The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania

Case No. 28/07-29/07

THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA

RULING

ON THE COMPLIANCE OF PARAGRAPH 4 (WORDING OF 22 APRIL 2003), PARAGRAPH 5 (WORDING OF 30 JUNE 2005) OF ARTICLE 47 (WORDING OF 18 JULY 2006), ARTICLE 57 (WORDING OF 18 JULY 2006), PARAGRAPH 3 (WORDING OF 22 APRIL 2003), PARAGRAPH 4 (WORDING OF 30 JUNE 2005) OF ARTICLE 58 (WORDING OF 30 JUNE 2005), PARAGRAPH 1 (WORDING OF 22 APRIL 2003) OF ARTICLE 60, AND PARAGRAPH 1 (WORDING OF 22 APRIL 2003) OF ARTICLE 61 OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA’S LAW ON HIGHER EDUCATION WITH THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA, AS WELL AS ON THE DISMISSING OF THE PART OF THE CASE SUBSEQUENT TO THE PETITION OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA, THE PETITIONER, WHICH WAS SET FORTH IN HIS DECREE (NO. 1K-1138) “ON APPLYING TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA” OF 22 OCTOBER 2007, REQUESTING AN INVESTIGATION INTO WHETHER ITEMS 3 AND 14 OF THE METHODS OF ESTABLISHING THE NEEDS OF FUNDS FROM THE STATE BUDGET OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA AND ASSIGNING THEM TO INSTITUTIONS OF SCIENCE AND STUDIES AS APPROVED BY THE RESOLUTION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA (NO. 1272) “ON APPROVING THE METHODS OF ESTABLISHING THE NEEDS OF FUNDS FROM THE STATE BUDGET OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA AND ASSIGNING THEM TO INSTITUTIONS OF SCIENCE AND STUDIES” OF 11 OCTOBER 2004 (WORDING OF 5 OCTOBER 2006) ARE NOT IN CONFLICT WITH PARAGRAPH 3 OF ARTICLE 40 AND PARAGRAPH 3 OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA

20 March 2008

Vilnius

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, composed of the Justices of the Constitutional Court: Armanas Abramavičius, Toma Birmontienė, Egidijus Kūris, Kęstutis Lapinskas, Zenonas Namavičius, Ramutė Ruškytė, Vytautas Sinkevičius, Stasys Stačiokas, and Romualdas Kęstutis Urbaitis

The court reporter—Daiva Pitrėnaitė

Aušra Rauličkytė and Milda Vainiutė, advisors to the President of the Republic, acting as the representatives of the President of the Republic of Lithuania, a petitioner, representing the President of the Republic of Lithuania in the part of the case subsequent to petition No. 1B-36/2007 submitted by the said petitioner

Seimas member Gintaras Steponavičius, acting as the representative of a group of members of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, a petitioner, representing this group in the part of the case subsequent to petition No. 1B-37/2007 submitted by the said petitioner

Tomas Daukantas, Head of the Legal Division of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Lithuania, acting as the representative of the Government of the Republic of Lithuania, a party concerned, representing the Government of the Republic of Lithuania in the part of the case subsequent to petition No. 1B-36/2007 submitted by the President of the Republic of Lithuania

Vydas Gedvilas, Deputy Speaker of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, acting as the representative of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, a party concerned, representing the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania in the part of the case subsequent to petition No. 1B-37/2007 submitted by a group of members of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, a petitioner in the case at issue

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, pursuant to Articles 102 and 105 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and Article 1 of the Law on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, in its public hearing, on 15 March 2008, considered case No. 28/07-29/07 subsequent to the following:

1) the petition of the President of the Republic of Lithuania, a petitioner, which was set forth in his Decree (No. 1K-1138) “On Applying to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania” of 22 October 2007, requesting an investigation into whether Items 3 and 14 of the Methods of Establishing the Needs of Funds from the State Budget of the Republic of Lithuania and Assigning Them to Institutions of Science and Studies as approved by the Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Lithuania (No. 1272) “On Approving the Methods of Establishing the Needs of Funds from the State Budget of the Republic of Lithuania and Assigning Them to Institutions of Science and Studies” of 11 October 2004 (wording of 5 October 2006) are not in conflict with Paragraph 3 of Article 40 and Paragraph 3 of Article 41 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania (petition No. 1B-36/2007);

