19/15 Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review - Lithuania

GE.11-17485

Human Rights Council Nineteenth session

Agenda item 6 Universal Periodic Review

Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review*

Lithuania

* The annex to the present report is circulated as received.

Contents Paragraphs Page

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1–4 3

I. Summary of the proceedings of the review process ................................................ 5–87 3

A. Presentation by the State under review ........................................................... 5–19 3

B. Interactive dialogue and responses by the State under review ........................ 20–87 5

II. Conclusions and/or recommendations ..................................................................... 88–93 14

Annex

Composition of the delegation ......................................................................................................... 22

Introduction

1. The Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), established in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 5/1 of 18 June 2007, held its twelfth session from 3 to 14 October 2011. The review of Lithuania was held at the 13th meeting on 11 October 2011. The delegation of Lithuania was headed by Remigijus Šimašius,

Minister of Justice. At its 18th meeting, held on 14th October 2011, the Working Group adopted the report on Lithuania.

2. On 20 June 2011, the Human Rights Council selected the following group of rapporteurs (troika) to facilitate the review of Lithuania: Congo, Norway and Qatar.

3. In accordance with paragraph 15 of the annex to resolution 5/1, the following documents were issued for the review of Lithuania:

(a) A national report submitted/written presentation made in accordance with paragraph 15 (a) (A/HRC/WG.6/12/LTU/1);

(b) A compilation prepared by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in accordance with paragraph 15 (b) (A/HRC/WG.6/12/LTU/2);

(c) A summary prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (c) (A/HRC/WG.6/12/LTU/3).

4. A list of questions prepared in advance by Belarus, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland was transmitted to Lithuania through the troika. These questions are available on the extranet of the UPR.

I. Summary of the proceedings of the review process

A. Presentation by the State under review

5. The head of the delegation of Lithuania, Remigijus Šimašius, Minister of Justice, stated that Lithuania regarded the universal periodic review process as requiring involvement of both political personalities and experts. At all stages of the review, Lithuania see the need for political will to take the necessary decisions, and the need for expertise to find the best specific ways and means to produce the desired result. The national report of Lithuania was drawn up by a commission set up by the Minister of Justice, including representatives from the Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Social Security and Labour, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Education and Science, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of the Interior. The draft report was then discussed and approved at a Government meeting.

6. In the drafting process, consultations with institutions engaged in the protection of human rights were held, account was taken of the information prepared by NGOs and submitted to the United Nations, as well as of feedback from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) regarding the currently prepared Lithuanian reports on the implementation of international human rights treaties. Furthermore, the draft report was posted on the information system for draft legislation of the Parliament and on the website of the Ministry of Justice.

7. The delegation of Lithuania thanked with appreciation Belarus, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom of Great

Britain and Northern Ireland for their questions submitted prior to the review. It also thanked OHCHR and NGOs for their substantial inputs.

8. Lithuania highly valued its cooperation with the United Nations human rights bodies and procedures: recommendations provided by treaty bodies prove to be extremely useful in assessing laws and policies, so that actions can be taken to improve them. Cooperation with United Nations bodies is also important as a good practice sharing opportunity.

9. Lithuania made a very rapid transition from neglect to respect of human rights. It has reached substantial results in many areas of guaranteeing human rights and is ready to share its experience. More specifically, the Republic of Lithuania regained its independence in 1990 and was immediately confronted with the task of modernizing its legal system, ensuring a smooth transition to a democratic regime based on the respect for human rights and freedoms. In fact, in creating the system for the protection of human rights, Lithuania in 1990 had to start from scratch, especially in the field of civil and political rights as it could not build upon an earlier tradition for the protection of human rights. New institutions had to be established, new substantive and procedural laws had to be adopted, and professionals had to be trained in order to introduce a functioning human rights protection system and a human rights culture in Lithuania.

10. Assumption and implementation of obligations under international human rights documents was an important component in this process. It was stated in the Act on the Re- establishment of the State of Lithuania of 11 March 1990 that the State guaranteed human and civil rights as well as rights of ethnic minorities. Even before its official recognition by the majority of States, in early 1991 Lithuania adopted a resolution to solemnly undertake obligations under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and to accede to both the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural, Rights and to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

11. Lithuania has a strong institutional structure to ensure implementation of human rights standards. While at the Government level all ministries are responsible for the protection of human rights in their respective competence areas, there are three Ombudspersons’ institutions - one of general competence, one for equal opportunities and one for children’s rights - entrusted with the task of protection of human rights both in reaction to received complaints and proactively.

12. Lithuania’s achievements in the field of gender equality were acknowledged by the European Union when Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania, was chosen to be the seat of the European Institute for Gender Equality. In Lithuania, women hold two of the three top- ranking public administration posts, i.e. the President of the Republic and the Chairperson of the Parliament. Women account for 40 per cent of all managerial staff: legislators, senior public officials, and heads of establishments, institutions and other organizations.

13. In 2010, Lithuania was ranked eleventh in the world in the Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters without Borders and classified as a free country in terms of the press freedom by Freedom House.

14. Admittedly, Lithuania faced challenges too. The recent global economic crisis had been one of such challenges: temporary reduction of salaries in the public sector as well as revision of certain benefits made it possible to keep the social protection at appropriate level and provide social assistance at least for the most vulnerable groups of the population.

15. Another challenge was to continuously improve the system for the protection of human rights, benefiting from the best practices of the international community, in particular in developing the principles applicable to national human rights institutions. In view of the recommendations of international human rights institutions to reinforce the

domestic institutional framework, Lithuania had decided to optimize the activities of existing institutions and to preserve the advantages of the existing system.

16. Lithuania had chosen a combined approach where human rights were not an isolated issue but they were seen as an issue to be dealt with in the work of every Ministry, integrated into all its policies, and constantly assessed against the yardstick of Lithuania’s international commitments.

