EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 20.7.2021 SWD(2021) 717 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2021 Rule of Law Report



Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Lithuania Accompanying the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2021 Rule of Law Report



The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2021) 700 final} - {SWD(2021) 701 final} - {SWD(2021) 702 final} - {SWD(2021) 703 final} - {SWD(2021) 704 final} - {SWD(2021) 705 final} - {SWD(2021) 706 final} - {SWD(2021) 707 final} - {SWD(2021) 708 final} - {SWD(2021) 709 final} - {SWD(2021) 710 final} - {SWD(2021) 711 final} - {SWD(2021) 712 final} - {SWD(2021) 713 final} - {SWD(2021) 714 final} - {SWD(2021) 715 final} - {SWD(2021) 716 final} - {SWD(2021) 718 final} - {SWD(2021) 719 final} - {SWD(2021) 720 final} - {SWD(2021) 721 final} - {SWD(2021) 722 final} - {SWD(2021) 723 final} - {SWD(2021) 724 final} - {SWD(2021) 725 final} - {SWD(2021) 726 final} - {SWD(2021) 727 final}



Abstract The Lithuanian justice system continues to present good results in terms of efficiency, and further measures to improve this are being implemented. Digital tools are widely used in the justice system, which has contributed to ensuring the continued functioning of courts during the COVID-19 pandemic. Appointments to high judicial positions remain subject to delays. While appointments to the Constitutional Court have resumed, the president of the Supreme Court remains in function ad interim since September 2019. Initiatives to strengthen anti-corruption culture in the judiciary are being developed by the National Courts Administration and the Judicial Council. Amendments to the legal aid system are being discussed, responding to long-standing concerns of lawyers. On 4 November 2020, the new anti-corruption action plan 2020-2022 was adopted with the aim of improving the implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Programme. Asset disclosure now has a more efficient and effective regulation and updated rules on lobbying activities aiming at ensuring more transparency and publicity of meetings between elected officials and lobbyists are in force since January 2021. The implementation of the revised legal framework on revolving doors and cooling off periods has started after their approval in July 2020. Whistleblowers protection provisions are in place and the prosecution office is raising awareness to promote the use of reporting channels. Several high-level corruption cases were investigated or brought to court. The public procurement legal framework has been improved to prevent frauds and corruption risks in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, recommendations and guidance for improving transparency and reducing corruption risks in the implementation of the COVID-19 economic relief plan were issued by the Special Investigations Service. The legal framework for media pluralism in Lithuania guarantees the basic right of freedom of expression and the right to information. While the media regulators continue to be considered independent and effective, a debate about the effectiveness and impartiality of media self-regulatory bodies has taken place. To strengthen media ownership transparency, the Ministry of Culture is putting in place a publicly available Information System of Producers and Disseminators of Public Information. The professional environment for journalists is gradually improving in Lithuania, especially as regards access to information held in the main public registers. Nevertheless, it appears that authorities sometimes invoke data protection in order to unduly limit access to information. Lithuanian authorities have taken several measures to alleviate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on media outlets. A project aimed at improving the quality of law-making is under preparation, which will include the revision of existing legislation, in order to eliminate outdated or disproportionate regulation. Lithuania adopted emergency measures in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, which are still in place. While the activity of Lithuanian NGOs was impacted by the COVID-19-related restrictions, the authorities have provided specific financial support to NGOs. Civil society space remains open, and a new NGO foundation has been created to provide sustainable institutional support for NGOs. The Lithuanian authorities are developing initiatives to improve legal education, and there are plans to integrate legal and anti-corruption education in general education programmes.

