with respect to nation al treatment in connection with protection of
geographical indications and undisclosed inform ation.  Please provide references to the
provisions of relevant laws providing national treatment for those two forms of intellectual
property.
 Reply:
 The document WT/ACC/LTU/42 provides citations for national treatment from different laws
regulating the protection of intellectual property, because in such areas as patents, industrial design,
trademarks, etc. the separate laws have been adopted and the all WTO TRIPS provisions, includingnational treatment specified in appropriate laws.
 The geographical indications and undisclosed information is covered by the common Law on
Competition, which is applied to all areas of economy without exception. Therefore, there is no clear
reference to national treatment concerning geographical indications and undisclosed information in
aforementioned law. But this does not mean that national treatment is not applied for geographicalindication and undisclosed information.
 It should be also noted, that the new Law am ending the Law on Trademarks and Service
Marks was presented to the Lithuanian Government for consideration, where the additional provisions
will be introduced concerning the usage of geographical indications. It is necessary to mention that
the translation of this new Law amending the Law on Trademarks and Service Marks was alreadysubmitted to the WTO Secretariat.
 Question 42.
 Regarding the obligation in Article 6b of the Paris Convention (page 8), the right hand column
of WT/ACC/LTU/42 says that Article 4.2 of the Law on Trademarks and Service Marks
provides that a sign that is identical or confusingly similar to a mark which is well known andbelongs to other legal or natural persons cannot be registered.  Please explain how the
ownership by other legal or natural persons is established.  Is responsibility for determining this
ownership placed on the State Patent Bureau or must the owner of the well-known mark oppose
the registration and demonstrate its ownership?
 Reply:
 The owner of the well-known mark can oppose the registration (Law on Trademarks and
Service Marks Article 4.2, 12). If the owner opposes the registration on this ground, he must to provethat he is the owner of the well-known trademark. For this reason he has to have the court decision
recognizing that he is the owner of the well-know n mark. It means that the owner of the well-known
mark has to prove his ownership through the court pr ocedure. State Patent Bureau does not carry out a
search for prior rights e.g. there is no ex officio  examination for prior rights in Lithuania.
 Question 43.
 Regarding Article 25 of the Law on Trademarks and Service Marks says that invalidation or
revocation of a trademark registration will not be allowed if the holder of a prior mark has
knowingly tolerated the use during five years of a later mark that had been the subject of a
bona fide application.  Does this Article apply only with regard to a registered trademark or are
well-known marks intended as well?  Does the word knowingly mean having actual knowledge?In the event of a dispute, how would the term bona fide application be interpreted?  Have there
been any cases in which this Article has been applied?WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 31
 Reply:
 Article 25 of the Law on Trademarks and Service Marks applies only for the registered
trademarks. Furthermore, the new amendment of the Law was already presented to the Lithuanian
Government for consideration, where the specific prov isions indicate that the owner of a mark, which
is recognized in Lithuania as well known, will have the right to prohibit the usage, which is madewithout his consent, of any sign in the course of trade, which is related with the reproduction,
limitation, or translation of a well known mark and is liable to be confused in relation to goods which
are not identical to or similar with those for which that well known mark is used. Necessary to
mention, that the Law also foresees that it is not necessary to register a well known mark in order to
get a protection in Lithuania from the infringement  the rights of the owner of the well known mark
(see also Reply to Question 42).
 The word knowingly means having the actual k nowledge. We have not yet cases in which this
Article has been applied and we can not comment how the term bona fide  would be interpreted in the
courts.
 Question 44.
 In regard to Article 8 of Paris, document WT/ACC/LTU/42 (page 10) states that Article 4.3
prohibits registration of a sign that is identical or confusingly similar to firm names orsignboards of such firms belonging to other natural persons or legal entities that acquired the
right in the names or means before the date of application or priority filing date of the
trademark application.  Please describe the factors that are considered in determining whether
other natural persons or legal entities acquired the right in the names or means.
 Reply:
 The factor determining the right in the firm  names is registration of the firm name in
Lithuania or the usage of such name in Lithuania. The factor determining the right in the signboards is
the use of such signboards.
 Question 45.
 Regarding Articles 10 and 10b of the Berne Convention, document WT/ACC/LTU/42 (page 19)
lists several provisions of the Law on Copyright and Related Rights providing for free uses of
works.  Please describe in detail the extent of reproduction permitted for teaching purposes
under Article 22; that permitted for works by libraries and archives under Article 23; and that
permitted for information purposes under Article 24.  Please also describe in detail the
relationship between these authorizations and the provisions of Article 19 of the Law.