17. Trying to ensure better coordination while not diminishing the role of specialized bodies in the protection of human rights, it has been proposed to set up a coordinating Human Rights Council of Lithuania as part of the Ombudspersons’ institution to perform

systematic monitoring of human rights and implementation of relevant recommendations, and to examine human rights issues. This initiative had already been discussed by the Parliamentary Human Rights Committee at a hearing on 8 June 2011, and at a round-table discussion with international experts hosted by the President of the Republic on 12 July

2011. On 21 September 2011 the Board of the Parliament set up a working group, chaired by the chairman of the Parliamentary Human Rights Committee and composed of representatives from the Parliament, NGOs, academia as well as the Government, to draft the necessary legal acts to ensure compliance of the Parliamentary Ombudspersons’ Institution with the Paris Principles, by 30 March, 2012.

18. Human rights formed an important part of activities of other organizations of which Lithuania was a member. Within the European Union, it participated in developing human rights protection and promotion procedures. Membership of the Council of Europe gave Lithuania access to comprehensive legal framework and elaborate complaint examination system of the European Court of Human Rights. In 2011, Lithuania chaired the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which had strong human dimension activities. Participation in all of these structures created additional possibilities for advancement of human rights nationally, as well as internationally.

19. Lithuania stressed the importance of the universal periodic review maintaining its momentum and countries participating in it actively. Lithuania also expressed great hopes for subsequent cycles of the review, which are to focus both on the implementation of previous recommendations and on new issues that will arise.

B. Interactive dialogue and responses by the State under review

20. During the interactive dialogue, 39 delegations made statements. Recommendations made during the dialogue are to be found in section II of the present report.

21. The Russian Federation noted that Lithuania had undertaken measures to protect human rights, in particular through the adoption of the law on equal opportunities, the amendments to the criminal code and the establishment of a special department at the Prosecutor General Office to fight manifestations of racism. However, Russia considered that the work done so far was obviously not sufficient: in Lithuania there were still many stateless persons, a law rate of naturalization, discrimination on the basis of language and nationality, manifestations of xenophobia, racism and attempts to falsify history. Russia made recommendations.

22. France asked whether there were obstacles preventing Lithuania from ratifying the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and noted that Lithuania did not sign the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. France noted that the United Nations compilation referred to the persistence of xenophobic and racist behaviors and acts. France asked which measures had been taken to avoid committal of persons with mental disabilities. France made recommendations.

23. Canada commended Lithuania for its leadership in promoting human rights. Canada noted Lithuania’s willingness to give refuge to international human rights defenders and

activists. It was pleased that Lithuania passed its first comprehensive law on domestic violence. Noting that Lithuania’s legal system was equipped to deal with anti-Semitic individual acts, Canada was concerned at the persistence of this form of intolerance. Canada encouraged Lithuania to promote and enforce human rights safeguards. Canada made recommendations.

24. China commended Lithuania for its success promoting gender equality, combating human rights trafficking and protecting the right of the child. China noted the progress and efforts made by Lithuania in promoting national minorities’ rights and in encouraging national integration. Noting that Lithuania had approved the anti-discrimination programme 2009-2011 aiming to reduce intolerance in society, China asked for more information in this regard. China made a recommendation.

25. Norway appreciated Lithuania’s efforts to enhance the protection of human rights. However, Norway was concerned at the negative attitudes in the population towards minorities, in particular sexual minorities. Norway was pleased that Lithuania expanded the mandate of the Ombudsperson beyond gender equality, but it was concerned at the leverage of human rights institutions. Recognizing Lithuania’s efforts to combat domestic violence,

Norway noted that it is a problem of significance. Norway made recommendations.

26. The Republic of Moldova welcomed Lithuania’s commitment to reinforce human rights education. Moldova applauded Lithuania for optimizing the activities of its mechanisms for the protection of human rights, including the establishment of a coordinating human rights council as part of the Ombudsman institution to perform systematic monitoring of human rights and implementation of relevant recommendations. It acknowledged Lithuania’s efforts to promote gender equality and to combat domestic

violence. The Republic of Moldova made recommendations.

27. Sweden welcomed the opportunity to continue the dialogue with Lithuania. Considering some reports of crimes committed towards lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) persons, Sweden asked Lithuania what measures will take to strengthen their rights and how the law could be refined to avoid discrimination against LGBT persons. Sweden inquired for Lithuania’s plan to improve human rights situation in

prisons as well as Lithuania’s plan to present a new and solid programme for the integration of Roma community. Sweden made recommendations.

28. Ireland commended Lithuania for the adoption of the Law on Protection from Domestic Violence and asked if the law provided also for awareness training in the area of victim abuse for use by public servants such as the police, prosecutors and judges. Ireland welcomed the establishment of a working group aiming to create a human rights council. Ireland inquired about the current situation in Lithuania of children in institution-based care. Ireland made recommendations.

29. Algeria commended Lithuania for the broad consultations held for the elaboration of the national report and for the ratification of the majority of the core international human rights instruments. Algeria took positive note of efforts undertaken to enhance the institutional framework for the protection of human rights. Algeria noted the gender inequality in the labour market and in the participation in public life; the inadequate living conditions in prisons; and human trafficking among the challenges faced by Lithuania. Algeria made recommendations.

30. Belarus noted Lithuania’s commitment in the area of human rights. Noting concerns signalled by treaty bodies, Belarus asked Lithuania for measures to combat the trade in children, child prostitution and pornography. Belarus, recalling on recommendations made by special procedures and treaty bodies, asked about measures taken by Lithuania to

safeguard the rights of minorities. Belarus recalled recommendations made by the Committee against Torture and the Human Rights Committee to investigate alleged cases of torture and cruel treatment. Belarus made recommendations.

31. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland inquired about the implementation of the National Strategy for Combating Violence against Women and the extent of its success. It recalled Lithuania’s Copenhagen commitment to establish an

independent national human rights institution in accordance with the Paris Principles. The United Kingdom welcomed Lithuania’s ratification of the Convention on the Rights of

Persons with Disabilities and the action plan to implement the National Programme for Social Integration of Disabled Persons. The United Kingdom made recommendations.

32. The Islamic Republic of Iran expressed its concerns at discrimination against the Roma community as well as racist violence and hate speech against non-European minorities; at the fact that asylum-seekers cannot work irrespective of the time they stayed in Lithuania; and at allegations of excessive use of force by law enforcement officials against detainees. Iran made recommendations.

33. Belgium stated that new amendments to the Law on the Protection of Minors against the Detrimental Effect of Public Information made secret any information “disparaging family values” or referring to marriage other than between people of the opposite sex.

