<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

The article argues that states’ narratives about themselves and each other, shaped by the foreign policy decision-makers, create filters for the achievement of soft power goals. A state agent can shape narratives that can be rejected by the state’s target’s society because they would undermine dominating biographical and strategic narratives of the state target. The empirical analysis of the narratives of the president, minister of foreign affairs, and spokesperson of the MFA of Russia illustrates how Russia prevents itself from soft power expansion by “othering” Lithuania. At the same time, analysis of the narratives of presidents and the minister of the foreign affairs of Lithuania illustrates how they shield society from Russia’s narratives and, thus, soft power while searching for “sameness” with the Euro-Atlantic partners.
</abstract>

You Shall Not Pass: The Strategic Narratives Defining Russia’s Soft Power in Lithuania

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

Recently amended legal regulations established the opportunity of application of advance directives for terminally ill patients in Lithuania. Provisionally, advance directives should enhance patient’s rights while making complex end of life decisions, however, implications for legal and moral responsibility to empower a patient’s autonomy are not clearly established yet. The article discusses the legal and ethical justification of implementation of advance directives and, in their absence, the surrogate decision making for the best interests of the patient and the best representation of the patient’s will. The reflections of recent empirical studies indicate the importance of a patient-centered approach that can provide the hints for harmonization of the national legal system, including a supportive decision-making culture, raising public awareness and confidence, more effective professional communication, and broader public involvement into end-of-life deliberations. Analysis of legal and ethical arguments imposes the conclusion that the specific question of respect of dignity in the end of life is not just a problem of health care management or the quality of health care services, but a fundamental challenge of human rights that should be discussed at the policy decision making level. Overall, we assume that application of advance directives should be elaborated in accordance with the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), the ideals of welfare society, and other national laws as well as public interests.
</abstract>

Protection of Human Dignity at the End of Life of the Terminally Ill: Ethical and Legal Considerations about the Law and Policy on Advance Directives in Lithuania

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

This article studies the Kosovo Government decision to restrict freedom of movement <italic>vis-á-vis</italic> freedom of gathering during the Covid-19 pandemic, a restriction which has directly affected religious freedoms and practices across multiple religions. The article also addresses the decision of the Constitutional Court, which ruled that the Government’s decision was unconstitutional. The article reflects on and contextualizes the behaviors of different religious communities in Kosovo, in light of these religious restrictions in the age of Covid-19.
</abstract>

Human Rights and Religious Freedoms During the Covid-19 Pandemic in Kosovo

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

Among the different instruments of collaborative governance, participatory budgeting (PB) is of particular interest in Poland. PB includes the residents who co-decide about local public expenditure. PB proponents suggest that it has the potential to democratize budgeting but others point to the ease with which organized groups sometimes capture the process to serve their interests. The analysis shows that due to the weak axiological grounds that result from the infringements of all nodal public values, e.g. human dignity, sustainability, citizen involvement, openness, secrecy, compromise, integrity, and robustness, PB in Poland has little potential to enhance accountability for the protection of the common good.
</abstract>

Accountability, Public Values, and Participatory Budgeting in Poland

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

Many parents (over)share personal details regarding their children in social media without thinking that this can negatively affect the wellbeing of their child and put him/her at risk. Furthermore, parents forget that they are not owners of their children’s data but just the legal representatives of the child with an obligation to act only for the best interests of the child. A child’s right to privacy and the protection of his/her data is regulated in international, EU and national level, however, this is not enough to avoid malpractice of the data of a child. This article analyses social media dangers and whether parental actions result in privacy and online safety violations focusing on legal regulations and their interpretations in international, EU and national level exploring child’s right to privacy, consent of the child and the right to be forgotten.
</abstract>

School of Business and Governance, Department of Law

Child Right to Privacy and Social Media – Personal Information Oversharing Parents

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

As the processes of globalization become more intense, the legislation adopted by international institutions occupies an increasingly important place in national criminal law, including crimes related to corruption. However, the regulation of some acts of corruption, in the context of sustainable development, raises questions about its compliance with criminal law principles. This article examines the requirements of international law to criminalize a promise and offer to give or accept a bribe in national law, recognizing that criminalization of such actions as completed criminal offense potentially violates the principle of <italic>ultima ratio</italic>. The article demonstrates that there is no unequivocal conclusion from international law that states must provide for liability for all acts of bribery as a completed criminal act. In order to implement the principle of <italic>ultima ratio</italic>, criminal liability for acts consisting essentially in the preparation or attempt to pay a bribe should not be enshrined in the same paragraph as bribery, where the bribe is exchanged by hand.
</abstract>

Criminalization of the Promise and Offer to Give or Accept a Bribe as a Completed Criminal Offense: Compliance with the <italic>Ultima ratio</italic> Principle