 Reply:
 Law on Copyright and Related Rights Article 22.1 .1 provides free reproduction of a work for
teaching and scientific research purposes: it shall be permitted without the authorization of the author
of a work or any other owner of copyright in this  work, and without the payment of remuneration the
reproduction for teaching and scientific research purposes of short published works or a short extract
of a published work, by way of illustration, in writi ngs, sound or visual recordings, provided that such
reproduction does not exceed the extent justified by the purpose.
 Law on Copyright and Related Rights (Article 23.1) provides free reprographic reproduction
of works by libraries and archives. Without the author ization of the author or other owner of copyright
in a work, any library or archive may, for non-commercial purposes, reprographically make a copy of
such work, where:
 - the work reproduced is a published article or any other short work or short extract of
a writing, with or without illustrations, and the purpose of such a reproduction is toWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 32
meet the request of a natural person, provided that the copy will be used solely for the
purpose of personal studies, education or scientific research, and the act of
reproduction is an isolated case occurring, if repeated, on separate and unrelated
occasions;
 - a copy of work is made for the purpose of preservation or replacement of a copy that
is lost, destroyed or rendered unusable, or for the purpose of replacement of a lost,
destroyed or unfit for use copy of another similar library or archive, if it is impossible
to obtain such a copy by other acceptable means, and if the act of reprographic
reproduction is an isolated case occurring, if repeated, on separate and unrelated
occasions.
 Law on Copyright and Related Rights (Article 24.1) provides free use of works for
information purposes. Without the authorization of the author or other owner of copyright in a work
shall be permitted:
 - the reproduction in newspapers, radio and television broadcasts, repeated and
rebroadcast broadcasts and programmes, or other mass media, of an article published
in a newspaper or other periodical on current economic, political or religious issues,
or of a broadcast work of the same character. This permission shall not apply wherethe exclusive right to authorize or prohibit the reproduction, broadcasting,
retransmission, or other communication to the public of a work is retained by the
author or other owner of copyright;
 - the use of literary and artistic works the place of performance or display of which
renders information on public or current events in the press, radio or television,provided that such a use is motivated for informatory purposes and that it constitutes
additional information material;
 - use in newspapers or periodicals, as well as broadcasting, retransmission, cable
retransmission or other communication to the public, for the purpose of reporting
current events, of political speeches, reports, lectures or other works of a similarnature delivered in public, as well as speeches delivered during court proceedings, to
the extent justified by the purpose.
 Article 19 of the Law on Copyright and Related Rights provides conditions of limitation on
author’s economic rights. Any limitations on economic rights shall be permitted exclusively to the
cases provided for in this Law. Article 22, Article 23 and Article 24 provide certain special cases: the
reproduction of a work for teaching and scientific research by way of illustration (Article 22),
reprographic reproduction of a work in library or archive for the purpose of preservation orreplacement of a copy that is lost, destroyed or rendered unusable (Article 23); the reproduction in
mass media articles published in a newspaper or other periodical on current economic, political or
religious issues; the use of works the place of performance or display of which renders information on
public or current events in the press, radio or television (incidental or accidental uses of works); the
use in mass media for the purpose of reporting current events, of political speeches, reports or otherworks of a similar nature delivered in public, as well as speeches delivered during court proceedings
(Article 24).
 These limitations and exceptions (provided in Article 22, Article 23 and Article 24) do not
conflict with a normal exploitation of a work and do not prejudice the legitimate interests of the
author or other owner of copyright (Article 19): the reproduction does not exceed the extent justifiedby the purpose for teaching and scientific research (Article 22); the act of reprographic reproduction
in library or archive is an isolated case occurring, if repeated, on separate and unrelated occasions
(Article 23). In all cases the name of author and the source used shall be indicated.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 33
 Question 46.
 Regarding Article 18 of the Berne Convention, document WT/ACC/LTU/42 (page 20) citesArticle 72.1 of the Law on Copyright and Related Rights as applying the Law to all literary,
artistic and scientific works and objects of related rights which, at the moment of entry into
force of the Law, have not fallen into the public  domain due to the expiration of the term of
protection previously granted.  Article 18 of the Berne Convention requires that protection be
provided to all works that have not fallen into the public domain in the country of origin
through the expiration of the term of protection.  Please describe in detail how Article 72.1 of
the Law on Copyright and Related Rights complies with that requirement.