Belgium also noted that intolerance towards homosexuals increased over the past years due to discriminatory legislatives initiatives. Belgium made recommendations.

34. Regarding its family policy, Lithuania noted a recent ruling by the Constitutional Court which acknowledged partnership as another form of family and the current debate on how to better protect the rights of unmarried couples.

35. Replying to questions about the Law on the Protection of Minors against the Detrimental Effects of Public Information, Lithuania stressed that the law was adopted in order to implement the requirement of the Convention on the Rights of the Child that appropriate guidelines be developed for the protection of the child from information and material injurious to his or her well-being. As the original wording of the law evoked misgivings about its possible interpretation in a manner discriminatory against sexual minorities, the law was amended. Its current version did not classify information on homosexuality as detrimental to minors and actually protected sexual minorities by classifying as detrimental information which humiliates a person because of their sexual orientation.

36. To explain the attitude of the State towards sexual minorities, Lithuania stated that the Parliament rejected legislative initiatives which contained suggestions that it impose administrative sanctions for propagating homosexual relationships.

37. Lithuania mentioned the trend toward prosecuting hate crimes more intensively and gave the example of a recent case related to commentaries on the internet about sexual minorities.

38. Replying to a recommendation to treat racial motivation as an aggravating circumstance, Lithuania noted that its Criminal Code was already amended to this effect.

39. Replying to a recommendation to implement its new law regarding restitution of Jewish communal property, Lithuania stressed its determination to do so.

40. The delegation of Lithuania stated that the network of the educational institutions of national minorities in Lithuania is one of the biggest in the EU member States. In the 2010- 11 period, 136 general education schools with Polish and Russian as the main language of instruction were functioning in Lithuania.

41. The Lithuanian model could be regarded as a unique case in the European context, when national minorities are entitled to receive education in their mother tongue from the first grade through the twelfth grade. Pursuant to national legislation, all subjects except Lithuanian and other languages of national minorities are taught in educational institutions in the native language, which accounts for about 85 per cent of all learning time. At present, the model of education of national minorities has been reoriented towards a modern education model that meets the European Union standards, and seeks to provide equal opportunities for access to education at all levels for persons belonging to national minorities, including the introduction of a uniform Lithuanian State language examination standard to all educational institutions operating in Lithuania.

42. From this year onward, more classes of the Lithuanian language in Lithuanian schools for national minorities will be allocated to developing skills in the State language. Graduates of national minority schools who will take the examination on the Lithuanian language and literature during the transitional period will be entitled to various examination allowances and exemptions, such as longer duration of the examination, the possibility to use dictionaries and less strict assessment criteria.

43. Fostering tolerance through education is one of the priorities of Lithuania’s presidency of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in the human domain, therefore much attention was devoted to the Holocaust. Lithuania was among the first countries that introduced the commemoration day for victims of the genocide of the Jewish nation. In 1994, by the decision of the Parliament, September 23 (the liquidation of Vilnius ghetto in 1943) was declared the national Holocaust Remembrance Day

44. The Holocaust is part of the mandatory school history syllabus and has been integrated into the larger context of the history of the Second World War. The Holocaust is also included in such disciplines as ethics, religious and civic education, and literature. The development of education on the Holocaust has been significantly advanced by the Task Force for International Co-operation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research (ITF), with which Lithuania has cooperated since 2000.

45. The provisions of article 14 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania enshrine the Lithuanian language as the State language (using Lithuanian in public life is an absolute requirement, whereas in private life persons belonging to a national minority may use, whether orally or in writing, any language that they find acceptable). The legal regulation of Lithuania guarantees that persons who have no command of the State language have the right and the opportunity to use interpreting services in legal proceedings and in administrative proceedings, regulatory offence proceedings as well as criminal and civil proceedings.

46. The existing laws of the Republic of Lithuania do not provide the opportunity to use the language of a national minority alongside the official State language in official names of traditional places. A Working Group, including officials and national minority representatives prepared a draft Concept of the law on national minorities. It laid down the provisions which envisaged legal establishment of the option in residential areas inhabited by substantial numbers of persons belonging to national minorities to use bilingual topographical signs. It also provided for them as to apply to territorial entities of public and municipal administration in the language of the national minority if the person belonging to a national minority so requested.

47. According to the population census, approximately 2,500 persons living in Lithuania belonged to the Roma national minority. More than a half of the Roma in Lithuania did not face acute social and other problems. These Roma lived scattered throughout the territory and successfully led their cultural, economic, educational and professional life. Meanwhile,

there were several places (in Vilnius, Panevėžys, and others) where Roma frequently experienced challenges, in particular addressing social issues.

48. Lithuania implemented two programmes on Roma, at State and municipal levels. The national Programme for the Integration of Roma into Lithuanian Society for 2008-2010 had three basic goals: (a) to ensure full integration of persons belonging to the Roma national minority into Lithuanian society and to reduce their social exclusion; (b) to promote public tolerance and trust in the Roma national minority, and (c) to improve their living conditions in those areas where Roma live in substantial numbers. The Ministry of Culture, in consultation with other institutions as well as representatives of the Roma national minority, was drafting the Action Plan for the Integration of Roma into Lithuanian Society for 2013–2015.

49. Denmark expressed concerns at Lithuania’s homophobic legislation and recent proposals in the Parliament undermining the rights of sexual minorities. It referred to Amnesty International’s recommendations in this regard. It raised the issue of prison conditions, in particular overcrowded cells and misbehaviour among prison personnel. It mentioned in particular the conditions in Lukiškės Prison, which were condemned by the European Court on Human Rights and the Lithuanian Ombudsman. Denmark made recommendations.

50. While welcoming the strengthening of the 2005 Law on Equal Opportunities, Germany echoed information related to the increase of racist violence and hate speech against non-European minorities and asked for more information on measures taken to address this issue and about remedies available to victims of intolerance. While noting efforts undertaken to address prison overcrowding, Germany asked how Lithuania intended to bring custody conditions to an acceptable level. While referring to reports on prolonged pretrial and administrative detention, Germany asked how Lithuania intended to remedy this practice.