I.Justice System The justice system is composed of courts of general jurisdiction (the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, regional courts and district courts) and courts of special jurisdiction (the Supreme Administrative Court and two regional administrative courts). District court judges are appointed by the President of the Republic, upon the advice of a Selection Commission, while Supreme Court judges are appointed by Parliament (Seimas), on the nomination by the President of the Republic, following the advice of the Judicial Council. The Judicial Council, entirely composed of judges appointed by their peers, is the executive body of judicial self-governance, and ensures the independence of courts and judges. The National Courts Administration, which is independent from the executive, is competent for providing material and technical support to the courts, ensuring the efficient functioning of the court system and the training of judges. The Constitutional Court adjudicates on the constitutionality of legislation and of the acts of the President and the Government. Prosecutors are independent; the Prosecutor General is appointed and dismissed by the President of the Republic upon the assent of the Parliament. Lower-ranked prosecutors are appointed by the Prosecutor General, on the recommendation of a Selection Commission. Lithuania participates in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. The Bar is an independent part of the legal system, and is financed from contributions paid by advocates and from other sources. Independence The level of perceived judicial independence remains average to high among the general public and companies. In 2021, the level of perceived judicial independence among the general public has further improved for the third consecutive year, and remains average (55% rated their perception as ‘fairly good’ or ‘very good’, an increase of 3 percentage points in relation to 2020). Among companies, the level of perceived judicial independence remains generally high although in 2021 it decreased, countering the steady increase registered in previous years (60% perceive it as ‘fairly good’ or ‘very good’, a decrease of 6 percentage points in relation to 2020). The competences of the Judicial Council have been strengthened, and its composition has been amended. Since November 2020, the Judicial Council consists of 17 members (previously 23). Amendments to the Law on Courts also determined that judges may be elected to the Judicial Council for a maximum of two consecutive terms. The Judicial Council continues to be entirely composed of judges appointed by their peers, which is consistent with Council of Europe recommendations. The term of office of the judges who will no longer be members has not been subject to early termination, as the new rules came into force after the end of their regular term of office. As noted in the 2020 Rule of Law Report, the Judicial Council now has the competence to select the judges-members of the Selection Committee of Candidates to Judicial Office, which, until 2020, was an exclusive competence of the President. For the first time, the Judicial Council appointed three judges as members of this Committee. The Judicial Council has also become one of the participants to the independent state strategic management system, established in the Law of the Republic of Lithuania on Strategic Management, which entered into force on 1 January 2021. In this context, the Judicial Council is being actively involved in the preparation of the 2021–2030 National Progress Programme. After a period of standstill, three new judges have been appointed to the Constitutional Court. After the term of office of three Constitutional Court judges, including the President, came to an end in March 2020, the Parliament rejected the three proposed candidates for the vacancies, leading to a substantial period during which the three judges remained in function ad interim. Following doubts raised by political parties as to the lawfulness of the continuation in function of the three judges, the Constitutional Court clarified that the solution was in line with the provisions of the Law on the Constitutional Courtand stressed that the Constitutional Court must function without interruption. According to the law, in case a new judge is not appointed, the judge whose term of office has expired shall act until the new judge is appointed. This legal solution appears to be consistent with Venice Commission recommendations. The Parliament resumed the procedure for the renovation of the Constitutional Court in January 2021. This has enabled the appointment of the three judges. On 17 June 2021, Parliament appointed a new President of the Constitutional Court. The President of the Supreme Court remains in function ad interim. The appointment of a new President of the Supreme Court is pending since September 2019. Following the Constitutional Court’s ruling that the dismissal of the chairperson of the civil chamber of the Supreme Court was unconstitutional, the judge was reinstated in her respective functions as judge of the Supreme Court, including as chairperson of the civil chamber and acting president of the Court. While this ensures the functioning of the Supreme Court, it is important to proceed with the appointment procedure. However, further delays are expected, as according to the Law on Courts, the procedure for the appointment of the President of the Supreme Court can only take place once the full composition of the Supreme Court is ensured, and one judicial position in the Supreme Court remains vacant due to delays in the selection procedure. The National Courts Administration and the Judicial Council are taking initiatives to strengthen the anti-corruption environment in the judiciary. Strengthening the anti-corruption culture in the justice system is one of the five priorities included in the National Courts Administration (NCA) programme for the period 2020-2022. In this context, the NCA, in cooperation with the Judicial Council, is organising seminars on