 Reply:
 The Bern Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works has entered into force,
with respect to Lithuania, on 14 December 1994, and on that date Lithuania has become a member ofthe Bernie Union.
 Under Article 18.1 of the Bernie Convention and under Article 536 of the Civil Code in force
at that moment the term of protection is the life of the author and fifty years after his death. After the
entrance into force of the Law on Copyright and Related Rights (1999) the provisions on Copyright
and Related Rights incorporated in the Civil Code were repealed. Under Article 30.1 of the Law onCopyright and Related Rights the term of protection was extended to the life of the author and seventy
years after his death. Article 72.1 provides for that the said Law shall apply to the authors, if at the
moment of its entrance into force the term of protection of their rights to literary, scientific and artistic
works, which was active before the entrance of this law, has not expired. It is understood that the term
of protection is not extended to the works that have fallen into the public domain before the entranceof the Law on Copyright and Related Rights if the term of fifty years after the death of the author has
expired. However, the wording of Article 72.1 of the said Law does not stipulate that the term expires
if the works have fallen to the public domain in the territory of Lithuania. It is understood if the term
of protection in the country of origin (foreign country) was shorter or longer than in Lithuania before
the entrance of the said Law and it has not expired, i.e. the works have not fallen in the public domainin the country of origin, the term of protection in the territory in Lithuania extends up to seventy years
after the death of the author. Thus, Article 72.1 of the Law of the Copyright and Related Rights
complies with Article 18 of the Bern Convention.
 Question 47.
 In regard to the requirements of Article 32 of the TRIPS Agreement (document
WT/ACC/LTU/42 page 32), please describe how and under what authority judicial review of
decisions can be made under Articles 38 and 45 of the Patent Law revoking or invalidating apatent.
 Reply:
 According the recommendations of the WTO experts and TRIPS requirements, Article 38 and
Article 39 of Patent Law have been replaced (Draft Law already submitted to Parliament, expected
time of adoption: June 2000). The new versions of Articles 26, 39, 40 foresee that the judicial reviewof decisions can be made under the following circumstances:
 - public interest, national security, health or development of the national economy; or
 - a court determined that the manner of exploitation by the patent owner or his licensee
is anti-competitive, the Government may d ecide that the state (municipal) institution,
natural or legal person may exploit the invention without the consent of the patentowner. The exploitation of the invention shall be limited to the purpose for which it
was authorized and shall be subject for the payment to the patent owner of an
adequate remuneration.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 34
 In the case do not observing of regulations of using the authorization, or do not satisfied of
remuneration, the patent owner, has the right to file a suit to the court.
 Invalidation of the patent is regulated under Article 45 of the Patent Law. On the ground if inventionis not patentable within the meaning of Articles 2 to 5 of Patent Law any person concerned the court
may invalidate a patent. The suit may be filed with the Vilnius County court. Unfortunately, we donot have yet a practice of enforcement of Article 45. At present there is only one case in Supreme
Court. This case is not over yet.
 Question 48.
 In regard to Article 39.2 of the TRIPS Agreement, document WT/ACC/LTU/42 (page 34)
provides a definition of commercial secret which includes the phrase except for information that
cannot be considered a commercial secret under the laws of the Republic of Lithuania.  Please
describe in detail what information meets the definition cannot be a commercial secret underLithuania’s laws and provide citations to the relevant laws.
 Reply:
 As it was already mentioned in document WT/ACC/LTU/42 and pursuant to Article 3 of the
Law on Competition Commercial secret means technical, technological, commercial or organizational
information belonging to the undertaking and not disclosed publicly, the confidentiality of which isprotected by the undertaking, except for information that cannot be considered as a commercial secret
under the Lithuanian laws. Statement of this definition except for information that cannot be considered
as a commercial secret under the Lithuanian laws means that according to some laws information that is
provided by undertaking to certain institutions becomes disclosed and publicly accessible. For example:
 The Law on Public Trading in Securities requires providing the following information:
 Article 4. Registration of Securities
 2 The issuer who intends to register securities must file the following documents
 with the Securities Commission:
 …
 2) prospectus (if the securities are intended for private placement, the
memorandum, an abridged variant prospectus, may be submitted),
 …
 3. According to the rules approved by the Securities Commission, the issuer
must provide in the prospectus (memorandum) financial statements, disclose
information about its activities and the issued securities and those about to be
issued, about the managing bodies and contracts entered into by their
members with the issuer, about the persons connected with the issuer, as wellas persons who are the issuer’s partners, and also any other information
provided for by the rules.  The prospectus must also contain findings of an
independent auditor acting under the legal acts regulating the activities of
auditors concerning the compliance of the issuer’ accounting and financial
accountability with the Lithuanian laws and general principles of accounting.