51. Switzerland congratulated Lithuania for its open and constructive attitude in multilateral bodies. Switzerland noted that racism should be combated with determination. Switzerland expressed concerns at the Law on the Protection of Minors against the Detrimental Effect of Public Information and at new amendments, which are discriminatory against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. Switzerland referred to national investigations about the existence of secret detention centres in association with the Central Intelligence Agency. Switzerland made recommendations.

52. Australia commended the Government for the adoption of a National Anti- discrimination Programme for 2009-2011. It welcomed Lithuania’s efforts to address poor conditions in prisons and detention centres but expressed concern at reports of physical mistreatment, overcrowding and unhygienic conditions as well as the length of pretrial detention. It also expressed concern at the low living standards and social exclusion of Roma as well as the poor funding of programmes aimed at integrating them. Australia made recommendations.

53. Estonia noted the significant progress made by Lithuania in protecting human rights since it recovered its independence and noted with appreciation that it ratified core human rights instruments and fully cooperated with special procedures. Estonia commended Lithuania’s significant achievements in ensuring the rights of persons belonging to national minorities and in encouraging their active participation in all areas of society. Estonia also commended Lithuania for its achievements in gender equality and its efforts to combat violence against women. Estonia commended Lithuania’s measures to promote the social

integration of persons with disabilities.

54. Slovenia inquired about Lithuania’s intentions regarding the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or

Degrading Treatment or Punishment. It asked about the measures taken to address the concerns and recommendations regarding the rights of people with disabilities as expressed by the Committee on the Rights of the Child and the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Slovenia made recommendations.

55. Hungary congratulated Lithuania on assuming the presidency of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Hungary recalled the importance of protecting national minorities. Hungary noted with satisfaction Lithuania’s priority to combat human

trafficking and asked about measures taken for the rehabilitation of victims. Hungary was pleased with the existence of various independent institutions such as the Equal Opportunity Ombudsperson’s Office or the Children’s Ombudsperson and welcomed

Lithuania’s efforts to align their legislative framework with the Paris Principles. Hungary made a recommendation.

56. Turkey praised Lithuania for its efforts in improving the national human rights situation, in particular regarding gender equality, welfare of children and disabled persons, minority rights, fight against human trafficking and the improvement of prison conditions. It noted the absence of an International Coordinating Committee (ICC)-accredited national human rights institution, although several institutions assumed a similar role. Turkey welcomed the establishment of programmes on equal opportunities for women and men. Turkey made a recommendation.

57. Argentina commended Lithuania for its continuous cooperation with the special procedures of the Human Rights Council in order to examine the human rights situation in the country. Argentina made recommendations.

58. Poland commended Lithuania for its human rights achievements since it recovered its independence. Poland underlined that Lithuania repealed its Law on National Minorities in 2010, which resulted in regular use by administration and courts of the ban on the use of local names in official and minority languages. Poland also underlined that Lithuanian law stipulated that any spelling occurring in public domain shall use exclusively Lithuanian letters, including for documents issued for members of national minorities. Poland made recommendations.

59. Brazil noted the establishment of the various Ombudsmen and recognized the positive role they played in promoting cooperation with special procedures. It commended Lithuania for the measures taken on gender equality but noted persistent challenges such as the wage gap between men and women. Brazil acknowledged the programmes aimed at social integration of ethnic minorities but expressed concerns at acts of discrimination. It noted Lithuania’s engagement in investigating the human rights implications of counter- terrorism measures. Brazil made recommendations.

60. Spain recognized the legal steps taken to ensure more equity in Lithuania through the 2005 Law on Equal Treatment and noted its positive cooperation with special procedures. Spain noted the high rate of abortion among girls under 18 despite the Programme on Child Health 2008-2012 and asked whether it would not be necessary to establish specific programmes on reproductive and sexual education addressed to adolescents, in particular in rural areas. Spain made recommendations.

61. Finland welcomed Lithuania’s commitment to human rights and appreciated its openness regarding its remaining challenges in the area of human rights. Finland echoed concerns by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women on the limited access of girls and women to family planning. Finland made recommendations.

62. Replying to some of the issues raised by the participants in the interactive dialogue, the delegation of Lithuania stated that Poland was expressing opinions but not facts regarding the language requirements of topographic indications.

63. Concerning protection against domestic violence, Lithuania noted that a new law was recently adopted, its implementation had just started and it was too early to evaluate its impact. Nonetheless the Government was ready to make further efforts in this connection.

64. On juvenile justice, Lithuania stated that new measures had been adopted, in particular on police functions and actions. Police officers were specifically trained to deal with juveniles and facilities had been created to hold them appropriately in police stations. The Government adopted the National Programme on the Protection of Children from Violence and for Assistance to Children.

65. While the number of crimes against children remained worrying, the number of grave violent crimes was decreasing in Lithuania. More financial investments were needed for the prison system, which needed to be modernized through the building of new infrastructure. Decisions on improvements had been made with regard to police lock-ups.

66. A major change regards the decision of the pretrial judge on the legality of detention which was, until June 2007, final. This kind of decision could now be subject to an appeal filed with a superior court. Mentioning a recommendation made by Germany, Lithuania stated that the Ministry of Justice submitted a draft law to the Parliament on alternative sentences.

67. On secret detention, Lithuania underlined that it was the first and so far the only country to have initiated and carried out thorough Parliamentary investigation concerning the alleged transportation and confinement of persons detained by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). It was established that certain conditions did exist for containing the detainees, however no legally proven evidence was found that this actually happened. In order to examine the issue further, the Prosecutor General’s Office carried out a criminal investigation of the facts at their disposal. These facts did not indicate a need for further actions. In the event that new facts and circumstances became available, they would receive thorough investigation. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe welcomed the Parliamentary inquiry conducted in Lithuania. The Minister of Justice, in a recent meeting with Amnesty International was apprised of details of secret detentions previously unknown to the Government. The Prosecutor General’s Office was informed of these facts and investigation had already been started. Lithuania was open to international cooperation in this regard and highly valued advice from international organizations.

68. Chile commended Lithuania for its efforts in protecting human rights, in particular through the ratification of various international human rights instruments, its cooperation with the special procedures and its engagement in gender-equality initiatives. Chile noted that Lithuania guaranteed equality to its minorities in the enjoyment of their political, economic, social and cultural rights and that it recognized their national identity and cultural continuity. Chile made recommendations.

