[ad_1]
Standing in front of the media during the first quarantine, Landsberg questioned “whether the government had exceeded its authority by announcing the quarantine” and also suggested considering a state of emergency.
After a while, he thought out loud whether the Minister of Health Aurelijus Veryga should be replaced by the Minister of National Defense Raimundas Karoblis as head of emergency operations at the state level.
When constitutional law specialists worked on the idea of the state of emergency, G. Landsbergis beat himself to the chest, loving that he had not even set out to introduce it: “He just raised a legal problem.”
However, when winter arrives, G. Landsbergis, who already works at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, speaks again about the state of emergency. Almost threatening, it warns: “The state of emergency turns a courteous warning into an obligation that the government can then instruct people on, their departure from home may be more severely restricted if they are raped, and other measures are envisaged” (BNS, 17 / 12/2020).
Seimas President Viktorija Čmilytė-Nielsen also supports G. Landsbergis’s idea of a state of emergency, according to which such strict measures may be necessary if the current ones do not work.
Terrible law
What is that emergency?
The Law of the State of Emergency establishes the right of the Seimas (and in urgent cases between the sessions of the Seimas and the President of the Republic, who must convene an extraordinary session of the Seimas to discuss this issue; the Seimas approves or revokes the decision of the President ) to resort to drastic police decisions.
For example, the curfew could be announced as a time of day when it is forbidden to be in public places without special permission and identity documents. People without the latter can be detained pending identification, but not for more than 24 hours. The special permit would be issued by the Commander for the Protection of Public Order, a state institution made up of officials from the Internal Affairs System, the Department of State Security, soldiers and officials from the institutions of the national defense system, representatives of other state institutions and municipalities and members of the Union of Lithuanian Rifles.
Even requisition is possible: non-refundable refundable seizure of the owner’s property for the needs of society, reimbursing the value of the property to its owner after the lifting of the state of emergency.
It may be provided that, in an emergency, to remedy the effects of an emergency or crisis, or to guarantee public safety and public order, the officers of the commander’s office shall have the right to enter the person’s home at any time during the day without your consent.
It may also be provided that the search, reception, dissemination of information on an emergency or crisis situation, or the action of state institutions and officials, the command is allowed only with the consent or permission of the heads of the relevant state institutions.
It will depend on the plans of the Seimas
This is the potential horror of the leaders of the two ruling parties. It is true that the chairman of the Seimas Committee for Defense and National Security, also conservative, Laurynas Kasčiūnas assured that the most drastic measures would certainly not be used. It certainly will not be the case that grocery stores are closed, public transport is not used, and people are probably not prohibited from going to work either. It is true that if the curfew is announced, it would be forbidden to do so without special permission during its validity.
“Theoretically, emergency legislation would make it very clear who can do what and who cannot. It is not that, if a state of exception is imposed, all the measures provided by law are introduced. All opportunities for people to move would depend on the decision of the Seimas, so now I can’t speculate whether people could go to work or not. Needless to say, the necessary professions are doctors, policemen, etc. – it would certainly work, of course, certainly there will be no retail stores. closed groceries. An emergency can be with a curfew, it can be without it. The objective would be to reduce the meetings and movements of people, not to prohibit work, “taught L. Kasčiūnas.
Will end bad
Audrius Butkevičius, a signatory to the Lithuanian Independence Restoration Act, security expert, former director general of the Department of National Defense and Minister of National Defense, says that the practice of several countries shows that the introduction of a state of emergency ends badly.
“People have always responded to constraints with resistance and it has been ineffective. The state of emergency would also be ineffective in Lithuania.
In Lithuania and elsewhere, one should not seek coercion, but public cooperation, which is achieved through good communication and not through prohibitions and intimidation. Such measures are nothing more than a collapse of political communication and a demonstration by those in power that they cannot establish contact with the people they control. And the desire to show power, to intimidate.
There may be a desire to order everyone to lock themselves in the house and only allow certain hours to go out to buy food, but you will not see all the human policemen.
What happened in Russia when the quarantine was announced? The police took the elderly to the stairs of the house, in India they beat them with sticks, in Taiwan, with special tubes. However, the result was null and void. Exactly the same will be in Lithuania ”, predicted the expert.