 …
 7. The Securities Commission must publish the data on the class, volume and
price of the issue of registered securities in the Official gazette as well as
provide the investors with the opportunity  to familiarize themselves with the
prospectus (memorandum). The issuer must provide the opportunity toWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 35
familiarize themselves with the documents filed for registration to all the
persons who are willing to do so.
 Article 5 foresees regular disclosure of information, and Article 6 foresees disclosure of
information concerning stock events.
 The Law on the Register of Enterprises requires providing the following information:
 Article 5. Registration Documents
 The following documents must be lodged with the Registrar:
 …
 3) contracts (or copies thereof) of the incorporation of a public or private
company, or the formation of an association of enterprises, or a partnership;
 4) account of the incorporation of a corporation, and a statement on the account
by the inspector of the corporation;
 5) balance sheets of a public or private company if required by the laws of the
Republic of Lithuania;
 Article 7.1 Use of the Documents and Information of the Register  states:
 All legal and natural person shall have the right to use the Register documents and
information for a prescribed fee.
 Question 49.
 In regard to Article 39.3 of the TRIPS Agreement, document WT/ACC/LTU/42 (page 35)provides references to sections of Lithuania’s Patent Law and states that protection of
registration data is linked to the patent term.  Absent from the information is an explanation of
the manner in which data submitted to those authorities in the Republic of Lithuania thatapprove the marketing of pharmaceuticals and agricultural chemicals is protected from unfair
commercial use and for what period.  Please describe in detail how those authorities protect
data submitted to them to obtain marketing approval and for what period.  Please provide
citations to relevant laws.
 Reply:
 As it was already explained in document WT/ACC/LTU/42, Patent Law among other
products also covers protection of pharmaceutical and agricultural chemical products. The document
also provided all required information concerning the order and period of protection of data.
 Additionally, the basis for the registration of medicines is established by the Law on
Medicines and also by its secondary legislation. In accordance with this Law, the State Medicines
Control Agency at the Ministry of Health (SMCA)  shall conduct the registration of medicines and
shall approve the Rules of Registration of Medicines.
 SMCA Regulations provide that the SMCA shall ensure confidentiality of documentation and
information submitted by agencies of Lithuania, enterprises/applicants, foreign pharmaceutical
companies and firms or their representatives in Lith uania, if this is required by the applicant. This
provision is also included in the Regulations of the SMCA divisions responsible for the registration of
medicines (one of the SMCA division is the Medicines Registration Bureau (MRB) consisting ofWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 36
three subdivisions: Medicine Registration Commission, Commission for Bioproducts and Diagnostic
items, Commission for Food Products and Cosmetic Supplies):
 - under the MRB Regulations, the MRB shall ensure confidentiality of the
documentation and information submitted by the applicant and the security of
documentation;
 - in accordance with the Regulations of the MRB subdivisions, they must also ensure
confidentiality of the documentation submitted by the applicant about the medical
product to be registered.
 On 3 December 1999 the EMEA (European Medicines Evaluation Agency) published The
EMEA Code of Conduct accompanied by Annex 2 called EMEA Guidance on Confidentiality and
Discretion. Due to the fact that the Rules of Registration of Medicines and regulations are being
drafted in accordance with the EU legislation, the provisions of this document will be incorporated inour new legislation.
 Question 50.
 In regard to Article 41.3 of the TRIPS Agreement, document WT/ACC/LTU/42 (page 36)
provides information on the evidence on which j udges’ base decisions but states that there is no
preference given written evidence.  Article 41.3 of the TRIPS Agreement does not deal with thenature of the evidence that should be considered in reaching a decision on the merits of a case.
Article 41.3 provides that judges’ decisions shou ld preferably be in writing, providing the
reasoning for their decisions.  Please describe in detail how judges decisions in a case are
communicated to the parties and the public and cite  to the relevant sections of the Civil Code or
other legal authority.