professional ethics, and developing measures to strengthen the control of private interest declarations. The Judicial Council has also set up an inter-institutional working group, which includes a representative of the Special Investigation Service, to strengthen the anti-corruption environment in the judiciary. These efforts address concerns regarding the negative impact on the image of the justice system raised by the suspicion of members of the judiciary being involved in corruption cases, in the context of criminal cases that remain pending since 2019. These suspicions already led to the dismissal of five judges, and the suspension of three judges. The Bar Association has raised concerns regarding the respect for professional secrecy. Under the provisions of the Law on Criminal Intelligence, law enforcement authorities may perform covert actions of information collection that, according to the Bar Association, may amount to controlling communication between lawyers and their clients, even in the absence of criminal charges. The Bar Association had requested from State authorities information regarding the existence of criminal intelligence actions, outside of any criminal investigation, against members of the Bar, which was refused. The refusal was challenged before national courts. The Bar Association’s appeal was dismissed in a final decision. The Bar Association has brought an application before the European Court of Human Rights. On 9 December 2020, the European Court of Human Rights informed the Lithuanian Government of the admissibility of the case. The Bar Association also challenged the legal regulation on criminal investigation activities before the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court. Following its decision, the Bar Association appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania. The judicial proceedings before the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania are pending. Quality The selection procedures for the judiciary have resumed, after slight delays caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and inherent limitations imposed by the quarantine regime declared, the number of selection procedures for the judiciary was lower than in 2019. The selection panel meetings have resumed according to the usual schedule, following the adaptation of procedural rules to the use of videoconference equipment. According to the NCA, in 2021 a larger number of selection procedures is planned in order to compensate the decrease registered in 2020, and ensure the assignment to vacant positions. The Judicial Council has initiated discussions regarding the funding model of the judiciary. In the context of the negotiations on state budget formation, the Judicial Council has raised concerns regarding to the allocation of funds to the judiciary and the criteria thereto. The Judicial Council has initiated a research of national and international practices, in order to establish objective and transparent criteria for the allocation of funds. Changes to the legal aid system are being discussed. The Programme of the 18th Government of the Republic of Lithuania includes a project aimed at reducing the workload of lawyers who provide legal aid, and tackling the problem of inadequate remuneration for the legal aid services, including provision for proportional remuneration depending on the complexity of the legal services provided, and transparency of the payment procedure. These changes would respond to longstanding concerns voiced by the Bar Association, and are in line with the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) recommendations and Council of Europe Guidelines. The project, expected to be implemented during the current 2020-2024 legislature, is however at a very early stage, and its rollout will be preceded by a feasibility study.

The use of digital tools in the justice system is widespread. Lithuania’s procedural rules allow the use of digital technology in courts in civil, commercial, administrative and criminal cases in a wide range of situations, both regarding the participation of parties using communication technology, and the admissibility of evidence. Lithuanian courts appear also well equipped with electronic communication tools. Digital solutions to initiate and follow proceedings are broadly in place for civil, commercial and administrative cases, but are less used for criminal cases. The widespread use of digital tools has contributed to ensuring the continued functioning of the courts during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite the improvement in the available video conferencing equipment, stakeholders highlight the need to significantly upgrade computer equipment of the court system and other resources relevant to the digitisation of justice. Further measures to modernise the work of the courts, in particular to ensure the use of communication technologies for the organisation of remote hearings in all procedures and reinforce the access of public to case-law, are also envisaged. Efficiency The justice system continues to present good results in terms of efficiency. Lithuania maintains its short disposition time in civil and commercial cases in first and second instance, while registering an increase in third instance. The disposition time in administrative cases has also decreased, both in first and second instance. The trend of reduction of the already comparatively low backlogs has continued, in all the categories of cases considered. The implementation of the project “Increasing the Efficiency of Judicial Activities” is ongoing. The project aims at increasing the efficiency of court activities, through the development of advanced management models of court resources and case allocation, and the modernisation of case management. The implementation of the project, which started in 2017, was expected to end in September 2021, but has suffered delays due to the COVID-19 pandemic. New legislative measures to further improve efficiency are also envisaged in the Programme of the 18th Government of the Republic of