Secret intentions
So why does Landsberg keep talking about the state of emergency? According to A. Butkevičius, having a sufficient and satisfying society is an old conservative dream.
“Then it will be possible to complete another sale of Mažeikių Nafta, build a windmill park in the Baltic Sea, thus saving a lot of money or borrowing billions at 10% interest.”
The Chinese call this system “robbery during a fire”. It causes hysteria, does not communicate with people and then justifies harmful selfish actions as much as they want: war, plague, pandemic, emergency “, summarized A. Butkevičius.
Commenting on the situation, the psychologist, former parliamentarian, writer Vytautas ČEPAS:
Speaking of a state of emergency, G. Landsbergis seems like a nice and nice boy on the outside, women, especially the elderly, like: a chatter, a family, many children, learning to speak. But those who love him don’t have critical thinking. Healthy critical thinking: without denying vaccines or the fact that the Earth is round.
They forget that G.Landsberg’s rise was due to his grandfather’s current activities and influence. Thanks to his grandfather, a young man emerged who seemed to fit in everywhere, but specific cases showed that he was not very suitable. A party leader who basically does not lead the party. Run by Ingrida Šimonytė, who is not even partisan.
Landsberg feels cornered. He is not stupid, he realizes that his possibilities are limited. That decisive decisions are needed and cannot be made because they do not lead the real party. It goes without saying that in a situation like this, a person wants to show some power, that he can do something. Can you, as a member of the Government, influence the introduction of a state of emergency so that people can move only with permission, or at least speak about it and form an opinion on it? He wants to show determination that a lot in the state depends on him.
To become a true party leader, you must start from the base of politics: a member of the municipality or even any position in the municipality. Now that he has “inherited” the position of president of the party and has so much to do with politics that he has been an MEP for a long time, he cannot imagine everything that is happening in politics, he does not understand the situations, only the stories.
Like in that story by Peter Cvirka, where the father taught his son to be a blacksmith, but told him not to work because the work was hard. Just watch and learn. What came out of it? He learned how to make just one flop: heat the iron and put it in water.
The same is true of G. Landsberg. The person below has to climb and do it himself, not just look and listen. Those conversations about your state of emergency can only be an attempt to hide your inferiority complexes.
Interview with Aurelijus VERYGA, Seimas member, psychiatrist, former head of statewide emergency operations:
– Governors are now constantly threatened by the need to impose a state of emergency. Was there pressure to enter when your coalition was in power?
– It was spoken then. I don’t know if this can be called pressure, but the government has been criticized. You probably also recall that the opposition at the time was outraged that the government had adopted all the restrictions without the knowledge of the Seimas, saying that the Seimas wanted to be involved in managing the process. This is probably why the state of emergency was discussed, as presented by the Seimas. However, there was an interesting situation on Thursday: Regarding COVID-19 during Government Hour, members of the Government stated that the Seimas would only show up and not participate anywhere. In other words, one is speaking when there is no need to make decisions, the other is when you need to make decisions yourself.
Our government has never talked about a state of emergency.
– The first to talk about it is G. Landsbergis, who is now Minister for Foreign Affairs. Is this an area of government for the Minister of Foreign Affairs? Did Linas Linkevičius, for example, regulate such issues?
– Apparently, G. Landsbergis does not speak about this as a minister, but as a party leader. Because the most logical thing would be to talk to the Minister of the Interior or the National Defense about this, because the army should also be used.
– A psychologist put forward the version that G. Landsbergis covers his inferiority complex with such speeches, because he inherited the position, he is not even a true party leader. What is your opinion as a psychiatrist on this?
– Well, I cannot comment much on the appointment of another party leader, that is their business. Furthermore, since I cannot comment on the mental state of people, professional ethics does not allow me to do so. I think these issues should be viewed politically, not psychiatrically. Politically, I can say that there is no need for an emergency, and those who speak like that don’t say many other things, like what to expect then. After all, then it would be possible to restrict the freedom of the media and, for example, make it impossible to leave home without permission. When an emergency is entered, everything can be configured.
[ad_2]