 Reply:
 Article 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) provides that all courts hear cases in holding
public proceedings. By a motivated court ruling the proceedings may be closed for public when it is
necessary to protect the secrecy of a person, the privacy of his life or property, as well as when a case
heard in public may disclose a state, a professional or a commercial secret. The resolution part of adecision is always pronounced in public. Similar provisions are contained in Article 16 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
 According to CCP Article 213 judge’s decisions are pronounced orally for the parties taking
part in the procedure. If the party is not participa ting in the procedure the copy of the decision will be
send to this party (Article 229 of CCP). Article 102 of the CCP provides that all the materials of
decided civil cases, except the materials of the cases heard in closed court proceedings, are public and
anyone including persons who did not participate in  the proceedings have access to them. They also
have the right to copy the material. Such right is acquired when a decision or a ruling to discontinue
the case or to dismiss the case comes into effect, or in case the case may be heard in the cassation
instance, after its hearing in the cassation instance,  or upon the time set for the cassation appeal has
expired. Similar provisions are contained in Article 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
 Article 8.1 of the Court Law stipulates  that from the 1 of July, 2000 decisions of the district
Courts which has public interest will be available on Internet. The decisions of the Supreme Court of
Lithuania are available on Internet from 2 of June 1999.
 Article 213 of the CCP provides that after coming to a decision or a ruling in a deliberation
room, the Court returns to the session room and the chairperson of the proceedings or a judge of the
panel of judges pronounces the decision or the ruling. After the decision or the ruling is pronounced,the chairperson of the proceedings explains the cont ent of the decision or the ruling, the procedure and
the time for lodging an appeal. At the same time, the judge announces for the participants of theWT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 37
proceedings the time for gaining access to the record of court proceedings. Similar provisions contain
Article 352 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Al so, Article 286 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
stipulates that the sentence is pronounced in the presence of the defendant or is read to the defendant
immediately after its pronouncement.
 Article 220 of the CCP provides that a decision  is made by writing down the introduction and
the resolution parts of the decision and by pronounci ng it immediately after the completion of the
hearing of the case. The description and the motivation parts of the decision are written within three
days after the pronouncement of the decision. Similar provisions are contained in Article 344 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
 Article 2201 of the CCP further states that in exceptional cases, taking into account the
complexity and volume of the case, a judge (-s) by issuing a motivated ruling may postpone the
making and the pronouncement of the decision for a term of time which is no longer than sevencalendar days. During the period, the judge may hear other cases. By ruling to postpone the making of
the decision, the Court also sets the date for the pronouncement of the decision.
 Article 229 of the CCP states that not later than within three days after the giving of the
decision, the Court mails the decision to the parties and to the third parties of the case, which did not
participate in the court proceedings. Similar provisions are contained in Article 354 of the Code ofCriminal Procedure.
 Question 51.
 In regard to Article 41.3 of the TRIPS Agreement, document WT/ACC/LTU/42 (page 37)
provides information regarding the Vilnius District Court’s original jurisdiction over industrial
property cases (with the exception of geographical indications and undisclosed information).Please describe the way in which appeals of at least the legal aspects of that court’s decisions can
be brought and provide citations to the appropriate laws.
 Reply:
 Article 17 of the Court Law stipulates that the Court of Appeal shall be considered to be of
appeal instance for cases, which were investigated by the district court as of first instance. Article 18of the Law stipulates that the Supreme Court shall be considered to be of cassation instance for the
judgement, sentences, decisions and resolutions of th e district courts after they come into force, as
well as for cases of the Court of Appeal.
 The Vilnius District Court having original jurisdiction over industrial property cases hear
these cases as the court of first instance, therefore, the order of appeal is the same as to all other
decisions of the courts of first instance, however the appeal are heard by the Court of Appeal. The
decision of the Vilnius District Court may be appealed in accordance to the order established in theCode of Civil Procedure.
