A Lithuanian court on Tuesday dismissed a complaint by a group of 77 migrants seeking compensation for moral damages over detentions imposed after they entered the country in 2021.
The Regional Administrative Court ruled that the applicants failed to prove one of the key conditions for civil liability, unlawful actions by state institutions, and therefore rejected their request for 5,000 euros in compensation for each individual.
According to the court, the migrants argued that after fleeing persecution in their countries of origin, they were detained in Lithuania in July 2021 and housed for up to six months without the right to move freely under the legal framework in force at the time.
They claimed the restrictions were imposed without individual decisions or the possibility of appeal, violating the European Convention on Human Rights, Lithuania’s Constitution and EU law.
The applicants also cited a June 7, 2023 ruling by the Constitutional Court of Lithuania, which found similar legal provisions on the temporary accommodation of asylum seekers to be unconstitutional. They argued that the restrictions caused psychological harm, including stress, insecurity and a loss of trust in public institutions.
However, the court said the migrants’ accommodation and movement restrictions could not be assessed in isolation from the “broader geopolitical and security context” at the time. It argued that the government at the time was dealing with emergencies linked to the Covid-19 pandemic and the surge in migrants entering Lithuania from Belarus, which authorities described as a threat to national security.
The court also noted that in 2021, the Lithuanian parliament declared an emergency in response to what it called a “hybrid attack” orchestrated by the Belarusian government, which it accused of deliberately facilitating irregular migration flows.
Addressing the Constitutional Court’s 2023 ruling, the court said such decisions generally apply prospectively. In this case, it noted, the ruling was issued after the applicants had already left Lithuania and therefore could not be applied retroactively to their situation.
The court further argued that it was the applicants’ responsibility to demonstrate not only the existence of non-material damage but also a clear causal link between alleged unlawful actions by authorities and the harm suffered. It found that general claims of suffering were insufficient.
It also noted that the migrants did not file individual claims regarding specific conditions of detention, alleged inhumane treatment, health impacts or other material and non-material damages, which could be pursued separately under established legal procedures.
Taking all circumstances into account, the court concluded that the conditions for civil liability had not been met and dismissed the complaint as unfounded.
The ruling can be appealed.
Newsletter
Every Friday morning.