69. The Netherlands noted that Lithuania was part of most human rights instruments and closely cooperated with treaty bodies and special procedures. While acknowledging the general legal framework for the promotion of human rights, the Netherlands expressed concerns at legislative initiatives affecting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender people. While acknowledging Lithuania’s efforts in minority integration, the Netherlands echoed information indicating that the Roma community still had fewer opportunities and had to deal with intolerance. The Netherlands made recommendations.

70. Latvia praised Lithuania for its commitment in promoting and protecting human rights, its cooperation with special procedures and highlighted that it was one of the first countries having issued a standing invitation to them. It noted with satisfaction that combating human trafficking was a priority for the Government and stressed its efforts in organizing an effective system for control and prevention of human trafficking embracing

educational, socio-economic, healthcare, legal, financial and other measures. Latvia made a recommendation.

71. Mexico noted the efforts made by Lithuania to promote and protect human rights and in particular the establishment of programmes to promote women’s rights, the

enactment of the Law on Education taking into account the needs and rights of minorities, the adoption of a programme on the prevention of human trafficking, the ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol as well as the programme for the prevention of violence against children. Mexico made recommendations.

72. The United States of America referred to the energetic and productive Lithuanian chairmanship of the Community of Democracies in 2009-2011. Lithuania co-founded with the United States a new working group on gender equality and women’s rights operating under Community auspices. In 2010, Lithuania also became the first Baltic nation to host a European agency, the European Institute for Gender Equality. The United States noted the adoption of the Law on Domestic Violence but indicated that much remained to be done. The United States of America made recommendations.

73. Slovakia welcomed the progress made by Lithuania in advancing its human rights record. It commended Lithuania for being party to most of the core international human rights instruments. It also praised Lithuania for its enactment of the 2005 Law on Equal Opportunities prohibiting direct or indirect discrimination on different grounds as well as the Programme on the Prevention and Control of Trafficking in Human Beings 2009-2012. Slovakia made recommendations.

74. Ukraine positively assessed Lithuania’s efforts regarding human rights protection and its openness with special procedures. Ukraine acknowledged the participation of the civil society in the elaboration of the national report and stated that the establishment of a national human rights institution in accordance with the Paris Principles would help Lithuania to address human rights issues. Ukraine encouraged Lithuania to take further measures to eliminate gender stereotyping and to reduce gender wage gap. Ukraine emphasized the importance of the three priorities of the Strategy for the Development of the National Minority Policy.

75. Romania welcomed the establishment of the Office of the Ombudsman for Equal Opportunities as well as the creation in 2009 of the first European Gender Equality Institute. It referred however to the concerns of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women regarding persistent discrimination against women. It praised Lithuania for all the initiatives taken in favour of promoting and protecting children’s rights but noted that corporal punishment was a tolerated practice, in particular within the family but also in schools and child-care institutions. Romania made recommendations.

76. Azerbaijan noted that Lithuania was party to core human rights instruments and welcomed its collaboration with special procedures. Azerbaijan noted that Lithuania did not have a national human rights institution accredited by the International Coordinating Committee. Azerbaijan noted the legal and institutional reforms undertaken to ensure gender equality, including the 2006 National Strategy for Combating Violence against Women. Azerbaijan echoed concerns raised by treaty bodies on excessive use of force by law enforcement officials. Azerbaijan made recommendations.

77. Congo noted that Lithuania established the separation of powers, ratified the main international human rights instruments and extended an open and standing invitation to special procedures. Congo welcomed progress made on equal opportunities between men and women, children’s rights, data protection and press ethics. Congo welcomed the fact that combating violence against women was among national priorities and encouraged

Lithuania to pursue its legislative reforms relating discrimination and all forms of intolerance.

78. Uruguay welcomed Lithuania’s efforts in combating discrimination but noted the persistence of xenophobic acts and practices of racial segregation, mainly against the Roma community. It recognized Lithuania’s efforts in bringing its policies in line with the Convention on the Rights of the Child but noted the discrimination against children from vulnerable families, children with disabilities, Roma children, refugee or asylum-seeking children and children living in rural areas. Uruguay made recommendations.

79. Afghanistan noted the continuous cooperation of Lithuania with special procedures, indicating its commitment towards the promotion and protection of human rights in the country. It welcomed the Law on Equal Opportunities, the National Strategy for Combating Violence against Women, the Law on the Protection from Domestic Violence as well as the establishment of the Ombudsman for children’s rights. Afghanistan made

recommendations.

80. Malaysia commended Lithuania for its inclusive approach towards the universal periodic review and noted the democratization and economic liberalization agenda on which Lithuania had embarked since it recovered its independence, with impressive gains in the field of human rights. Malaysia noted that Lithuania was affected by the recent global economic crises which negatively impacted on human rights but it was confident that Lithuania remained committed to continue human rights protection. Malaysia made recommendations.

81. The delegation of Lithuania stated that the protection of human rights was a complex process, where every achievement brought new challenges and dilemmas. Roughly 20 years ago Lithuania faced the challenge of creating an essentially new legal system, introducing human rights in all law and in daily life. Lithuania’s international partners agreed that it had managed to accomplish this first task.

82. Lithuania said that the comments and a recommendation made by the Russian Federation were based on not-so-well established facts. Lithuania recalled the three steps of its occupation from 1940 until its independence and that all occupying powers denied human rights. Lithuania would definitely prosecute all criminals who committed crimes against humanity under whatever ideology and asked the Russian Federation for more collaboration in finding those alleged criminals.

83. Lithuania underlined that a major conceptual challenge was to ensure that all human rights were protected and not only the most popular of them. For example, the Law on the Protection of Minors against the Detrimental Effect of Public Information was just one example of how to reconcile competing claims relating to the protection of human rights. Lithuania was open to critical remarks with regard to the choices it made to address difficult questions.

84. Lithuania stated that the implementation of human rights was primarily the task of specialized ministries. However, the possibilities for civil society to get involved in law and policy making significantly increased recently with the inclusion of the principle of transparency in the legislative process.