 The appeal may be lodged by any of the party to the case. The appeal has to be lodged within
fourteen days after the decision of the Vilnius District Court was pronounced. The appeal is to be
lodged via the court, which decision is appealed. The judge of the first instance have to decide on
question of admissibility of the appeal not later than three days after the appeal was presented to thecourt. The appeal may be declared inadmissible if:
- the appellant exceeded the time limit and did not claimed for restoration of that time limit or
the claim was rejected;
- the appeal was lodged by incapable person or person who do not have a right to lodge an
appeal; and
- the appeal was lodged by representative who is not granted such representation.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 38
The judge of the Court of the first instance, by accepting the appeal, have to send, within
three days after expire of the time limit for the appeal of the decision, to the persons participating in
the appeal procedure the copies of the appeal and other documents annexed to the appeal and have to
send to the appeal court the appeal and its annexes.
 Question 52.
 Regarding Article 49 of the TRIPS Agreement, document WT/ACC/LTU/42 (page 41) statesthat administrative remedies should conform to the principles established in legal acts.  Please
describe the administrative provisions available to right holders to enforce their intellectual
property rights and cite to the relevant provisio ns that ensure that these remedies conform to
the principles of Articles 41 to 48.
Reply:
According Article 6 of the Civil Code courts and arbitration are entitled to protect civil rights.
Article 4 of Code of Civil Procedure ensures a possibility to every person to bring an action in the
court in order to protect his rights or interests. Law on Copyright and Related Rights provides the
right of copyright holders and holders of related rights to protect their rights and interest by bringing
civil action (Article 65). Article 136 of Code of Civil Procedure provides the cases concerning
intellectual property should be examined in the County courts.
In the case, when indication of criminal activities arise, which are provided on Article 142 of
Criminal Code (infringement of copyrights or inventor rights), the copyright holder or inventor can
claim for the instituting the criminal investigation in accordance to the Code of Criminal Procedure
(Article 126).
Moreover, the Article 308 of the Criminal Code provides for criminal responsibility for the
usage of trademark without permission, registered in the patent bureau, for marking of produced
goods and presentation for realization of such goods. The Criminal Code provides for criminal
sanction for such criminal activity with fine with deprivation of right to occupy certain positions or
work certain work or engage in certain activities up to three years or without deprivation of such right.
If the big amount of goods were marked or if quality of marked goods has differ a lot from the goodsproduced by legal owner of the trade mark or if the big damage was caused to the company, the
Criminal Code provides for more sever criminal sanction – deprivation of liberty up to three years
with fine or only fine with deprivation of right to occupy certain positions or work certain work or
engage in certain activity up to five years or without deprivation of such right.
Question 53.
Regarding Article 50.1 of the TRIPS Agreement, document WT/ACC/LTU/42 (page 41) cites
provisions of the Law on Copyright and Related Rights that deals with provisional measuresand to Articles 96 to 100 of the Civil Code that  provide for preservation of evidence.  Please
describe with respect to the forms of industrial property the provisional measures available to
prevent infringement.
Reply:
In the case of industrial property infringement the Articles 96 through 100 of the Code of
Civil Procedure providing the general procedure of the preserving of evidence applies. It stipulates
that under the action of industrial property holder the court has the right to impose measures of
provisional relief.
Provisional measures to prevent infringement of industrial property rights are provided in
Law on Trademarks and Service Marks (Article 28) and in Law on Industrial Designs (Article 25).Under these articles, in according to the claim of the holder of a mark (the owner of an industrial
design), the Court may adopt a decision to terminate any acts the likely performance of which may
infringe the rights protected by laws.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 39
Also, the Patent Law (Article 41) provides, that, the owner of a patent or the applicant shall
have the right to institute court proceedings against any person who is performing acts which make it
likely that infringement of patent or published patent application will occur. Such proceedings may
not be instituted later than three years from the establishment of the fact of infringement.
Article 29 of Law on Trademarks and Service Ma rks provides, that the holder of a registered
mark or the beneficiary of a licence may request in writing form the customs administration to
withhold goods transported across the border of Lithuanian, which bear a mark which is considered
by the said holder or beneficiary as infringing their rights in a mark registered in Lithuania.
 Question 54.Regarding border measures required by the TRIPS Agreement, Articles 51 through 60,
document WT/ACC/LTU/42 (pages 43 to 45) provides information concerning the protection of
trademarks.  Please provide similar info rmation concerning the protection provided
copyrighted works at the border and any protec tion provided other forms of intellectual
property.
Reply:
Border Measures
Provide for suspension of release by customs authorities of goods
suspected of bearing a counterfeit trademark or of being a piraticalcopyrighted work, either at the request of the right holder. Members are
authorized to extend such protection to holders of other forms of
intellectual property. (Article 51).Draft Law on the Protection of Intellectual Property for
Imported and Exported Goods.
