2022 m. September 30 d.

The Seimas Ombudsperson calls on the Migration Department to improve informing individuals about the examination of their applications

Seimas Ombudswoman Erika Leonaitė examined the complaint of the applicant V.Z. regarding the inappropriate actions of the Migration Department at the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Lithuania (Migration Department). It revealed improper information and decision-making when examining the written requests submitted by the applicant’s spouse to the Migration Department for the urgent issuance of a temporary residence permit in the Republic of Lithuania and a national visa. After examining the facts and circumstances presented in the complaint, the Seimas Ombudswoman decided that the requests in the Migration Department were processed in violation of the deadlines stipulated in legal acts and that the person who submitted these requests and his spouse were not properly informed about the relevant decisions made in relation to them. The Seimas Ombudswoman recommends that the Migration Department improve informing individuals about the examination of their applications and initiate changes to related national legal acts.

During the investigation of the complaint, it was established that the request of the applicant’s spouse for the issuance of a temporary residence permit was received by the Migration Department in 2022. in May. On its basis, the officials of the Migration Department, after evaluating the collected information related to the applicant and her spouse, decided to conduct an inspection to determine whether their marriage is not a fictitious one. The officials, exceeding the decision-making deadline established in the description of the procedure for issuing temporary residence permits in the Republic of Lithuania to foreigners by 8 working days, informed the applicant’s spouse by e-mail that his application for the issuance of a temporary residence permit in Lithuania will be examined in the general procedure and the decision is planned to be made by September 11, 2022. The officials also returned the unused part of the state fee to the applicant and her spouse. Thus, the officials provided them with only part of the information required by law, and did not explain the reasons for the decision to refuse the applicant’s spouse in 2022. The request for the month of May should have been processed as soon as possible. During the investigation of the complaint, it was also established that the applicant learned about the extension of the deadline for examining her husband’s application for a national visa only after she contacted the Migration Department by email. The officials of the Migration Department did not deny this fact, stating that neither the applicant’s spouse nor the applicant herself were informed about the decision to extend the deadline for the aforementioned application.

During the investigation of the complaint, it was established that the request of the applicant’s spouse for the issuance of a temporary residence permit was received by the Migration Department in 2022. in May. On its basis, the officials of the Migration Department, after evaluating the collected information related to the applicant and her spouse, decided to conduct an inspection to determine whether their marriage is not a fictitious one. The officials, exceeding the decision-making deadline established in the description of the procedure for issuing temporary residence permits in the Republic of Lithuania to foreigners by 8 working days, informed the applicant’s spouse by e-mail that his application for the issuance of a temporary residence permit in Lithuania will be examined in the general procedure and the decision is planned to be made by September 11, 2022. The officials also returned the unused part of the state fee to the applicant and her spouse. Thus, the officials provided them with only part of the information required by law, and did not explain the reasons for the decision to refuse the applicant’s spouse in 2022. The request for the month of May should have been processed as soon as possible.  

During the investigation of the complaint, it was also established that the applicant learned about the extension of the deadline for examining her husband’s application for a national visa only after she contacted the Migration Department by email. The officials of the Migration Department did not deny this fact, stating that neither the applicant’s spouse nor the applicant herself were informed about the decision to extend the deadline for the aforementioned application.   The Seimas Ombudswoman pointed out in the recommendation that in the case in question, the Migration Department, as a public administration entity, should have acted carefully and informed the spouse of the applicant, as well as the applicant, about the decision to extend the deadline for the examination of the submitted application for the issuance of a national visa and to indicate the planned date of the decision. Especially since the officials of the Migration Department knew the e-mail address of the applicant’s spouse, they could easily inform him and his spouse about the aforementioned decision and thus prevent additional ambiguities. In the certificate, the Seimas Ombudswoman indicated that the applicant and her spouse tried to remove the ambiguities more than once by contacting the Migration Department by e-mail. These circumstances made it possible to conclude that the applicant reasonably stated in the complaint that when the deadline for the decision on her spouse’s request to issue/not issue a national visa was reached, she and her spouse were not informed about the extended deadline for examining this request, nor about the actual adoption of the specified decision.  

Taking into account the circumstances established during the investigation of the complaint, the Seimas Ombudswoman recommended to the Director of the Migration Department to take measures so that in the future the officers of the Migration Department comply with the requirements of legal acts and no later than 3 working days before the end of the deadline for the urgent examination of the application for a temporary residence permit in the Republic of Lithuania would inform the foreigner at his postal address that his request will be considered in the general procedure, indicating the reasons for such a decision. She also urged the Migration Department to consider initiating changes to national legislation to ensure that a person who has submitted an application for the issuance of a national visa is informed of the extension of the application deadline, the reasons for it and the planned decision date. And the most important thing is to take additional measures, improving the information of individuals on issues relevant to them.    

Related news