85. Overall, Lithuania thought that it would be a fair assessment to say that it achieved significant progress in ensuring human rights, notably in civil and political rights, which were adequately guaranteed.

86. On freedom of peaceful assembly, Lithuania indicated that it was guaranteed by law and the only restriction was related to the necessity of ensuring public safety. Lithuanian courts ensured that public safety was not used as a mean of unreasonable restriction of that freedom. Lithuania provided examples to back its statement, namely the 2010 Baltic gay

parade, which took place in Vilnius, and a protest action by trade unions which took place in front of the Parliament.

87. Lithuania thanked representatives of all States for their comments and recommendations and regretted that it could not answer to all questions due to time constraints.

II. Conclusions and/or recommendations**

88. The recommendations listed below enjoy the support of Lithuania:

88.1. Review criminal law to make it fully comply with relevant international and regional obligations and, in particular, guarantee the

protection of national, ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities (Switzerland);

88.2. Strengthen mechanism for the implementation of legislation in force including laws against discrimination and the manifestation of racism (Russia);

88.3. Continue to strengthen legislation aimed at the elimination of gender based violence (Afghanistan);

88.4. Refrain from adopting legislative measures which criminalise homosexual relations or breach the rights to freedom of expression and to non-

discrimination of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender people (Belgium);

88.5. Refrain from legislative initiatives which may criminalize homosexual relations between consenting adults (Slovenia);

88.6. Strengthen the domestic legal framework to punish racial segregation and step up all types of measures to prevent, prohibit and eliminate in its

territory all practices of this nature, in line with article 3 of the Convention on

the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (Uruguay);

88.7. Take appropriate steps to ensure the full application of existing legislation on combating racism and racial discrimination (Malaysia);

88.8. Strengthen its legislation, notably its criminal legislation, relating to the punishment of racist acts and take concrete and effective measures with a view

to combat all forms of discrimination and to prohibit as well as sanction in a

more severe manner such behaviours (France);

88.9. Ensure an increased normative and institutional control of law enforcement offices and security forces personnel with a view to avoid cases of

excessive use of force and ill treatment of detainees (Spain);

88.10. Reinforce the Ombudsman on Equal Opportunities, including through providing this office with adequate funding in order to ensure its compliance

with international standards in this regard (Algeria);

88.11. Strengthen the gender equality machinery with respect to human and financial resources (Azerbaijan);

88.12. Continue to strengthen measures to protect the rights of child victims (Iran);

** Conclusions and recommendations have not been edited.

88.13. Adopt more effective measures ensuring that all children throughout the Lithuanian territory enjoy all rights, without discrimination, in line with

article 2 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (Uruguay);

88.14. Undertake more effective measures to address the problems of sexual abuse and violence against women and girls (Afghanistan);

88.15. Promote cultural diversity and acceptance of multiculturalism (Iran);

88.16. Strengthen government policy aimed at ensuring inter-ethnic harmony and culture diversity (Belarus);

88.17. Develop even closer co-operation with civil society on human rights related issues (Norway);

88.18. Ensure that racist and xenophobic incidents are effectively prosecuted (Iran);

88.19. Establish, at the earliest, an action plan aimed at preventing racist assaults, so as to allow members of vulnerable groups to live in security and

dignity (Switzerland);

88.20. Further strengthen measures to prevent and combat discrimination and to investigate allegations of hate crimes (Brazil);

88.21. Intensify the fight against social stereotypes, which cultivate prejudices against national minorities (Russia);

88.22. Reject non-tolerant attitudes and consider a strategy on balanced and objective information to the population through the education system, attitude

campaigns and political statements (Norway);

88.23. Develop public awareness campaigns to combat manifestations of discrimination and racism, including xenophobia, homophobia , anti-Semitism,

and other forms of intolerance in order to further protect and strengthen the

rights of members of minority groups, including Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and

Transgender individuals and the Roma community (United States of America);

88.24. Consider/Study the possibility to take additional measures to combat discrimination against LGBT people (Argentina);

88.25. Take action in order to avoid discrimination of LGBT persons, in practice and through law (Sweden);

88.26. Carefully consider whether the right balance is struck when the main street of Vilnius is made available for annual marches by neo-Nazis on

Independence Day, whilst vulnerable groups like the LGBT society are refused

to use the same venue, and are referred to less attractive locations (Norway);

88.27. Take further steps to eliminate discrimination against people based on their sexual orientation or gender identity (Ireland);

88.28. Strengthen its efforts to eliminate persistence of patriarchal attitudes and stereotypes regarding the roles and the responsibilities of women and men

(Republic of Moldova);

88.29. Strengthen its efforts to eliminate gender stereotyping (Romania);

88.30. Strengthen its measures to ensure effective investigations into all allegations of torture and ill-treatment committed by law enforcement officials

(Azerbaijan);

88.31. Take all necessary measures to prevent and prosecute all forms of violence and harassment related to sexual orientation and gender identity

(Slovenia);

88.32. Make a wide array of family planning methods, such as a comprehensive range of modern and affordable contraceptives, more widely

available (Finland);

88.33. Continue to ensure that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are able to exercise their rights to freedom of expression and assembly

(Australia);

88.34. Ensure the full respect for freedom of expression and freedom of assembly for all, including LGBT people (Slovenia);

88.35. Facilitate access to social and health services as well as to education for children belonging to more vulnerable groups (Uruguay);

88.36. Address the problem of Roma children dropping out of school, and promote the Roma language in the school system (Iran);

88.37. Explicitly prohibit corporal punishment in the family and implement existing prohibitions (Romania);

88.38. Establish emergency measures aimed at integrating Roma children in regular schools and solve the problem of the drop-out rate of these children

(Uruguay);

88.39. Support and develop educational programs and institutions for national minorities (Russia);

88.40. Use more actively existing or new platforms for involving the Roma community in policy formulation, implementation and actively pursue an

increase in the number of Roma in all public institutions (Netherlands);

88.41. Develop a close dialogue with all minorities regarding language education issues (Norway);

88.42. Further consider measures to secure the integration of the Roma community (Sweden);

88.43. Further pursue investigations on human rights implications of counter- terrorism measures, such as secret detention programs, with a view to

identifying allegations of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of

detainees (Brazil).

89. The following recommendations enjoy the support of Lithuania which considers that they are already implemented or in the process of implementation:

89.1. Ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances (France);

89.2. Adhere to the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, at the earliest

(France);

89.3. Ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Azerbaijan);

89.4. Consider the possibility of ratifying the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment

(Argentina);

89.5. Consider the possibility of ratifying the Convention on the Protection of all Persons against Enforced Disappearances (Argentina);

89.6. Ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture (Brazil);

89.7. Sign and ratify the Optional Protocol of the Convention against Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (Spain);

89.8. Ratify the Convention for the Protection of All Persons Against Enforced Disappearances (Spain);

89.9. Ratify or access, as appropriate, the Optional Protocol to the Convention on Torture (Uruguay);

89.10. Swiftly implement the Law of Compensation of the Immovable Property of the Jewish Religious Communities of Lithuania (United Kingdom);

89.11. Fully explore the possibility of consolidating the work and functions of existing ombuds-institutions and establish a national human rights institution

in compliance with the Paris Principles (Malaysia);

89.12. Establish a national human rights institution in accordance with the Paris Principles (Azerbaijan);

89.13. Set up an independent national human rights institution, in accordance with the Paris Principles (United Kingdom);

89.14. Establish an accredited national human rights institution in the near future (Turkey);

89.15. Establish a national human rights institution in accordance with the Paris Principles (Spain);

89.16. Explore possibilities to further strengthen the competence, role and mandate of the human rights protection offices (Norway);

89.17. Continue to optimise the activities of its mechanisms for the protection of human rights by establishing a coordinating Human Rights Council as a part

of Ombudsman institution to ensure compliance of the institution framework

with the Paris principles (Republic of Moldova);

89.18. Establish a national human rights commission in compliance with the Paris Principles as soon as possible and make it adequately resourced (Ireland);

89.19. Look at how to reduce its dependence on institution-based care for children (Ireland);

89.20. Reinforce the measures to protect the rights and interests of children victims and witnesses of offences prohibited by the Optional Protocol to the

Convention on the rights of the Child relating to the sale of children, child

prostitution and child pornography, in line with CRC recommendations

(Chile);

89.21. Continue to monitor the implementation of the National Strategy for Combating Violence against Women (United Kingdom);

89.22. Implement policies and actions aimed at the effective integration of the Roma community which would include the employment, education, security,

social and health sectors, emphasis on the promotion of the Roma language,

and the regularization of their identity documents (Mexico);

89.23. Enact a more robust set of policies and procedures to combat anti- Semitism, and that a public strategy be developed to dissuade prejudices and

intolerance towards the Jewish population and its culture, including with

respect to Jewish memorial and commemorative sites within Lithuania

(Canada);

89.24. Move swiftly to put in place policies and procedures that will better protect the private and financial information of international human rights

defenders and activists who take refuge in Lithuania (Canada);

89.25. Continue to implement specific measures to raise awareness of human rights standards, particularly as regards antidiscrimination, and educate the

society and train professionals working in this field (Republic of Moldova);

89.26. Continue to fund programs aimed at integrating Roma and take further steps to address the on-going social exclusion of Roma (Australia);

89.27. Continue pursuing appropriate awareness raising campaigns aimed at eliminating traditional patriarchal attitudes and stereotypes regarding the roles

and responsibilities of women and men in society (Slovakia);

89.28. Continue its positive efforts to promote gender equality and protect women’s rights in areas such as employment (China);

89.29. Take appropriate measures to ensure equality between men and women in the labour market particularly in terms of equal pay for equal work

as well as to upgrade the participation of women in public life (Algeria);

89.30. Improve the access of women to the labour market, especially by implementing policies which would reduce the gender pay gap (Spain);

89.31. Take concrete measures aimed at facilitating access to the labour market to persons with disabilities, notably the adoption of a law in this regard

(France);

89.32. Promote necessary actions in order to guarantee the integration of persons with disabilities in the employment market, in line with the Convention

on the rights of Persons with disabilities (Mexico);

89.33. Pay greater attention to the situation of persons with disabilities, with more facilities in public buildings, housing, transports, telephone helplines,

improvement in care centres, review of proceedings of involuntary

hospitalisation and protection of the exercise of fundamental rights, such as the

rights to vote (Spain);

89.34. Continue to work to improve mobility and accessibility for persons with disabilities, in line with existing Lithuanian and EU regulations, and the

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Canada);

89.35. Implement the recommendations made by the European Committee against torture and other inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment at

its visit in the country (Sweden);

89.36. Take vigorous measures to effectively improve living conditions in prisons in order to meet international standards (Algeria);

89.37. Take steps to improve the prison conditions in order to meet all international standards (Denmark);

89.38. Take steps to meet international standards for prison and detention centre conditions (Australia);

89.39. Address the infrastructural needs of the country’s penitentiary system (Slovakia);

89.40. Through its National Strategy for Combating Violence against Women, further seek to address violence proactively by seeking to influence attitudes

and behaviours, in particular through the active involvement of men and boys

(Finland);

89.41. Continue its efforts aimed at preventing, punishing and eliminating all forms all violence against women (Argentina);

89.42. Strengthen the policies and actions to combat violence against women (Chile);

89.43. Continue to take measures to mitigate, eliminate and prevent violence against women and to provide assistance to victims of violence (Republic of

Moldova);

89.44. Provide awareness training in the area of victim abuse for those public servants such as police, prosecutors and judges, who most frequently come into

contact with victims of gender-based violence in the course of their work, to

assist in their understanding of the impact such violence has on its victims, and

also other family members in particular children (Ireland);

89.45. Take firm measures to combat cross-border trafficking in women for sexual and other exploitative purposes and align its Criminal Code with the

international and European Union law on trafficking in human beings

(Hungary);

89.46. Make additional efforts in the area of human trafficking by developing new measures which would allow a better prosecution of criminal organizations

as well as better protection of victims (Spain);

89.47. Continue efforts in combating human trafficking and provide the necessary assistance to the victims of trafficking (Latvia);

89.48. Reinforce further the country’s efforts in the area of prevention of trafficking in human beings (Slovakia);

89.49. Intensify efforts to prevent trafficking in human beings, including cross-border trafficking in women for sexual and other exploitative purposes,

and increase the number of prosecutions in this respect (Republic of Moldova);

89.50. Move to increase monitoring and enforcement of its system of child protection, building on its recent commendable amendments to the criminal

code which tightened penalties for child molestation, with the aim of decreasing

the level of child physical and sexual abuse and neglect (Canada);

89.51. Provide mandatory sexual education in schools and increase knowledge and awareness about family planning among women and men (Finland);

89.52. Reinforce policies for the integration of minority groups, particularly Roma, in line with CERD recommendations (Chile).