Article 6 provides that the holder of an intellectual property
right may lodge an application in writing with the Customs
Department under the Ministry of Finance for action by theCustoms authorities to take measures to protect the rights
of that holder in case he is aware or suspects that goods
infringing intellectual property rights are intended for therelease for free circulation, outright export, re-export,
application of other import and export procedures or
placing in a free zone or free warehouse.
According to the Article 12 where, in the course of
examination carried out in performing Customs formalitiesfor import or export procedures or placing the goods in a
free zone or free warehouse it is found that there are
reasonable grounds to believe that the goods are infringing
intellectual property rights, the holder of the intellectual
property rights, where known, shall be notified without
delay about the alleged infringement of his rights. In thiscase the goods shall be detained for a period of five
working days following the notification of the holder of
intellectual property rights to enable him to lodge anapplication to the Customs Department for action to protect
his rights.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 40
Authorize authorities to require the right holder requesting border
measures to post a bond sufficient to protect the defendant and to
prevent abuse. (Article 53).Draft Law on the Protection of Intellectual Property for
Imported and Exported Goods. (Article 10).
Where the Customs Department takes a decision to grant
the application, the Customs measures shall be initiated
only upon the submission by the holder of the intellectual
property rights of the security in order:
1)  to satisfy claims submitted to the Customs authorities
by the persons concerned in respect of whom Customs
measures have been applied, if the application of suchmeasures is terminated owing to the act or omission by the
holder of intellectual property rights or where it has been
established that the Customs measures had been applied inrespect of the goods found to have been unreasonably
accused of infringing intellectual property rights;
2) to ensure payment of the costs incurred where the
detained goods were kept under Customs control.
Requires prompt notification of the right holder and the importer whenaction under Article 51 is taken. (Article 54).Draft Law on the Protection of Intellectual Property for
Imported and Exported Goods. (Article 14.2).
The territorial Customs office, to which the Customs office
which has detained the goods is subordinate, shallimmediately communicate the information to the Customs
Department which has taken a decision to apply Customs
measures, to the declarant, the applicant and the Tax PoliceDepartment under the Ministry of Interior.
Requires that Customs authorities be notified within a maximum of 20
days of the receipt of notice that proceedings no the merits have begun
or the suspension is to be revoked. (Article 55).Draft Law on the Protection of Intellectual Property for
Imported and Exported Goods..
According to the Article 16 the holder of intellectual
property rights must immediately notify the Customs
Department of his appeal with the statement of claim to a
court.
Article 17.1 provides that if within 10 working days from
the date of notification of the holder of intellectual property
rights on the detention of goods the Customs Department is
not notified of the appeal by the holder of intellectual
property rights to court or of the adoption of the finaldecision or decision to take interim measures, the detained
goods are placed under the Customs procedure or other
Customs approved treatment or use under which they wereintended to be placed.
Authorities must be authorized to require the right holder to compensate
the importer or owner of the goods subject to border measures if goods
were wrongfully detained or if proceedings leading to a decision on themerits are not begun within the allotted time. (Article 56).Draft Law on the Protection of Intellectual Property for
Imported and Exported Goods. (Article 20.3).
The procedure for recovery of losses and damages is
governed by the Law on Copyright and Related Rights,
Law on Industrial Design, Law on Trademarks and Service
Marks, Patent Law and Civil Code.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 41
Right holders must be allowed to inspect the detained goods in order to
substantiate the right holder’s claims. Importers must be given similar
authority. Members may give the right holder the names and addressesof those involved in the importation when infringement is found to exist.
(Article 57).Draft Law on the Protection of Intellectual Property for
Imported and Exported Goods. (Article 14.3 –14.4).
The territorial Customs office, to which the Customs office
which has detained the goods is subordinate, shall, in
compliance with laws and other legal acts governing the
protection of personal data, public security, commercial,industrial and professional secrecy, at the request of the
holder of intellectual property rights, notify him of the
name and address of the declarant as well as the name andaddress of the consignee (where such data is known).
Taking into account the conditions of Customs control, the
Customs office that has detained the goods shall afford theapplicant and other persons having the right to dispose the
goods to inspect the detained goods and take their samples.