Lithuania, in particular to promote out-of-court dispute resolution, and to transfer non-judicial functions currently performed by courts to other institutions. Lithuania is also active in promoting and granting incentives for the use of alternative dispute resolution methods. II.Anti-Corruption Framework The Ministry of Justice and the Special Investigation Service coordinates the anti-corruption preventive measures and the Chief Official Ethics Commission of the Republic of Lithuania supervises the institutional ethics standards. The STT is also tasked with preparing and implementing certain anti-corruption preventive measures. The competence to fight corruption is shared between several authorities. The STT has competences to detect and investigate the most serious corruption-related criminal offenses. The Prosecution Service conducts and coordinates pre-trial investigations. In the framework of the National Anti-Corruption Programme 2015-2025, on 4 November 2020, a new Action Plan for 2020-2022 was approved by Parliament. The perception among experts and business executives is that the level of corruption in the public sector remains relatively low. In the 2020 Corruption Perceptions Index by Transparency International, Lithuania scores 60/100 and ranks 11th in the European Union and 35th globally . This perception has been relatively stable over the past five years . The investigation and prosecution of corruption has continued as regards a number of high-level corruption cases. In 2020, the STT started 69 pre-trial investigations, with 35 cases sent to Court. 60 corruption related cases ended with a fine and 5 cases with an imprisonment sanction, while 2 cases ended with both imprisonment and fine. Additionally, 6 high-level corruption cases were investigated or brought to Court. One of them, started in 2016, involved a Member of Parliament and had been suspended when Parliament did not grant the Prosecutor Office’s request to waive the immunity of the Member. Following general elections, in December 2020, the Parliament authorised the Prosecutor’s Office to continue the investigation, which has resumed and the case has been brought to Court recently. The legislative framework to tackle foreign bribery is adequate while implementation of international recommendations on the need to raise awareness on this issue needs further improvement. In this context, human and financial resources available to law enforcement are considered sufficient to perform the tasks but authorities point to the need to increase the number of law enforcement officials. A new action plan to accompany the National Anti-Corruption Programme was adopted. The anti-corruption strategic framework is laid down in the National Anti-Corruption Programme 2015-2025 and it is implemented and coordinated by the Government with the support of the Special Investigations Service (STT). The programme takes a comprehensive approach to corruption focusing on both the public and the private sector. However, as highlighted by the STT in its latest evaluation, building an environment resilient to corruption risks in all public administration bodies needs a more systematic approach and some measures remain to be implemented. The Action Plan for 2020-2022 adopted by Parliament in November 2020 seeks to improve the implementation of the programme. The actions planned include improving the Central Electoral Commission information system, revising lobbying rules, strengthening law enforcement capacity to detect corruption cases including via training and preventive action and strengthening the whistleblower protection mechanism. The plan envisages setting up a new system for monitoring and assessing corruption in the public sector and improving corruption awareness. The Special Commission of the Government of the Republic of Lithuania has the task of monitoring, controlling and coordinating the fight against corruption, while the STT plays a key role in monitoring the results of the plan. Lithuania plans to draft and adopt a new National Anticorruption Agenda (2022-2033) in 2021, replacing the current National Anti-Corruption Programme. Finally, in December 2020 the President of the Republic inaugurated the new Integrity Academy. The main objective of the newly established Academy is to bring together experts and institutions to exchange best practices in the prevention of corruption and to provide specialised anti-corruption training. In the first months of activity, the Academy organised several training sessions for public servants. Public procurement legislation has been modified to prevent fraud and corruption risks under the COVID-19 pandemic. The public procurement legislation was adapted to respond to potential corruption issues in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The new amendment entered into force in July 2020 and aims at preventing the participation to public procurement of doubtful suppliers trying to profit from the emergency situation. A specific reference is made for international procurement using unannounced negotiated procedures where the contracting authorities should consult with several other national authorities, including the STT, in order to acquire as much information as possible on the supplier. After the adoption of the National Action Plan 2020-2022, a new amendment has been presented to the Parliament with the aim of pursuing the centralisation of public procurement procedures. The asset declaration framework for elected officials now has a more efficient and effective regulation. A new amendment to the Law of Public and Private Interests in the Public Service for elected and appointed persons was adopted in July 2020. It aims at simplifying the process for declarations of interest and specifies all the necessary details needed to log the declaration which must be done by the elected members in the 30 days following their election. The Chief Official Ethics Commission is responsible for checking the declarations, which are also made public. On 4 January 2021, the new Register of Private Interests (PINREG) became