[ad_1]
The representative of the Vilnius city municipality told Žinių radijo that the decision was made by mutual agreement between the municipality and the police, and that the organizers could change the location of the event and the expected number of participants, in which case the municipality I would reconsider the demonstration. . At the time, the head of the Raimondas Grinevičius Family Movement claimed that he had not heard any attempt to speak about possible changes to the rally by the representatives of the municipality.
The lawyer Petras Ragauskas also had doubts about some of the municipality’s arguments. At the time, the political scientist Kęstutis Girnius claimed that this decision by the municipality would only provoke public discontent, which would strengthen this movement. The political scientist compares this case with the first LGBT marches in Vilnius.
I would not guarantee safety
Adomas Bužinskas, deputy director of the Vilnius city municipal administration, spoke on the Žinių radijo program that the decision not to allow the concentration in the Seimas was taken by a collegiate body that includes representatives from both the police and the municipality.
“Our objective is to ensure the traffic and the safety of the people, that is why (in the meeting – aut.past participated) police, road safety specialists and municipal representatives. We never make a decision without calling the other party and asking those questions and seeing how they are prepared, ”explained A. Bužinskas.
At the time, commenting on R. Grinevičius’s statement that the municipality is only assaulting society with that step, A. Bužinskas stated that the risks posed by these storms are being avoided.
“We believe that storms in society are caused by many things, but they are the main reason why we see the risk that that security is not necessarily maintained.
We are not really saying that the organizers themselves take and organize something, of course not, but the organizers themselves see and understand that there may be such provocations ”, said the representative of the municipality.
According to him, both the police and the municipality, which coordinates the permits, are responsible for security, which, according to A. Bužinskas, it is doubtful that it can be guaranteed.
“Up to 2 thousand. Square meters (square near the Seimas – aut. past.) 15 thousand. people unless they could fit two or three stories. Of course, the safety of participants or outsiders is not guaranteed.
In the hope of provocations, it would naturally be difficult to remove certain people who specifically provoke from that crowd, ”said the Deputy Director of Administration.
A. Bužinskas stated that if the expected number of participants was lower or the rally site was different, the municipality could consider this request.
“(Organizers – aut.past) made it quite clear that this was not a matter of debate, that the place must remain what it is. There are also time circumstances: you want to protest until 10 pm. Perhaps it is a pebble in the municipal garden because the square is not well lit, which would complicate the work of both us and the officials. We believe that the 12-hour protest is not necessarily the most optimal time, especially in Vilnius, in the first days of September, when traffic is quite complicated on a working day, ”said a representative from the municipality.
“The organizers can still write another request, for another event, in another place, for a smaller number of wives, which we will be obliged to consider within three working days,” he added.
The arguments were not convincing
At that time, the head of the Family Movement, Raimondas Grinevičius, stated on the “Žinių radijo” program that during the entire meeting no question was raised about the reduction of the number of participants or about the change of venue.
“The meeting did not even discuss any change of location, reduction of the number of participants. Absolutely no problem was expressed and no attempt was made to speak or suggest, neither about us nor about them ”, emphasized R. Grinevičius.
According to him, the municipality’s arguments for not allowing the meeting before the Seimas are unfounded.
“It can be said that this is the second political decision of the Vilnius municipality. Let us remember the coordination that was not given to us on June 15, and now it is the second decision, ”recalled the head of the Family Movement.
After the meeting with the president of the Seimas, our organization did everything possible to bring society closer to the government, stabilize the discord in the state and the anger of the people against the government, and the Vilnius municipality erased all the work that we had accomplished. “he added.
R. Grinevičius emphasized that the August 10 rally, which turned into riots, was not related to the Lithuanian family movement, so the argument of distrust of the organizers, according to him, is not logical.
At the time, evaluating the SSD warning about the increased likelihood of violent attacks during protests, R. Grinevičius stated that those risks arise during all such events around the world.
“Is there at least one demonstration in any country in the world that does not provoke at least a minimum outbreak of violence? “All rallies, all protests and demonstrations are subject to increased risk,” he said.
The solution is a complete innovation
The constitutional law expert, lawyer Petras Ragauskas assesses the decision of the municipality, argued at the request of the Martynas Mažvydas Library that his work is interrupted by the rally, recalling other events in Vilnius.
“If we look at the implementation of rights, the Constitution itself establishes that a person, in the exercise of their rights, must not violate the rights of other people. It is already programmed that there are always interests and rights in conflict, so it is necessary strike a sensible balance In the context of this balance, confidence in the library’s argument seems, to put it mildly, strained.
Because if the Vilnius city municipality is allowed to close half the city when a Velomarathon is held, then the constitutional right of assembly is not implemented there. It is just an event that can be fun for some people, but there are many people who find it incredibly uncomfortable and create a lot of inconvenience. However, these types of events are taking place ”, emphasized the lawyer.
At that time, the argument of the SSD certificate, according to P. Ragauskas, could be more important if it was evaluated together with the additional request of the organizers to extend the meeting time until 10 pm. and when additional lighting is required.
“After sunset, if the lighting does not guarantee safety and public order, it could be a strong enough argument to say that the event should not be organized at that time,” said the lawyer.
However, the lawyer himself was more concerned about the procedure itself: the fact that the municipality revoked his approval.
“The law does not provide at all the possibility of canceling an agreed event. The organizers can, of course, cancel the event, which is their sovereign right, but that the municipality cancels the coordination is a novelty, it seems to me,” said the lawyer. .
Compared to early LGBT marches
Kęstutis Girnius, a political scientist at the Institute of International Relations and Political Sciences, said the municipality’s decision is an illegal action directed against a political group, and all the municipality’s interpretations are puerile.
“I do not agree with most of the aspirations of the Family March, but it is a clear impression that they are more or less in trouble with the government and that various measures will be taken to prevent them from working. I think it can generate dissatisfaction, anger that will intensify that movement.
Remember a bit the situation in England before Brexit, when the entire elite explained that it was a mistake that the people who support Brexit are stupid, ignorant, racist, xenophobic. In the same way, Trump supporters, when ridiculed, only encouraged them to act even more, ”said K. Girnius.
At the beginning of the Seimas session of the rally, K. Grinius does not see it as an anti-state activity, and evaluates the decision of the municipality as a reiterated desire to repress the authorities.
“When the first gay march was supposed to be in 2010, the Administrative Court temporarily suspended the permission for the march because the Attorney General’s Office explained that marching sexual minorities would need to protect them from hostile people.
It is said that skinheads can carry out attacks on protesters, it is necessary to ban the march. It is silly, it is necessary to send more police so that the thugs are not affected, “said the political scientist.
