Lithuania / Supreme administrative court of Lithuania / administrative case No. A-1854-662/2019
Country
Lithuania
Title
Year
Decision/ruling/judgment date
Incident(s) concerned/related
Related Bias motivation
Groups affected
Court/Body type
Court/Body
Key facts of the case
A convicted person complained that he lodged request to prison authorities to have halal food and that he asked for an answer to his request in russian or kyrgyz language. The prison authorities did not approve his request and replied in Lithuanian language.
Main reasoning/argumentation
The court established that by current Lithuanian legislation and standarts prison authorities are not obliged to provide special religious food, but have responsibility to provide food which could be fit to consume for religious persons as possible. In addition, prison authorities are providing vegetarian/vegan food and convicts have possibility to buy food from prison shop. It was established, that the complainant had opportunity to use and buy food from shop and could eat vegetarian/vegan food, thus the prison authorities did not discriminate on religous grounds. However, the prison authorities were obliged to provide a reply in a language that the convict could understand, thus their answer in lithuanian language was considered as unlawful.
Is the case related to the application of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, the Racial Equality Directive?
Key issues (concepts, interpretations) clarified by the case
Prison authorities are not obliged to provide special religious food, but only strive to create conditions and food to fit religious needs.
Results (sanctions, outcome) and key consequences or implications of the case
The complaint was dissmised, and the first instance court rulling was left in force, as it was established that the prison authorities where obliged to provide an answer in language which the convicted person would understand.
Key quotation in original language and its unofficial translation into English with reference details
"Byloje nustatytos aplinkybės patvirtino, kad pareiškėjui buvo sudarytos sąlygos maitintis pagal jo religinius įsitikinimus, bei nebuvo objektyvių duomenų, kad jis buvo diskriminuojamas religiniu pagrindu."
"Established facts prove, that plaintiff had conditions to eat according to his religious beliefs and there were no information, that he was discriminated by religious grounds"