operational. Updated rules on lobbying aim at ensuring more transparency and publicity for meetings between officials and lobbyists. The new amended law on lobbying entered into force in January 2021 and foresees a cross declaration scheme where lobbyists, politicians and public servants must report their meetings in the Register of Lobbyists maintained by the Chief Official Ethics Commission (COEC). According to latest COEC annual report, at the end of 2020, 122 individuals were registered as lobbyists and 273 meetings were registered compared to 209 registered in 2019. The STT has provided the Parliament with its evaluation and recommendations to strengthen the proposed framework. The implementation of the revolving doors and cooling-off provisions of July 2020 has started. Revolving doors and cooling off period are regulated in the Law on the Adjustment of Public and Private Interests, which establishes a one year cooling-off period. Additionally, COEC has the power to derogate from the general rule on a case-by-case basis. Since the entry into force of the amendment to the Law in July 2020, COEC has received four requests for derogation. In one case COEC did not take a decision as information from the applicant was missing, while in the other two cases the requests were refused and in one case the request for derogation was approved. While whistleblowers protection regulation is in place, awareness is lacking among citizens. In 2020, 49 persons were recognised as whistleblowers by the Office of the Prosecutor General. A dedicated hotline was set up in August 2020 within the Office of the Prosecutors and in four months of activities dealt with 198 consultations. On the basis of the information provided through this channel, 16 pre-trial investigations started and 11 internal audits were carried out. The main reported misconducts relate to abuse of powers, failure to perform official duties, corruption in public procurement, but also violation of COVID-19 related measures. In order to promote the use of the hotline and to support other authorities in establishing their own reporting channels, the Office of the Prosecutor General is organising awareness training for public and private entities. Recommendations and guidance for improving transparency and reducing corruption risks in the implementation of the COVID-19 economic relief plan were issued. After the COVID-19 outbreak, the Government approved a EUR 5 billion plan to support the economy and limit the spread of the pandemic. The implementation of the support plan has been monitored by the STT. In this context, the STT issued a number of recommendations and documents aimed at ensuring transparency and reducing corruption risks. A single online platform to disclose information about the implementation of the COVID-19 plan was proposed by the STT but has not been implemented. Nevertheless, the authorities considered the amount of information published by relevant institutions to be sufficient to correctly inform the citizens. STT has assessed several legal measures adopted to limit the impact. III.Media Pluralism and media Freedom In Lithuania, the legal framework concerning media pluralism and media freedom is based on constitutional safeguards and sectorial legislation. The Constitution prohibits censorship and monopolisation of the media and guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of information. The Law on the Provision of Information to the Public is the main media law. Legislation to transpose the Audiovisual Media Services Directive has been adopted. The institutional framework consists of the Lithuanian Radio and Television Commission (LRTK), the Office of the Inspector of Journalist Ethics and the Public Information Ethics Association. There have been no significant changes in the legal framework concerning the regulator for audio-visual media services. Financial and human resources of the LRTK have remained stable and are considered adequate, especially since its budget is funded by fees collected from the market players. The LRTK has proposed to the Parliament to extend the duration of the mandate of its members from four to five years and to change its name into “National Media Commission”. The Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM 2021) reports a very low risk for the independence and effectiveness of the media authority. A debate about the effectiveness and impartiality of media self-regulatory bodies is under way. Lithuania’s public broadcaster “Lietuvos nacionalinis radijas ir televizija” (LRT) proposed an amendment to the Law on the Provision of Information to the Public to have it excluded from the supervision by the Public Information Ethics Commission, a decision-making body of the Public Information Ethics Association, due to the introduction of the ethics controller function in the LRT itself. This led to public discussions about the effectiveness and impartiality of the Public Information Ethics Commission, the composition of the Public Information Ethics Association and the extent to which the functioning of self-regulation should be prescribed by law. To enhance media ownership transparency, the Ministry of Culture is putting in place a publicly available Information System of Producers and Disseminators of Public Information, in line with the Law on the Provision of Information to the Public and Strategic Directions of the Public Information Policy 2019 – 2022. The system, called “VIRSIS”, will disclose data on media owners, including ultimate beneficial owners, and, progressively, amounts of advertising income obtained from the public bodies. In order to ensure that the information in VIRSIS is up-to-date, it will be synchronised with other state information systems and registers and it will incorporate relevant real-time data. The system will be launched in the course of 2021. According to the MPM 2021, media ownership transparency is at medium risk. News media concentration is high, in particular since a small number of companies own the majority of news media outlets across different sectors.

