Freedom of speech in Lithuania has become the centre of an unprecedented civic mobilisation, as citizens rallied to defend the independence of the national public broadcaster. The conflict around LRT shows how strongly Lithuanian society reacts when democratic values and media freedom appear under threat.
Protests in Defence of Media Freedom in Lithuania
In December, mass protests erupted across Lithuania after the ruling coalition proposed changes to the regulation of the public broadcaster LRT. In Vilnius alone, around 10,000 people gathered in Independence Square in front of the Seimas, while demonstrations also took place in Klaipėda, Kaunas, Šiauliai, Marijampolė, Jonava, and Kėdainiai.
The protests were triggered by a legislative initiative that critics described as an attempt to introduce political control over LRT. Citizens marched under the slogan “Hands off freedom of speech”, framing the issue as a fundamental democratic struggle rather than a technical legal debate.
Why the LRT Reform Sparked Outrage
The proposed amendments aimed to simplify the early dismissal of the LRT director.
According to the draft, the head of the broadcaster could be removed by a secret vote of the LRT Council based on loosely defined criteria such as “improper performance” or rejection of the annual report.
Key concerns raised by critics included:
- Reduced safeguards for the independence of the public broadcaster
- Lower voting thresholds enabling political influence
- Removal of the requirement that dismissal must be justified by public interest
As LRT had previously reported extensively on coalition scandals and internal conflicts, many journalists and observers viewed the reform as retaliation for critical coverage.
Political Context and Public Reaction
The initiative was initially introduced by the populist party “Dawn of the Neman”, a controversial member of the ruling coalition. Later, a similar proposal was registered by the Social Democrats, which only intensified public anger instead of calming it.
President Gitanas Nausėda commented on the situation with irony, suggesting that Lithuanians were launching a “hybrid attack against themselves”. However, his reluctance to clearly oppose the reform negatively affected his public approval ratings.
Meanwhile, the scandal further weakened the ruling coalition, whose support dropped significantly in opinion polls, benefiting the opposition conservatives.
International Pressure and European Standards
The controversy quickly moved beyond Lithuania’s borders. The European Commission requested official explanations, questioning whether the amendments complied with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA).
According to the Commission, the proposed changes risked violating Article 5 of the EMFA, which requires:
- Transparent and independent appointment procedures
- Stronger safeguards for dismissing public broadcaster leadership
- Justified and proportionate decision-making
Comparisons with Hungary’s media reforms began to surface, amplifying international concern over the direction of Lithuanian media policy.
Escalation, Memes, and Temporary Retreat
As protests resumed in mid-December, the opposition submitted hundreds of amendments, some deliberately absurd. One amendment proposing that the LRT director could only be dismissed after a vote of no confidence by a cat owned by an opposition MP unexpectedly passed, instantly turning into a national meme.
This episode highlighted both the creativity of parliamentary resistance and the depth of the political crisis. Eventually, mounting public pressure forced the Seimas leadership to suspend consideration of the amendments until next year.
Protests even followed Lithuanian leaders abroad. In Brussels, demonstrators confronted the president’s motorcade with banners accusing him of lacking resolve in defending media freedom.
Will There Be New Attempts to Control LRT?
Despite postponing the vote, coalition leaders have not abandoned their plans. Proposals are already being discussed to expand the powers of the LRT Council, including approval of editorial policy and decisions on media partnerships.
Prime Minister Inga Ruginenė publicly urged restraint, but key coalition figures insist the reform can be “improved” rather than withdrawn. President Nausėda even suggested a complete reset of LRT leadership as a way out of the crisis, a proposal that critics see as equally dangerous.
What is clear is that Lithuanian society has drawn a red line. Any further attempts to weaken the independence of the public broadcaster are likely to trigger renewed protests.
Civic Resistance as a Democratic Signal
The LRT law controversy has evolved into a broader crisis exposing tensions within Lithuania’s ruling elite and the risks of alliances with populist and radical forces. Yet it has also demonstrated the resilience of Lithuanian civil society.
By mobilising tens of thousands of citizens, Lithuania has sent a strong message: freedom of speech and independent journalism are not negotiable. This public response may become a defining example for other European democracies facing similar pressures.