Establishes the conditions that must be in place if Customs Authoritiesare authorized to act ex officio, including the ability to ask the right
holder for information at any time, the requirement to notify theimporter promptly of the suspension; and the requirement that public
officials be liable if they act in bad faith.
(Article 58).Draft Law on the Protection of Intellectual Property for
Imported and Exported Goods. (Article 14.2).
The territorial Customs office, to which the Customs office
that has detained the goods is subordinate, shall
immediately communicate the information to the declarant.
Customs Code.According to Article 7 any person involved in the export,
import or transit operations must provide the Customs at
their request with all information and possesseddocuments, related with the said import, export and transit
operations.
According to Article 18 paragraph 3 the Customs officials
are liable for the unlawful actions pursuant to the order
established by law.
Competent authorities must be able to order destruction or disposal other
than by re-export of infringing goods where appropriate. (Article 59).Draft Law on the Protection of Intellectual Property for
Imported and Exported Goods. (Article 18).
The court having finally recognised the goods as infringing
intellectual property rights shall also take a decision on the
confiscation of the goods specifying which of the following
actions should be performed on the detained goods:
destruction;use of the goods without their release into commercial
channels, ensuring the protection of the holder of
intellectual property rights and without bearing by the Stateof any expenses incurred in connection of the use of such
goods;
any other measures which effectively deprive the persons
concerned of the illegal trafficking of the detained goods of
the economic benefits of the transaction (e.g. handing to
the holder of intellectual property rights).
Simply removing the trademarks which have been affixed
to the counterfeit goods without authorization shall be
regarded as a measure which effectively deprive thepersons concerned of the illegal trafficking of the detained
goods of the economic benefits of the transaction only in
exceptional cases.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 42
Members are authorized to except from border measures small quantities
of infringing goods of a non-commercial nature carried in personal
luggage or shipped in small consignments. (Article 60).Draft Law on the Protection of Intellectual Property for
Imported and Exported Goods. (Article 21).
The provisions of this law shall not apply to goods of a
non-commercial nature contained in travellers’ personal
luggage imported within the limits laid down by the
Government in respect of relief from import duties andtaxes and exported in cases when it is allowed to submit
the simplified declaration.
Question 55.
Regarding Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement, document WT/ACC/LTU/42 (page 45) cites toprovisions of the Criminal Code that apply to copyright infringement and trademark
counterfeiting.  Please provide information on the number and kind of criminal actions that
have been brought under these prov isions in the past two years, indicating the nature of the
crime, the number of defendants involved and the penalties assessed.
Reply:
In the past two years nine criminal proceedings were instituted against infringers for the
violation of copyright and trademark counterfeiting, mostly for the production, realization and storage
of counterfeited goods. When the criminal proceedings were started 42,000 units of intellectual
production were taken. Necessary to mention, that wh en the Courts have already passed verdicts in
some cases, 19,000 units of CDs were confiscated.
Moreover, 100 protocols of administrative infringement have been drawn up and about 4,000
units of intellectual production have been confiscated in such cases. Penalties inflicted amounted toabout 37,000 litas.
Three civil cases were put on the trial in the country-side district courts. Two claims were
satisfied, one rejected. The exact number of the administrative cases’ put on the trial in the country-
side courts is unknown, but there is evidence that there were more than 10 such cases.
Lithuania’s district courts have passed one verdict and 18 rulings for the copyright
infringement and trademark counterfeiting.
Trade Agreements
 Question 56.
Does the statement in paragraph 177 of the Draft Report that The Parties of the Agreement [i.e.,
the FTA with Ukraine] committed to ensure free transit of goods through their customs
territory mean that no transit fees are charged?  Please update the information in this
paragraph.  Agreements are not, as a rule, noti fied to the WTO Secretariat.  Lithuania should
clarify whether an actual notification in the context of Article XXIV of the GATT, has taken
place.
Has the FTA with Hungary been notified to  the WTO?  The Members would appreciate a
statement from Lithuania that it will notify its FTA with Ukraine upon accession.
Reply:
There is no any provision in the FTA Agreement with Ukraine, that the Parties agree not to
charge any transit fees for goods. Parties only agreed to ensure free transit of goods through their
territories within the meaning of Article V of the GATT 1994.WT/ACC/LTU/48
Page 43
FTA with Hungary has been notified to WTO by Hungary. FTA with Ukraine shall be
notified by Lithuania upon its accession to the WTO.
__________