This could become a serious test of the relationship between the Presidency and the ruling: it raises the question of whether Nausėda’s representation is

According to them, the exclusive participation of the President in the activities of the EVS exceeds the powers of the Head of State provided for in the Constitution in relation to the implementation of foreign policy.

“If it’s foreign policy issues, sanctions on Russia, the Eastern Partnership, North Africa, for example, then yes, it makes sense for the president to leave. However, if it’s a vaccine, a financial initiative multi-year and other issues that are internal policy issues and fall within the competence of the Government, it seems strange that the President is in charge and then the Government reports, “said the Matas National Union. Maldeikis, representative of the Christian Democrats.

Meanwhile, Tomas Janeliūnas, a political scientist and professor at the Vilnius University Institute of International Relations and Political Sciences (VU TSPMI), pointed out that changing established practices when the president attends the EVS could generate political tensions or even trigger a conflict between the government. and the Presidency.

The EVS sets the general direction and priorities of the European Union (EU). EU Member States are represented in the EVS by Heads of State or Government.

A political precedent has been set

As Professor T. Janeliūnas explained, a particular state must decide who, the president or the prime minister, will participate in EVS. According to him, the main condition of the Lisbon Treaty is that there must be a representative.

“The right of representation cannot be divided in any way, two representatives cannot be sent. There have been walks by Valdas Adamkus and Andrius Kubilius, there have been walks by the President and Prime Minister of Poland, and then there have been some scandals of this guy about who should be the real representative. Now the principle is simple: the state decides who it represents. Most EU countries delegate prime ministers. Only three or four countries, including France and Lithuania, delegate presidents.

It depends on the political system. “All countries that delegate presidents have a semi-presidential administration with a relatively strong president who has great powers in the field of foreign policy and sometimes even certain domestic political functions,” explained T. Janeliūnas.

Still, the political scientist emphasized that the decision about what will happen to the EVS is not determined primarily by the political system, but by consensus within the state. In Lithuania, it has recently become a practice for Lithuania to be represented in the EVS by the Head of State.

“Our precedent was formed due to the circumstances in which Dalia Grybauskaitė, after becoming president, played such a clear role that she wanted and could represent Lithuania in EVS, and at that time she probably had the best understanding of how the internal EU institutions. Consequently, at that time, Prime Minister Andrius Kubilius did not ask any questions, did not object, focused on internal political crises and therefore naturally delegated that role to the President “, said the VU TSPMI professor.

The chairman of the Seimas Foreign Affairs Committee, the conservative Žygimantas Pavilionis recalled that if for some time President D. Grybauskaitė shared his representation in the EVS with the then Prime Minister A. Kubilius, the division really came to a halt when Algirdas Butkevičius and Saulius Skvernelis took office.

“After the change of government, perhaps for personal reasons, perhaps due to reluctance or language skills, both Prime Minister A. Butkevičius and S. Skvernelis did not go to EVS. I remember the sharing model of historical experience. There was a chivalrous agreement between President Valdas Adamkus and then-Prime Minister Algirdas Brazauskas that when economic matters were discussed, the Prime Minister acted. When there was a discussion of questions of pure foreign policy, security or defense, then the president carried out, “Ž. Flag.

Is the practice contrary to both the Constitution and the needs of the State?

Mr. Maldeikis noted that EVS was currently dealing with a large number of issues related to pandemic and vaccine management, which were more closely linked to national policy. After the last EVS meeting, in which community leaders discussed vaccines, the President of Lithuania assured that he had received guarantees from the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, that Lithuania could vaccinate around 70% for the summer. adult population of the country.

The Seimas member raised the question as to why the president raises this as his goal and whether such representation is appropriate, since vaccination is a matter of internal Lithuanian politics.

“One of my goals, which I went to the polls with, is to simply raise the issue and find out for clarity. The question in this case is how we imagine the EU, whether it is domestic politics or foreign policy. The EU comes up often in Lithuania as a foreign policy that has little to do with our daily life, if so, it makes sense for the president to leave, because according to the Constitution, he cares about foreign policy.

