European Economic
and Social Committee
Non-discrimination
CSO representatives found both negative and positive aspects in the area of non-discrimination in Lithuania. The National Program for Equal Opportunities for Men and Women had been discontinued in 2021, with the intention to replace it with a horizontal implementation of gender equality across strategic planning initiatives. A participant expressed concern that the general lack of understanding of gender equality issues would prevent progress in this area. Others agreed that implementation of nondiscriminatory strategic planning would be hard to monitor, especially in fields that have long-standing traditions of systemic discrimination. Furthermore, it was noted that as there was no separate ministry for equality, all related issues fell in the hands of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. The latter, however, did not have the capacity to address discrimination cases in depth.
It was said that since 2010 the ratified Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) had been applied directly into Lithuanian law, in accordance with the Constitution, thereby protecting the rights of disabled persons. However, a participant in the discussion expressed the view that the Lithuanian Parliament had only started taking action in 2019, for example by eliminating the term "unable to work" when referring to a person with disability, and by adopting legislation improving the rights of children with disabilities.
It was underlined that the current Lithuanian Law on Equal Opportunities contained an exhaustive list of fourteen grounds on which discrimination was banned. In 2019 an amendment had been submitted to the Parliament to extend the list to include gender identity, family status and health status as further possible grounds of discrimination. The proposal also stipulated that all State institutions, employers and service providers had to guarantee reasonable accommodation for people with disabilities. However, it was said that there had been no progress in adopting the amendment.
With regard to the Istanbul Convention on Action against violence against women and domestic violence, CSO representatives said that although the current government seemed inclined to ratify it, the initiative had been met with a lot of pushback from the general public. This public outrage posed the biggest challenge to progress towards ratification and there was not enough political will to counter it.
Furthermore, access to safe abortion was limited, and it was not guaranteed by law; it was noted that the current President of the Republic was in favour of a ban on abortions, and the influence of the Church on this topic was also said to be very significant. Abortion, as well as gender-based violence, were highly stigmatised topics in Lithuanian society, which put further pressure on women. Participants noted that cross-sectional groups such as women with disabilities were an especially vulnerable group when it came to domestic violence. Recently, the Parliament had put forward a proposal to update the Law on Protection against Domestic Violence which would remove the explicit mention of violence against women in the context of domestic violence. A representative from the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, however, claimed that this draft law would implement the core ideas of the Istanbul
Convention.
According to a participant, the 2017-2019 and 2021-2023 Action Plans for Promoting NonDiscrimination were not sufficient, as they did not include a single measure that would specifically concern the LGBTIQ+ community. The current Law on Equal Opportunities did not specifically cover discrimination on the grounds of gender expression or gender identity, which put transgender individuals at a disadvantage in terms of the law. Slight progress had been made in 2019 when transgender individuals were no longer prohibited from seeking certain medical and legal professions. Furthermore, in 2021 the Ministry of Justice established a working group to create a legislative framework to provide recognition and protection for transgender persons.
It was said that there was no legal gender-neutral partnership in the country, as the Lithuanian Constitution defined marriage as between a man and a woman, and a proposal for single-sex partnerships had been rejected in the Parliament in the autumn of 2021. In general, a participant deemed the situation in Lithuania regarding the rights of the LGBTIQ+ community as grave. Representatives of the Lithuanian government stated that there was no plan to create a programme specifically aimed at protecting the LGBTIQ+ community, but that the intention should be included in all strategic planning initiatives horizontally.
A representative from a State-funded organisation providing legal guidance to victims of discrimination stated that most claims they had received in 2021 concerned discrimination on the basis of gender, disability and age. The office had handled around 400 inquiries last year, though a lot of them did not lead to legal processes. According to another participant, the minor repercussions that the defendant would face if deemed guilty often discouraged victims from seeking legal remedy. A lack of recognition of hate speech and hate crimes in the public and within authorities was mentioned as another element leading to a relatively small number of complaints.
CSO representatives expressed the view that State institutions were unprepared to handle the influx of migrants, many of whom were children and women, blocked at the border between Belarus and Lithuania. The rights of those people were not always respected, and NGOs and volunteers often provided the help that was lacking from the side of the State institutions, ranging from warm coverings in wintertime to legal guidance. Moreover, the declaration of a state of emergency in the border regions restricted access to the area for NGOs. A government representative noted that permission to enter the restricted area could be obtained from the State Border Guard service. It was also reported that representatives from government institutions and NGOs were having weekly meetings in order to share relevant information and tackle various issues.
All attendees in the meeting agreed that the Catholic Church had a great impact on policymakers, as they would informally meet with high Church representatives to discuss all important issues. Furthermore, the Catholic Church had taken a radical stance opposing the Istanbul Convention, access to safe abortion, and the same-sex partnership law, as progressive Catholic voices were a minority. At the same time, besides receiving direct funding without having the obligation to declare its income, the Catholic Church benefitted from many exemptions under Lithuanian law, which would be reduced with the adoption of the aforementioned amendment to the Law on Equal Opportunities.
Participants discussed that although they were sometimes invited to working groups organised by the ministries, their seat at the table was not guaranteed. It was also unclear how the ministries decided on the invitee list. Often, the participating CSOs only had the opportunity to express their opinions on the final draft of a legislation, rather than participate in the drafting. On the other hand, one representative felt that the governmental authorities delegated much of the work, including both the creation and implementation of support mechanisms, to the CSOs.
Finally, it was noted that the government elected in the autumn of 2020 entailed more female representatives than ever before (half of the ministers were women). Despite this increased representation, the gender pay gap had not decreased in recent years.