2) the petition of a group of members of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, consisting of Gintaras Steponavičius, Petras Auštrevičius, Kęstutis Glaveckas, Eligijus Masiulis, Vytautas Grubliauskas, Dalia Teišerskytė, Algis Kašėta, Audrius Endzinas, Raimundas Palaitis, Jonas Čekuolis, Algirdas Monkevičius, Vaclovas Karbauskis, Nijolė Steiblienė, Alvydas Sadeckas, Henrikas Žukauskas, Vaclavas Stankevičius, Algis Čaplikas, Andrius Kubilius, Jurgis Razma, Vilija Aleknaitė Abramikienė, Vincė Vaidevutė Margevičienė, Vida Marija Čigriejienė, Rasa Juknevičienė, Julius Dautartas, Audronius Ažubalis, Egidijus Vareikis, Saulius Pečeliūnas, Edmundas Pupinis, Donatas Jankauskas, and Rimantas Dagys, a petitioner, requesting an investigation into whether Paragraph 4 of Article 47 and Paragraph 4 of Article 58 of the Republic of Lithuania’s Law on Higher Education are not in conflict with Paragraph 3 of Article 40, Paragraph 3 of Article 41, and Paragraph 5 of Article 46 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania; whether Paragraph 5 of Article 47 and Paragraph 1 of Article 61 of the Republic of Lithuania’s Law on Higher Education are not in conflict with Paragraph 1 of Article 29, Paragraph 3 of Article 40, Paragraph 3 of Article 41, and Paragraph 5 of Article 46 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania; whether the Republic of Lithuania’s Law on Higher Education, inter alia, Article 57 of this law, to the extent that, according to the petitioner, it does not establish the principles of distribution of funds of the State Budget among schools of higher education, while the establishment of these principles is commissioned to the Government of the Republic of Lithuania, is not in conflict with Paragraph 3 of Article 40 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and the constitutional principles of a state under the rule of law and the separation of powers; whether Paragraphs 3, 4, and 6 of Article 58 of the Republic of Lithuania’s Law on Higher Education are not in conflict with Paragraph 1 of Article 29 and Paragraph 4 of Article 46 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania (petition No. 1B-37/2007).

By the Constitutional Court’s Decision “On Joining Petitions into One Case” of 14 November 2007, petition No. 1B-36/2007 submitted by the President of the Republic, a petitioner (case No. 28/07) and petition No. 1B-37/2007 submitted by a group of members of the Seimas, a petitioner (case No. 29/07) were joined into one case and it was given reference No. 28/07-29/07.

The Constitutional Court

has established:

1. On 22 October 2007, the President of the Republic, a petitioner, issued the Decree (No. 1K-1138) “On Applying to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania” (hereinafter also referred to as the 22 October 2007 decree (No. 1K-1138) of the President of the Republic), in which a petition is set forth, requesting the Constitutional Court to investigate whether Items 3 and 14 of the Methods of Establishing the Needs of Funds from the State Budget of the Republic of Lithuania and Assigning Them to Institutions of Science and Studies (hereinafter referred to as the Methods) as approved by the Government Resolution (No. 1272) “On Approving the Methods of Establishing the Needs of Funds from the State Budget of the Republic of Lithuania and Assigning Them to Institutions of Science and Studies” of 11 October 2004 (wording of 5 October 2006; hereinafter also referred to as government resolution No. 1272 of 11 October 2004) are not in conflict with Paragraph 3 of Article 40 and Paragraph 3 of Article 41 of the Constitution. This petition of the petition was received at the Constitutional Court on 22 October 2007. By its Decision “On accepting the petition of a petitioner” of 23 October 2007, the Constitutional Court accepted this petition of the President of the Republic, a petitioner. The announcement of the President of the Constitutional Court about the acceptance of the petition of the President of the Republic, a petitioner, was officially published in the official gazette “Valstybės žinios” on 25 October 2007. Under Paragraph 4 of Article 106 of the Constitution, and Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Law on the Constitutional Court, the validity of Items 3 and 14 of the Methods as approved by government resolution No. 1272 of 11 October 2004 (wording of 5 October 2006) is suspended until the ruling of the Constitutional Court concerning this case is published.

2. A group of members of the Seimas, a petitioner, applied to the Constitutional Court with a petition requesting an investigation into whether: Paragraph 4 of Article 47 and Paragraph 4 of Article 58 of the Law on Higher Education (hereinafter also referred to as the Law) are not in conflict with Paragraph 3 of Article 40, Paragraph 3 of Article 41, and Paragraph 5 of Article 46 of the Constitution; whether Paragraph 5 of Article 47 and Paragraph 1 of Article 61 of the Law on Higher Education are not in conflict with Paragraph 1 of Article 29, Paragraph 3 of Article 40, Paragraph 3 of Article 41, and Paragraph 5 of Article 46 of the Constitution; whether the Law on Higher Education, inter alia, Article 57 of this law, to the extent that, according to the petitioner, it does not establish the principles of distribution of funds of the State Budget among schools of higher education, while the establishment of these principles is commissioned to the Government, is not in conflict with Paragraph 3 of Article 40 of the Constitution and the constitutional principles of a state under the rule of law and the separation of powers; whether Paragraphs 3, 4, and 6 of Article 58 of the Law on Higher Education are not in conflict with Paragraph 1 of Article 29 and Paragraph 4 of Article 46 of the Constitution. This petition of the group of Seimas members, a petitioner, was received at the Constitutional Court on 5 November 2007.

1. The petition of the President of the Republic, a petitioner, is substantiated by the following arguments.

1.1. The provision of the Constitution which consolidates the right of the citizens who are good at their studies to acquire higher education free of charge obligates the state to establish clear criteria and a procedure, according to which the necessary funds would be allocated in order that the citizens who are good at their studies would acquire higher education, also to guarantee that one allocates funds as much as it is “realistically necessary” in order to acquire higher education. Since, as it is maintained by the President of the Republic, a petitioner, it is the Government that establishes the number of students who are financed, either fully or in part, by the funds of the State Budget, while the funds allocated to institutions of studies are computed on the grounds of the price of studies of one student, then, in the opinion of the petitioner, the State Budget should provide for precisely the amount of the funds that are necessary for the payment for the studies of students who are financed, either fully or in part, by the funds of the State Budget and whose admittance number is established by the Government. However, Item 14 of the Methods does not consolidate such a requirement, however, it entrenches the principle whereby funds of the State Budget are distributed among schools of higher education in proportion to the need for the funds, which is computed by means of the Methods; due to this, less funds could be allocated to institutions of studies from the State Budget than it is necessary in order to pay for the studies of the number (which is established by the Government) of the students who are financed, either fully or in part, by the funds of the State Budget. In the opinion of the petitioner, such legal regulation violates the constitutional right of the citizens, who are good at their studies, to acquire higher education free of charge, which is consolidated in Paragraph 3 of Article 41 of the Constitution; also, the constitutional duty of the state to allocate state schools of higher education as much funds as it is necessary in order to guarantee higher education to the citizens, who are good at their studies, free of charge, is not discharged; in the opinion of the petitioner, upon establishment of such legal regulation, the autonomy of schools of higher education entrenched in Paragraph 3 of Article 40 of the Constitution is violated.

1.2. According to the President of the Republic of Lithuania, the petitioner, the criteria of computation of the funds allocated for studies, which are established in Item 3 of the Methods, are not enough that in the course of computation of the funds allocated to individual institutions of studies it would be possible to take account of the fact how the corresponding institutions of studies secure the adherence to established standards of teaching, and of the fact how the content and level of education and teaching therein conform to the qualification recognised by the state; the established criteria do not permit the differentiation, according to the level of quality of studies, of the amount of funds necessary to finance the programmes executed by institutions of studies, and this virtually distorts the right (which is entrenched in the Constitution) of the citizens who are good at their studies to acquire higher education, and violates the right of autonomy of schools of higher education.