NATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF CROSS-BORDER INSTRUMENTS TO PERSONS WITH INTELLECTUAL AND/OR PSYCHOSOCIAL DISABILITIES IN LAW AND PRACTICE 30 Lithuania (with the exception of arrest, house arrest and the obligation to be separated from the injured party), which shall be in the closest correspondence to, but not be more severe than, the obligations and/or prohibitions referred to in the decision on the pre-trial detention measure issued by a competent authority in another European Union Member State. The grounds for refusing to recognise a decision of a competent authority of another Member State of the European Union on a supervision measure do not include a reference to a violation of fundamental human rights. There are no publicly available statistics on the use of the European Supervision Order in Lithuania. During the research interviews with practicing legal experts, it was noted that the ESO is a "languishing" norm, which is applied extremely rarely, and no practical examples could be provided. „While there are hundreds of EAWs issued and executed, there are only a handful of European Supervision Orders issued and executed. It is almost an inapplicable document in practice. Although it should be the alternative that ensures that people do not spend time in detention unnecessarily.“26 26 Quote from one of the semi-structured interviews.