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

This article assesses the permissibility of interference in private autonomy under the good faith principle when payment service providers unilaterally terminate contracts with consumers. The protection of the interests of such consumers is impeded by the formal application of legal rules and contractual terms, which ultimately contradicts public interests, including combating money laundering and terrorism financing. To overcome this conflict, the article proposes a doctrinal approach according to which the bank’s right to withdraw from the contract unilaterally should be limited by the systemic and teleological interpretation of regulating rules in combination with the general civil principle of good faith, which, by analogy with the original source of the problem, is called a good faith based approach. One of the general frameworks for implementing this approach is respect for freedom of contract, which is limited by the non-discussion presumption, modern civil law practice, and legal regulation of a consumer’s interests. According to research based on EU and Latvian law, legal doctrine, and case law, there are also valid reasons to intervene in private autonomy that should be recognized as legally acceptable for restoring justice and contractual equality in favor of consumers.
</abstract>

The Good Faith Based Approach as a Legally Acceptable Intervention in Freedom of Contract to Protect Consumers’ Rights When Banks Unilaterally Close Accounts

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 16 (2024): Issue 2 (February 2024)

Volume 16 (2023): Issue 1 (September 2023)

Volume 15 (2022): Issue 2 (December 2022)

Volume 15 (2022): Issue 1 (October 2022)

Volume 14 (2021): Issue 2 (December 2021)

Volume 14 (2021): Issue 1 (June 2021)

Volume 13 (2020): Issue 2 (December 2020)

Volume 13 (2020): Issue 1 (June 2020)

Volume 12 (2019): Issue 2 (December 2019)

Volume 12 (2019): Issue 1 (June 2019)

Volume 11 (2018): Issue 2 (December 2018)

Volume 11 (2018): Issue 1 (June 2018)

Volume 10 (2017): Issue 2 (December 2017)

Volume 10 (2017): Issue 1 (June 2017)

Volume 9 (2016): Issue 2 (December 2016)

Volume 9 (2016): Issue 1 (June 2016)

Volume 8 (2015): Issue 2 (December 2015)

Volume 8 (2015): Issue 1 (June 2015)

Volume 7 (2014): Issue 2 (December 2014)

Volume 7 (2014): Issue 1 (June 2014)

Volume 6 (2013): Issue 2 (December 2013)

Volume 6 (2013): Issue 1 (June 2013)

Volume 5 (2012): Issue 2 (December 2012)

Volume 5 (2012): Issue 1 (June 2012)

Volume 4 (2011): Issue 2 (December 2011)

Volume 4 (2011): Issue 1 (June 2011)

Volume 3 (2010): Issue 2 (December 2010) The Problem of the State of Exception

Volume 3 (2010): Issue 1 (June 2010)

Volume 2 (2009): Issue 2 (December 2009)

Volume 2 (2009): Issue 1 (June 2009)

Volume 1 (2008): Issue 1 (December 2008)

Baltic Journal of Law & Politics

Baltic Journal of Law &amp; Politics (BJLP) is a scholarly journal, published bi-annually in electronic form as a joint publication of the Faculty of Political Science and Diplomacy and the Faculty of Law of Vytautas Magnus University (Lithuania). BJLP provides a platform for the publication of scientific research in the fields of law and politics, with a particular emphasis on interdisciplinary research that cuts across these traditional categories. Topics may include, but are not limited to the Baltic Region; research into issues of comparative or general theoretical significance is also encouraged. BJLP is peer-reviewed and published in English.  Why subscribe and read  The journal’s contributions present quality research on topics of critical concern both within and without the academy. The journal provides a platform for the publication of innovative research in the fields of law and politics, with an acute interest in the cross-pollinations of disciplines, comparative approaches to regional issues, and active dialogue on pressing contemporary issues of theoretical and practical import.  Why submit  The journal is committed to the quality of every article from the initial stage of inquiry to the date of publication. The journal provides fast, fair and constructive peer review by specialists in their areas from all over the world. Authors receive editorial assistance in adjusting their manuscripts to the standards of the journal as needed. Submissions from all corners of the fields of law and politics are encouraged, especially research that locates itself at their intersections.  Peer review  BJLP is a refereed journal. Submissions are subject to academic peer-review. Every submitted manuscript receives at least two professional reviews, at least one of which is a double-blind review. The peer-review process typically takes 1-2 months after the paper is accepted to peer-review process after the initial review in the Senior Editorial Board. There are no charges for the review process. For more information please visit Instructions For Authors. Rejection Rate   70%   Archiving  Sciendo archives the contents of this journal in Portico - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections.  Plagiarism Policy  The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process. 