ANNUAL REPORT OF 2019 ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SEIMAS OMBUDSMEN’S OFFICE OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA also been established that the purpose of the Immunity Board subordinate and accountable to the Director set up in the SSD is related solely to ensuring the safety and protection of the institution and it does not carry out an assessment of the activities of the institution (officers) in respect of ensuring the protection of human rights. During the investigation, the Seimas Ombudsman noticed that both the legal regulation in force before 1 January 2013 and the applicable legal regulation do not clearly specify the maximum time limit for the application of measures restricting the private life of persons but not sanctioned by the court. This could lead to situations where measures of intervention into the person’s private life could take an unreasonably long time and the necessity (proportionality) and/or timing of their application would not be revised by an independent competent entity. The Seimas Ombudsman noted that the control should include ensuring not only the legality of activities, the assessment of work performed by employees, but also compliance with the standards of protection of human rights in the activities of the SSD. Moreover, the nature and special status of activities carried out by the SSD (due to a high risk of violation of human rights) prevent from leaving the entity engaged in such activities from retaining the full right of self-governance; therefore, an effective external control mechanism of the activities of the SSD should also be established. Upon completion of the investigation, it was emphasized that under the applicable legal regulation, the Republic of Lithuania Seimas Committee on National Security and Defence (hereinafter – the CNSD) must control the compliance of intelligence institutions and intelligence officers with laws and other legal acts of the Republic of Lithuania in implementing the assigned tasks. Among other functions, when exercising parliamentary control over activities of intelligence institutions, the NSGC has the right to investigate complaints about actions of intelligence institutions and intelligence EVERYONE COUNTS 23 officers. Besides, the Seimas Ombudsmen have the right to hear complaints about actions of intelligence officers who violate human rights and freedoms in carrying out intelligence and counterintelligence. A person’s complaint is the application to a competent entity for the protection of infringed rights or legitimate interests. A person submitting a complaint concerning violations of his rights has reasonable grounds to expect that his complaint will be thoroughly investigated and the violated rights will be defended, but the decisions taken both by the CNSD and the Seimas Ombudsmen are of a recommendatory, non-binding nature and, accordingly, cannot be considered to be an effective and efficient measure of defence of the individual’s rights. It should therefore be concluded that the existing guarantee for the protection of personal rights laid down in the Law on Intelligence is not sufficient, and that such regulation, which does not guarantee a person’s right of access to justice, is inadequate and raises doubts as to whether the mechanism of control of the activities of the SSD enshrined in the legal system of the country complies with the essential principles of non-judicial control and ensures the protection of the values enshrined in Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. In regard to the circumstances established during the investigation, the Seimas Ombudsman recommended to the Prime Minister to initiate the amendment/supplement of the Law on Intelligence currently in force, setting maximum time limits for the application of intelligence methods, conditions for the destruction of information collected by the SSD and the possibility for individuals to effectively defend their rights in court. The Seimas Ombudsman also recommended to the Director of the SSD to ensure that control of activities of the SSD officers should also include control of compliance with human rights protection standards in the activities of this Department.