90. The following recommendations will be examined by Lithuania which will provide responses in due time, but no later than the nineteenth session of the Human

Rights Council in March 2012:

90.1. Adhere to the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (Algeria);

90.2. Consider the possibility of ratifying the International Convention on the Protection of the rights of all Migrants Workers and members of their

families (Argentina);

90.3. Sign and ratify the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Spain);

90.4. Sign, ratify and implement the provisions of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (Poland);

90.5. Ratify or access, as appropriate, the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant of Social, Economic and Cultural Rights (Uruguay);

90.6. Ratify or access, as appropriate, the Convention on Enforced Disappearances and the Convention on Migrant Workers (Uruguay);

90.7. Adhere to article 14 of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination in view of recognizing the competence of

the Committee to receive and examine communications from individuals or

groups of persons who allege being victims of violations of any of the rights

stipulated in the Convention (Uruguay);

90.8. Adopt a new Act on National Minorities in order to precisely stipulate the rights and obligations of persons belonging to national minorities in

Lithuania in accordance with its international obligations, notably the Council

of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities

(Poland);

90.9. Ensure full compliance of the Lithuanian legislation and practice with international law which guarantees every person belonging to minority the

right to have his or her name in official documents written in minority

language (Poland);

90.10. Review the Law on the Protection of Minors against the Detrimental Effect of Public Information in order to remove all possibilities that this law

may be applied in such a way to stigmatize or discriminate against Lesbian,

Gay, Bisexual and Transgender people or to breach their rights to freedom of

assembly or expression (Belgium);

90.11. Introduce necessary measures to ensure full respect of human rights for all, including for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender people, by

reviewing the Law on the Protection of Minors against the Detrimental Effect

of Public Information (Switzerland);

90.12. Take the necessary legislative measures and enact policies that recognise the diversity of families and provide same sex couples with the same

rights and social security benefits as heterosexual couples (Netherlands);

90.13. Take steps to ensure that legislation protects the full rights of sexual minorities (Denmark);

90.14. Incorporate in domestic law the crime of torture and a definition comprising the elements of Article 1 of the United Nations Convention against

Torture (Mexico);

90.15. Repeal any discriminatory provision in existing laws on sexual orientation and gender identity (Slovenia);

90.16. Renew invitation to the Special Procedures of the Council which participated in the preparation of a joint study on secret detention to enable

them to conduct in situ investigations of facts contained in document

A/HRC/13/42 concerning Lithuania (Belarus);

90.17. Ease the procedure of obtaining citizenship, including by reducing the language requirement (Russia);

90.18. Reopen investigations on secret CIA prisons and study all elements regarding Lithuanian sites (Switzerland);

90.19. Adopt necessary legal amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure and Criminal Code to make its new Law on Domestic Violence fully

enforceable and to achieve that law’s primary aim, namely to protect victims

from violence (United States of America);

90.20. Intensify efforts to combat trafficking in person inter alia by renewing individual invitations to the Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons and

the Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child

pornography. Bring the criminal law into full conformity with the provisions of

the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the child relating to

sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography (Belarus);

90.21. Enable national minorities to freely use their languages in public domain, including topographical indications in minority areas (Poland);

90.22. Abandon the practice of applying the so-called retrogressive measures whereby members of national minorities are deprived of their rights and

freedoms which they had been enjoying and exercising earlier, sometimes for

many decades (Poland);

90.23. Consider granting the right to work, to asylum seekers who have been in the country for more than six months (Iran).

91. The recommendation below did not enjoy the support of Lithuania:

91.1. Stop attempts to revise the outcomes of the Second World War, the prosecution of anti-fascist veterans and glorification of the Nazi accomplices;

(Russia).

92. Lithuania considers that the recommendation included in paragraph 91.1 goes beyond established facts and also beyond aims and tasks of the Universal Periodic

Review process. However, it must be stressed that Lithuanian authorities never did

and never will condone Nazism or its ideology. Lithuania never attempts to revise

history and it believes that an honest thorough debate in other fora on history will

facilitate reconciliation based on truth and remembrance. Furthermore, every

criminal act must be investigated and Lithuania will prosecute all those guilty of such

acts.

93. All conclusions and/or recommendations contained in the present report reflect the position of the submitting State(s) and/or the State under review. They should not

be construed as endorsed by the Working Group as a whole.

Annex

Composition of the delegation

The delegation of Lithuania was headed by Remigijus Šimašius, Minister of Justice and composed of the following members:

• Tomas Vaitkevičius, Vice-Minister of Justice;

• Stanislav Vidtmann, Vice-Minister of Culture;

• Vygantė Milašiūtė, Head of the Division of International Treaty Law, Department of International Law, Ministry of Justice;

• Jonas Rudalevičius, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Republic

of Lithuania, Permanent Mission of the Republic of Lithuania to the United Nations Office and Other International Organisations in Geneva;

• Darius Staniulis, Deputy Director of the Department of Law and International Treaties, Ministry of Foreign Affairs;

• Gaivilė Stankevičienė, Second Secretary, Permanent Mission of the Republic of Lithuania to the United Nations Office and Other International Organisations in Geneva;

• Nerija Stasiulienė, Director of the Department of Law, Ministry of Health;

• Ričardas Totoraitis, Deputy Head of the Division of Academic Mobility and Continuing Education, Ministry of Education and Science;

• Irina Urbonė, Head of the Division of the Application of Law and Internal Investigations, Department of Law, Ministry of the Interior;

• Kristina Vyšniauskaitė-Radinskienė, Chief Specialist, Division of International Law, Department of International Affairs, Ministry of Social Security and Labour.