However, if we agree that the EU’s problems are also our internal problems, then those who represent the government should move, ”said M. Maldeikis.

The politician asked for a look at the issues discussed by EVS last year.

“We see that most of the issues are absolutely the competence of the Government: the multi-year financial perspective, payments to farmers, social issues. These are questions that we demand answers from the Government. It is very strange when the president goes to negotiate them. A strange paradigm emerges: the government is responsible for the issues, but the president will negotiate them. What is the mandate and position of the president in the Lithuanian domestic policy negotiations? “, Said.

Maldeikis was also supported by Raimundas Lopata, Member of Parliament, member of the Liberal Movement. According to him, the current practice is in a certain sense unconstitutional.

“The president cannot represent the government, as the government cannot represent the president. That representation should not be just a verbal agreement that the president will be in his place from now on. There was practically an oral consensus when someone told him something, but that is not possible. There is a normal system, two people can travel, depending on the problems, that is how it should be, “said R. Lopata.

Conservative Ž. Pavilionis also noted that when thinking about representation in EVS, the situation itself has changed. “Issues related to a pandemic are the direct competence of the Prime Minister. Also, there is a new situation at the moment where we have a prime minister who is fully competent,” he said.

Changing “tradition” would cause conflict

Professor T. Janeliūnas from VU TSPMI highlighted three reasons why it would not be necessary to revert to the system when representation is split, depending on the nature of the issues, or handed over to the Prime Minister. In the first place, according to T. Janeliūnas, a sufficiently long-term precedent has already been formed that it would be irrational.

“The second, in this case, I believe that this transfer would not be achieved easily, without tension and with consensus, as was the case during the presidency of Mr. Grybauskaitė. This means that we can have a significant political crisis on an equal footing, and it is unlikely that anyone will be better off.

The third argument is that the term of the president in Lithuania is longer and therefore his establishment, his capabilities and his reputation in EVS last longer than that of the prime minister. That smaller change makes it possible to take advantage of a very specific guide representing Lithuania, representing Lithuania’s interests and possibly having a bigger impact, greater visibility within the EVS itself. Our country’s prime ministers change more frequently and certainly not everyone is equally capable of diplomatically representing Lithuania’s interests abroad at the highest level. It would not be very practical to change that established tradition now, ”explained the professor.

As long as we do not have a major conflict or gap between the Presidency and the Government, according to T. Janeliūnas, there should be no problems with the current practice of representation.

MPs propose their own solution: it’s not about personalities

Distribution of representation according to the nature of the problems, when the Prime Minister intervenes in the resolution of national policy problems and Lithuania is represented by the President in the resolution of net foreign policy problems: such a formula is proposed by both M Maldeikis as by R. Lopata. .

“Given our constitutional structure and what is being considered in the SVE, depending on the nature of the issues under discussion and the functions provided for in the Constitution, such participation should be such,” Lopata said.

Maldeikis emphasized that the SVE issue has nothing to do with personalities or personalities. Similarly, according to a member of the Seimas, he would not want this to cause a conflict between different authorities.

“It is not a question of personality or personalities. Whoever the president or prime minister is, he would have raised this issue. This is a matter of principle. This is a type of constitutional case.

If it’s on the agenda, where there are foreign policy issues, say North Africa, Russia, the Eastern Partnership, the president will go. If there are national policy issues like finance, banking union, vaccination, logically the prime minister should go. When it comes to domestic political issues that are the competence of the Government, it seems strange that the president is happening, “he emphasized.

Meanwhile, Ž. The flag assured that the representation of the state in the EVS is in any case a matter of agreement between the president and the prime minister.

“It is a matter of agreement between the president and the prime minister. As they will agree, it will happen, without forgetting that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs coordinates common positions, and the opinion of the Minister of Foreign Affairs should also be sought,” he said.

We remind you that Prime Minister Ingrida Šimonytė herself, when asked in mid-November if she would initiate a change in the representation of the EVS, assured that this is not her priority yet.

“This is the case now, and I really don’t see a reason why we should rush to change something here,” he said at the time.