Ireland is neutral, so no one there is planning to seize
people’s property, as there certainly won’t be any war there.
“There is still a widespread—and not entirely
unfounded—belief in society that the declaration of a state of war or
mobilization would lead to the confiscation of private property, or even
families being forced out of their cars in the middle of the street.
Arūnas Pudžemis, Head of the Mobilization Division at the
Ministry of National Defence.
As geopolitical tensions in the region persist, there is
increasing discussion in the public sphere regarding the legal mechanisms
available for national defense. One of the most sensitive issues concerns the
temporary seizure and requisitioning of property. Many citizens fear this
implies the permanent loss of their assets; however, Lithuania’s defense
strategy is grounded in strict legal accountability and full financial
compensation.
Arūnas Pudžemis, Head of the Mobilization Division at the
Mobilization and Civil Resistance Department under the Ministry of National
Defence, explains the established legal procedures, the state’s commitment to
compensating losses, and the lessons learned from the experience in Ukraine.
– What are the primary legal instruments that govern these
procedures in the event of mobilization or the declaration of a state of war?
– During a state of war, mobilization, or a state of
emergency, the state has a legal basis to temporarily seize or requisition
property—such as vehicles or premises—belonging to citizens and businesses.
This procedure is regulated by the Law on the State of War, the Law on
Mobilization and Host Nation Support, and a specific Government resolution.
It is important to emphasize: during mobilization, the
residential property of citizens - a dwelling cannot be seized. Upon the
declaration of martial law, such a seizure is possible only in exceptional
cases; however, even then, the law guarantees that the owner must be provided
with alternative living quarters.
– What is the difference between the temporary seizure of
property and the requisition of property?
– Temporary seizure means that the state borrows property to
carry out specific tasks and subsequently returns it to the owner. This applies
to vehicles and real estate.
Requisition is an extreme measure whereby property is taken
permanently—either because it cannot be returned or because it is consumed.
Examples include food for soldiers or fuel for transport. In such cases, the
owner is fully compensated for the value of the property.
If property that has been temporarily seized is damaged,
loses some of its value, or is completely destroyed during an operation, the
state assumes financial responsibility and compensates for the losses based on
market value.
– How does the mechanism for fair compensation for seized
property work?
– This process is organized by an individual or individuals
specifically authorized by the director of the municipal administration, in
close cooperation with military commandant’s offices. During martial law, their
personnel—including soldiers and members of the Riflemen’s Union—assist in
maintaining public order, coordinate processes within the regions, and
participate in the lawful temporary seizure or requisition procedures.
The military may seize property directly in the field only
in exceptional cases—specifically, when an urgent and immediate need arises
during a military operation.
Temporarily seized property must be returned immediately
once it is no longer required, or no later than three months after the lifting
of a state of war or the end of mobilization. The owner is notified of where to
go to reclaim their property.
At the time of seizure, the property is documented in
detail, including photographs or video footage of both its exterior and
interior. If the property is returned in a damaged state (for example, if a bus
is seized with intact windows but returned with them broken), a report
detailing the damage is drawn up. The State covers the costs of repairs.
Compensation is paid out after the property has been
returned (or once its loss has been confirmed). If the State were to make
payment immediately, the transaction would legally constitute a
purchase-and-sale agreement rather than a seizure. If an owner disagrees with
the compensation amount calculated by the municipality and no agreement can be
reached, they have the right to seek recourse in court.
– Does the State already maintain a pre-existing list of the
most suitable civilian transport?
– Since the entry into force of the revised Law on the State
of War in 2020, civilian property is no longer included in mobilization plans
in advance, and owners are not notified beforehand. The temporary seizure of
property is not the primary option.
The state maintains a comprehensive catalog of mobilization
capabilities, which stores information regarding material resources,
manufactured products, goods, and services provided. However, there are no
plans for the mass requisitioning of vehicles or premises, as doing so would
bring the national economy to a standstill and reduce budget revenues.
Furthermore, if the state were to requisition civilian
transport, it would also need to secure drivers and fuel, as well as cover
depreciation costs; consequently, it is far more efficient to simply purchase
such services or transport on the open market.
– What types of vehicles or premises would the state need
most?
– Ordinary city station wagons, sedans, or luxury sports
cars are of the least use to the state. As the experience in Ukraine
demonstrates, for defense purposes, priority is given to vehicles with high
off-road capability (4x4), pickup trucks with cargo beds, heavy trucks, and
buses.
Electric vehicles are not particularly attractive, since,
under wartime conditions, ensuring they could be charged within a disrupted
power grid would be nearly impossible.
As for real estate, hotels or private country estates are
not the primary choice, because troops do not operate without their equipment
(after all, you cannot park an entire battalion’s worth of military vehicles in
front of a hotel in a city center). For the state, the most important assets
are large-scale industrial or logistics facilities (warehouses) that offer
electricity, heating, and basic sanitary conditions for the deployment of
troops and equipment.
– How can an ordinary person on the street distinguish a
legitimate state representative from a looter?
– An emergency requisition on the street during a military
operation can only be carried out by the decision of a military unit
commander—not at the initiative of an individual soldier.
The procedure must be as follows: a) the individual must
wear a military uniform and present an official service identification
document; b) an asset handover protocol must be completed on the spot,
recording the details of the person and the vehicle (including the VIN and
license plate number) as well as any existing defects; c) one copy of this
protocol must be handed to the owner immediately.
The director of the municipal administration must be
notified of such a requisition within a specified timeframe. Not having
documents or purchase agreements on hand during wartime will not be a reason to
halt the process; ownership rights can be proven later when applying for
compensation based on the issued official record.
– What happens to a citizen’s personal belongings located
inside a vehicle or on premises?
– The military has no need for civilian property; therefore,
the citizen must be allowed to take their personal belongings (tools, clothing,
or other items) with them.
Regarding premises and the items inside them that the owner
does not have time to physically remove, these remain on-site. If, upon the
return of the property, those items are no longer there, the state provides
compensation for them. Furthermore, if an individual hires transport to clear
out premises and move their belongings, they may subsequently submit invoices
to the municipality to request reimbursement for transportation costs.
– What would be the consequences for a citizen who refuses
to hand over their vehicle? Is this considered sabotage?
– There is no specific provision in the Criminal Code
addressing the refusal to hand over a vehicle; the Code of Administrative
Offenses could potentially be applied. However, in a state focused on defense,
such behavior would be difficult to comprehend. The military alone cannot
defend the country—soldiers stand on the front lines with weapons, while the
rest of society supports them. If a military unit requires transport at a given
moment to carry out defensive functions, society must provide it; otherwise, we
simply will not have a state of our own. No one will seize property
unnecessarily—this is strictly a measure of last resort.
– What does the experience of Ukraine teach us?
– The Ukrainian example reveals two phases. Looking back to
the start of the war in 2014, there were lawful temporary requisitions;
however, there were also many instances where businesses and companies
voluntarily handed over assets to the military, recording a "zero
value" in the official documentation (with the understanding that this
constituted support for the front line).
During the full-scale invasion, Ukraine began actively
employing a mechanism for the state to purchase assets at market value, with
immediate payment. The state strives to pay the owner right away, ensuring the
individual has the funds needed for their livelihood or to relocate to safety.
– What is the primary piece of advice your department would
offer to citizens?
– One must grasp this fundamental truth: for every soldier
on the front line, there must be 10 to 20 people in the rear providing support
(food, supplies, logistics). If we wish to live in a state of our own—rather
than one under occupation—everyone must contribute.”
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą