The LRT Law amendments filibuster was a parliamentary obstruction tactic used by opposition members in the Seimas in December 2025 to delay controversial amendments to the Law on the Lithuanian National Radio and Television (LRT Law), which governs the public broadcaster Lithuanian National Radio and Television (LRT). This event marked the first documented use of a filibuster in modern Lithuanian parliamentary history and resulted in the postponement of the proposed legislation until 2026.
LRT is the national public broadcaster of Lithuania. Under the current legal framework, its independence is maintained through a governance structure led by the LRT Council, which consists of 12 members appointed by various state and civic institutions. Historically, the dismissal of the director general required a two-thirds majority (eight out of 12 votes) of the council, a threshold designed to prevent politically motivated leadership changes.
Tensions over LRT's governance arose following the formation of a new ruling coalition after the 2024 Lithuanian parliamentary election, consisting of the Social Democratic Party of Lithuania, Dawn of Nemunas, and the Lithuanian Farmers and Greens Union. The coalition sought to reform the LRT Law to address perceived issues with the broadcaster's leadership and independence.
Two main amendment proposals were introduced:
Critics, including journalists, opposition parties, and international organizations, argued that these changes threatened LRT's independence by politicizing its leadership and potentially allowing government interference.
In response to the fast-tracked second proposal, opposition lawmakers from parties such as the Homeland Union (TS-LKD), Union of Democrats "For Lithuania", and Liberals Movement, employed a filibuster by submitting over 1,000 amendments to the bill (reports vary, with some sources citing approximately 470 remaining for committee review and others up to 1,000 total), many of which were deliberately absurd or humorous to highlight the perceived flaws in the legislation. This forced the Seimas Culture Committee to review each amendment individually, significantly delaying proceedings.
This tactic required the Seimas Culture Committee to review each amendment individually, leading to marathon sessions. The committee held extended meetings on Monday and Tuesday (December 15âÂÂ16), followed by unscheduled and prolonged plenary sessions, including a late-night session on Tuesday that lasted about 12 hours. A further extraordinary session was planned for Thursday (December 18), but it was cancelled after Culture Committee chair KÃÂstutis Vilkauskas (Social Democrat) fell ill and was hospitalized, leaving hundreds of amendments unconsidered.
Notable satirical amendments included:
The amendments sparked widespread public opposition. The first major protest occurred on December 9, 2025, in Vilnius's Independence Square, where thousands rallied against the initial Nemunas Dawn proposal under slogans like "Hands Off Free Speech" and "Defend Media Freedom." LRT staff also went on strike that day.
A second wave of protests followed the revised amendments, with a three-day action announced on December 15 and held from December 16 to 18, 2025, drawing thousands more participants, including journalists, cultural figures, and citizens concerned about media independence. Protests included gatherings outside the Seimas and symbolic acts like lighting fires to represent threats to free speech.
The proposals drew criticism from international media freedom organizations:
On December 18, 2025, President Gitanas NausÃÂda criticized both the fast-track process and the opposition's tactics, suggesting that the LRT Council and administration resign voluntarily to resolve the crisis. Following negotiations, the ruling coalition announced on December 19 that the vote would be postponed to 2026, abandoning the urgent procedure. The Seimas autumn session ended on December 23 without passing the amendments.
The filibuster and protests underscored growing political polarization in Lithuania and debates over media freedom in the EU context. It successfully delayed the bill, forcing a compromise and drawing global attention to safeguards for public broadcasters.