Although the repentant have already emerged, the real picture of a fateful vow is beginning to emerge.

Delphi recalls that 63 legislators voted in favor of the Public Limited Companies Law on Tuesday, 58 against and 7 abstentions.

Disagreeing with the bill at the presentation stage, the Seimas decided to return it to the initiators for improvement. They state that the project will be presented again to the Seimas in this or the next fall session.

Juozapaitis regrets having abstained

Vytautas Juozapaitis, representative of the National Union – Lithuanian Christian Democrats (TS-LKD), abstained on Tuesday.

On the radio news program “Topical Interview” on Tuesday, he said that he “probably made a mistake” in voting like this.

“Why did I abstain? Because I have an opinion on this issue, but without listening to the arguments of the opponents, my attitude towards all this problem is changing little by little ”, said the conservative V. Juozapaitis after the vote.

“Both the years and the political experience also change the attitude to the problem, I think that we really should listen to all citizens living in Lithuania today, listen and actually abstain, I probably made a mistake voting today. I don’t know how I would have voted in the final stages of this bill, it would depend on everything inside. But submission nonetheless needed to allow him to act at this stage. Then I would give every opportunity for groups to express their opinions, ”said the MP.

A TS-LKD spokesperson said it was encouraging that the law had been returned to the initiators for improvement rather than rejected.

“I did not vote against, but that abstention was like that … My traditional views, conservative attitude, belonging to a certain political force force, of course, there are many people who ask for it and so on, it does not mean that someone he pushed and forced me to do so. This does not mean that my views or orientation are changing, only the understanding and compassion of those who need help are changing, “said Seimas member V. Juozapaitis on news radio.

He also marveled at the applause from MPs who voted against the Association Act after the announcement of the results. 12 representatives of the TS-LKD voted against on Tuesday, 3 abstained.

French: the problem of the authors

Viktor Pranckietis, a member of the Liberal Movement, says he did not support the Gender Neutral Association project discussed Tuesday, which was missing two votes, due to emotions in society and among lawmakers.

V. Pranckietis is convinced that the passions that have arisen show that the law prepared is not perfect. However, the politician did not specify what should be specifically modified in the Public Limited Companies Law; according to him, this is a problem for the authors themselves.

“Since the law awakens many passions, it means that it is not prepared as it should be submitted to the Seimas, so that there are no such struggles,” V. Pranckietis taught the arguments of his decision to Elta.

The former head of Seimas noted that after parliament decided Tuesday to reject the Association Bill, he still advocated that the passionate bill be returned to the editors for improvement.

“The abstention was because it was not prepared to be acceptable, so it became unacceptable and could be improved. My second vote was to improve ”, assured the liberal.

However, the parliamentarian had no proposal for the project drawn up by the ruling coalition, of which V. Pranckietis is a part. He maintains that despite the fact that he himself voted in favor of returning the project for improvement, the places to be repaired should be sought by the drafters of the Public Limited Companies Act themselves.

“The problem of the authors. The authors must make this law in such a way that no one has doubts that it is legal, fair and in accordance with the Constitution, “said the politician who had served as Spokesperson for Seimas during the previous legislature.

A member of the Seimas does not believe that parliamentarians should vote on some issues of value that are important to a minority group in society, despite doubts that arise in society. V. Pranckietis assures that the project developers’ job is to persuade the majority of parliament to support the initiatives they are preparing.

“Then you have to convince yourself that it would be acceptable to a large part of the Seimas,” said the liberal.

However, V. Pranckietis did not disclose whether the project organizers attempted to speak to him and present arguments that might also persuade him. However, despite the demand that the coalition partners persuade the majority of the Seimas to support them before presenting the projects, the parliamentarian stressed that it is always up to him to decide how to vote, and his opinion emphasizes the parliamentarian, remains unchanged.

“I have a very independent opinion and I always decide for myself how I have to vote, and that opinion is constant,” Pranckietis said.

Šalaševičiūtė says there could have been more people who voted against

Rimantė Šalaševičiūtė, a member of the Lithuanian Green and Peasants Union (LVŽS) faction in the Seimas, did not participate in the vote. The politician says that he did not get to the vote, but that he would have cast his vote before the bill was passed.

“I entered the room late, the votes had already been announced, I couldn’t even say my opinion from the side microphone. My opinion would have been against. Because I have always spoken and speak of the traditional family. If we look at the presented association bill, its quality is questionable. And as a lawyer, I evaluated it in relation to article 38 of the Constitution. The project itself is really bad. ” Delphi said R. Šalaševičiūtė.

The Seimas member stated that relationships between unmarried people should be defined, but not in the way the drafters of the Association Law did.

“I am pleased that initiators had time to improve the bill before the fall session,” he said.

“If the document were different, the voting results would be different,” explained R. Šalaševičiūtė.

The parliamentarian assured that he should have run out of “vague statements”, that “they tried to present the Seimas as his electoral promises to the elector.”

“It is understood that some candidates for the Seimas make populist promises. It may not have been populist here, but promises were made that it would definitely be done, not considering that this issue would not be decided by one party, not even the ruling coalition, but by 141 members of the Seimas, ”R. Šalaševičiūtė explained his position.

The politician recalled that before each vote, parliamentarians must count how many votes they will receive. And this time, according to her, the rulers themselves commissioned.

He also said that not only did he not make it to the polls, but some did not show up. So the result could have been an even bigger defeat for the Freedom Faction and the rulers.

“I am not alone in the opposition, we are 3 behind, 3 more in self-isolation,” he said.

Although it was registered at the beginning of the morning session, the representative of LVŽS Jonas Jarutis, as well as the farmer Eugenijus Jovaiša did not vote. LVŽS Agnė Širinskienė and Aušrinė Norkienė did not participate in the meeting because they are in isolation.

“It has probably been 9 years in the Seimas, but the first vote was such that I was late,” said R. Šalaševičiūtė.

Targamadze: The starting point is not that

Vilija Targamadzė, a member of the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party (LSDP) faction, voted against the introduction of the Association Law. The Seimas member explained why he voted this way.

“The first thing is that I swore on the Constitution as a member of the Seimas, there is article 38, which describes the family. Second, I agree that this partnership issue, a non-traditional guidance issue, needs to be addressed, but it should be a separate law. And now the Seimas has already presented the law of coexistence submitted to the Public Order Commission, which could regulate these things, “he said.

V. Targamadze said the issue should be addressed, but “without claiming the concept of family.”

As already mentioned, the conservative V. Juozapaitis considered that the law should be supported at the presentation stage. V. Targamadze, representative of the LSDP faction, said that, in his opinion, changes could not be made at the wrong starting point.

“You know, as a scientist, I look a little different. If the starting point is not that? Then you need to consider the law of coexistence and see if it is appropriate or not. And if the starting position was not the family, because (in the Civil Code, aut. P.) The family book wants to do it, then it could be considered ”, he explained.

The politician said that although the rulers say that the legislators of the Law of Societies assure that society will not be equated with the concept of family, “it is clear what the purpose is when you find the place where you want to include it in the Civil Code.”
“Obviously it is a summons with the family”, Delphi said V. Targamadze.

The parliamentarian assured that if the rulers say that the law they drafted does not pretend to be a family, they will have to vote for the law of coexistence.