Lithuanian authorities have taken several measures to alleviate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on media outlets. The pandemic led to a drop in advertising revenue of media outlets, with two local newspapers having to terminate activity. Private media reduced the number of investigative projects. The media-specific support measures put in place by Lithuanian authorities included covering the costs of postal delivery, deferring the costs of television and radio transmission facilities and services and ensuring that journalists could travel across the country when the travel restrictions were in place. Various Government departments also bought media space for public information campaigns on the COVID-19 pandemic. The Government is planning a comprehensive review of its media policy in 2022. Follow-up measures will include a sustainable media funding model by 2023 and enhancing media literacy by 2024. The framework for access to information is gradually improving in Lithuania. According to amendments to the Law on the Provision of Information to the Public that entered into force on 1 July 2021, journalists are entitled to have free access to information held by the real estate register and the registers of businesses and organisations. Some stakeholders claim that the access to information procedures are still quite burdensome. In particular, some public bodies, especially municipalities, have invoked data protection rules to unduly restrict access to information. The professional environment for journalists continues to be safe. Since the 2020 Rule of Law Report, no new alerts have been published for Lithuania on the Council of Europe’s Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists, or the Mapping Media Freedom platform. The programme of the new Government commits to strengthen the framework for protection of journalists against persecution for critical journalism. IV.Other Institutional Issues related to Checks and Balances Lithuania is a representative democratic republic with a directly elected President, a unicameral Parliament (Seimas) and a Constitutional Court in charge of constitutional review of laws. The Parliament, the President, the Government, and a group of at least 50.000 citizens have the right of legislative initiative. The Parliamentary Ombudspersons are tasked with protecting and promoting human rights and freedoms. A project aimed at improving the quality of law-making is under preparation. The Ministry of Justice plans to carry out an analysis in order to identify shortcomings in the legislative process and the application of law, and to prepare methodological recommendations for institutions to improve the quality of legislation and the legislative process. The project envisages initiatives related to assessment of the impact of legal regulation, inclusive public consultation, ex-post evaluation of the impact of existing legislation, and deregulation and de-bureaucratisation. The latter initiatives, in particular, will include reviewing existing legislation and developing methodological guidance on systematic revisions, in order to eliminate outdated or disproportionate regulation, reduce administrative and regulatory burdens, and systematise regulatory provisions and related regulations. Emergency measures declared in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic remain in place. While the state of emergency, as provided for under the Constitution and specified in the Law on the State of Emergency, was not declared, the executive declared a nationwide situation of emergency, pursuant to the Law on Civil Protection, and introduced a nationwide quarantine, under the Law on Prevention and Control of Communicable Diseases in Humans. The declaration of these regimes is a prerogative of the Government, and does not require the authorisation of Parliament. During the periods of quarantine, the work of Parliament was not suspended, although some sessions were adjourned. Since January 2021, amendments to the Statute of the Parliament allow for the sittings to take place remotely. One judicial complaint against the quarantine measures contesting the competence of the executive to declare such measures was dismissed by a first instance court. Although several appeals against quarantine measures were presented before the Constitutional Court, none of these were found admissible. In November 2020, the two Parliamentary Ombudspersons presented a report assessing the compliance with fundamental rights and freedoms of emergency measures introduced in March 2020. In this report, concerns were raised regarding measures of forced isolation of persons returning from abroad, and respect for the right to affordable health care and the provision of the highest standard of health protection during the quarantine period. The new law on development of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) came into force in 2020. The new law stipulates that information on legal entities which qualify as NGOs, in accordance with the definition provided by Law, shall be collected in the Register of Legal Entities and made publicly available. This information will serve as a base for collecting data on NGOs, which will be used in government informed policymaking. The new law also created the NGO foundation, which aims to provide sustainable institutional support for NGOs. The civil society space in Lithuania is considered to be open, and although the work of civil society organisations was impacted by the COVID-19-related emergency measures applied in the country, the Lithuanian authorities provided financial support, which allowed NGOs to pursue their activities. This was the first time such subsidy measures were implemented for NGOs, as previously such measures were only available to businesses. Several initiatives to improve legal education are being developed. To foster the knowledge of constitutional rights, the Ministry of Justice organises a yearly general campaign for the assessment of legal knowledge, open to all citizens without a legal academic background. In 2020, the content of the examination tested the knowledge of the Constitution, based on practical situations. Additionally, a mobile application-game, “I know my rights”, was launched in October 2020, which aims at fostering knowledge on legal topics, including activities of notaries and bailiffs, criminal and administrative liability, and the Constitution. The Government also intends to integrate legal education and anti-corruption education in general education programmes. Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* * The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2021 Rule of Law report can be found at https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/upholding-rule-law/rule-law/rule-law-mechanism/2021-rule-law-report-targeted-stakeholder-consultation . Civicus (2021), Monitor tracking civic space – Lithuania ( CIVICUS - Tracking conditions for citizen action ). COEC 2020 annual report. ( https://vtek.lt/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Ataskaita_2020_internetui.pdf ) Constitutional Court of Lithuania, Statement of 16 June 2020 ( Statement by the Constitutional Court - Constitutional Court of The Republic of Lithuania (lrkt.lt) ) Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (2018), Recommendations on legal aid, para. III.1; Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the efficiency and the effectiveness of legal aid schemes in the areas of civil and administrative law. Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (2021), Contribution from the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) for the 2021 Rule of Law Report. Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2010), Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities ( https://rm.coe.int/cmrec-2010-12-on-independence-efficiency-responsibilites-of-judges/16809f007d ). Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2013), Opinion on the Draft Amendments to three Constitutional Provisions relating to the Constitutional Court, the Supreme State Prosecutor and the Judicial Council of Montenegro endorsed by the Venice Commission at its 96th Plenary Session (CDL-AD(2013)028). Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2014), Opinion on the Draft Law on the Constitutional Court of Montenegro, adopted by the Venice Commission at its 100th Plenary Session (CDL-AD(2014)033).

Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2021), Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the efficiency and the effectiveness of legal aid schemes in the areas of civil and administrative law. European Commission (2019), Flash Eurobarometer 482: Businesses' attitudes towards corruption in the EU. European Commission (2020), 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Lithuania ( lt_rol_country_chapter.pdf (europa.eu) ). European Commission (2020), Special Eurobarometer 502: Corruption. European Commission (2021), EU Justice Scoreboard. European Network of Councils for the Judiciary (2021), Contribution from the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary for the 2021 Rule of Law Report. European Research Council (2021), press release of 13 January 2021. Lithuanian Government (2015), Lithuania National Anti-Corruption Program 2015-2025 ( https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/lt/legalAct ). Lithuanian Government (2020), Programme of the eighteenth Government of the Republic of Lithuania. Lithuanian Government (2021), Input from Lithuania for the 2021 Rule of Law Report. Mapping Media Freedom (2021), Lithuania county profile ( https://www.mappingmediafreedom.org/country-profiles/lithuania/ ). Media Pluralism Monitor (2021), Report on Lithuania. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) (2021), World Press Freedom Index report on Lithuania. STT (2020), Booklet on transparency ( https://www.stt.lt/naujienos/7464 ). STT (2020), Progress report of National Anti-corruption Program 2015-2025 ( https://www.stt.lt/doclib/iwlpfjmqm2krucnq2u28zyguhkhv7ddy ). STT contribution to the Law on lobbying ( https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/en/TAK/ ) Transparency International (2021), Corruption Perceptions Index 2020. Transparency International (2020), Exporting corruption. Progress report 2020: Assessing enforcement of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention ( 2020_Report-Full_Exporting-Corruption_EN.pdf (transparencycdn.org) ) Annex II: Country visit to Lithuania

The Commission services held virtual meetings in March and April 2021 with: ·Bar Association ·COEC ·Constitutional Court ·Freedom House ·Judicial Council ·Lithuanian Journalists Union ·Media Authority – Radio and Television Commission of Lithuania ·Ministry of Foreign Affairs ·Ministry of Justice ·National Courts Administration ·National NGO Coalition ·Office of the Prosecutor General ·Public Information Ethics Association ·Public Procurement Service ·Office of the Seimas Ombudspersons ·Special Investigation Service ·Supreme Court ·Transparency International Lithuania

* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings: ·Amnesty International ·Center for Reproductive Rights ·CIVICUS ·Civil Liberties Union for Europe ·Civil Society Europe ·Conference of European Churches ·EuroCommerce ·European Center for Not-for-Profit Law ·European Centre for Press and Media Freedom ·European Civic Forum ·European Federation of Journalists ·European Partnership for Democracy ·European Youth Forum ·Front Line Defenders ·Human Rights House Foundation ·Human Rights Watch ·ILGA-Europe ·International Commission of Jurists ·International Federation for Human Rights