Interior Ministry Consults Statutory Services on Changes to Firearms Rules

Lithuania’s Interior Ministry is preparing changes to the rules governing firearm use in internal services, with the package expected to cover about 10 laws. The ministry is consulting the Police Department, the State Border Guard Service, the Public Security Service and the Financial Crime Investigation Service.

Šarūnas Dvareckas, the interior minister’s communications adviser, said the ministry would consider the institutions’ proposals and comments while preparing the amendments. It is also reviewing the practices of foreign law-enforcement agencies and the legal regulation used in other countries.

“

At present, amendments to the laws are being prepared that will change the procedure for using firearms in internal services. This will cover about ten laws regulating the use of firearms.

The Police Department has proposed removing the phrases “imminent danger” and “unavoidably necessary” from Articles 27 and 28 of the Police Law. It wants them replaced with a “real danger” criterion that can be assessed more objectively.

“

We listen to the proposals and comments submitted by the services, and they will be taken into account when preparing the amendments. We are also assessing the practices of foreign law-enforcement institutions and the legal regulation of other countries.

Police say the current rules create practical and legal difficulties because they do not establish clear criteria for deciding when danger is imminent or when firearm use is unavoidably necessary. In their view, the wording can force officers to consider whether a threat might have been avoided by other means, even in dynamic and critical situations where decisions must be made within seconds.

“Because of this, a situation may arise in which an officer facing a real danger refrains from using a firearm because of doubts about whether the decision would later be recognized as ‘unavoidably necessary’,” said Ramūnas Matonis, head of the Police Department’s communications division. Police stress that the proposed change would not authorize firearm use for any danger, or for an insignificant one. Rules requiring officers to use other possible measures before resorting to a firearm would remain in place. The department has also proposed ensuring legal and psychological assistance for officers who use firearms.

“

Because of this, a situation may arise in which, in the face of real danger, an officer refrains from using a firearm because of doubts about whether the decision would later be recognized as unavoidably necessary.