| Abstract: | ES vidaus rinka suprantama kaip teritorija be sienų, kurioje be kitų laisvių užtikrinamas ir laisvas prekių judėjimas. Laisvas prekių judėjimas yra labiausiai išplėtota iš vadinamųjų keturių „laisvių“ ir bene sėkmingiausiai veikianti Europos Bendrijos sritis. Automobilių pirkimas-pardavimas taip pat patenka į laisvo prekių judėjimo principų reguliuojamą sritį, nes autmobiliai taip pat yra „Prekės“. Taigi automobilių registravimo draudimas yra akivaizdus laisvo prekių suvaržymo pavyzdys, nes joks žmogus nebus suinteresuotas pirkti automobilį žinodamas, kad negalės jo registruoti ir naudoti. Tyrimo tikslas buvo išsiaiškinti, ar toks Lietuvoje taikomas draudimas nepažeidžia laisvo prekių judėjimo principų. Visų pirma, svarbiausio laisvam prekių judėjimui taikomo proporcingumo principo. Jis reikalauja, kad naudojamos priemonės atitiktų tą tikslą, kurio jomis siekiama. Taigi nukrypti nuo bendrosios taisyklės leidžiama tik tiek, kiek yra būtina keliamiems tikslams pasiekti. Tyrimo rezultatai parodė, kad Lietuvos institucijų veiksmai nėra proporcingi siekiamiems tikslams. Visų pirma, proporcingumo principas nereikalauja Bendrijos šalių atsisakyti naudoti laisvą prekių judėjimą varžančias priemones. Antra, taikomas „dešiniavairių“ automobilių registracijos draudimas, nepagrindžiant moksliniais tyrimais ar skaičiavimais, negali būti pateisinamas tik dėl galinčio kilti pavojaus kitiems eismo dalyviams, žmonių sveikatai ir visuomenės saugumui. Išanalizavus kitų šalių praktiką, naudojant „dešiniavairius“ automobilius, prieinama vienos išvados, kad šių automobilių naudojimas niekuo nesiskiria nuo įprastų automobilių ir didesnės rizikos nei jį vairuojantiems žmonėms, nei kitiems eismo dalyviams nesukelia. Taigi toks automobilių registracijos draudimas, taikomas Lietuvoje, yra neproporcingas, nepasiekia nei teisinių, nei socialinių tikslų.
The free movement of goods is the most successful project in European Community. It is an important part of the internal market described in EC treaty as follows: the internal market shall comprise an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty. It is necessary to ensure the appropriate application of principles of free movement goods in European Community. Only this way it is possible to ensure fair competition among states companies and keep internal market competitive to the rest of the world. For the majority of products, EU countries have adopted the principle of mutual recognition of national rules. Any product legally manufactured and sold in one member state must be allowed to be placed on the market in all others. Articles 34 and 35 of the Treaty on Functioning of European Union deals with the prohibition of quantitative restrictions and measures having an equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions on imports and exports. Measures having an equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions mean laws, regulations, administrative provisions, administrative practices, and all instruments issuing from a public authority including recommendation which have similar effect to quantitative restrictions. These articles are a leading tool to deal with elimination of technical barriers which are the most dangerous to free movement of goods notion. Only on the grounds of Article 36 there is a possibility to restrain free movement of goods on public grounds, such as public morality, public policy or public security; the protection of health and life of humans, animals or plants, the protection of national treasures possessing artistic, historical or archaeological value. Apart from the exceptions in Article 36 the ECJ has also described the mandatory requirements for Member States they should impose on the free movement of goods such as the consumer protection, the environmental protection, etc. Road safety was named as one of the mandatory requirements by ECJ in several cases. The Court has also acknowledged that road safety constitutes an overriding reason in the public interest capable of justifying a hindrance to the free movement of goods. By prohibiting the registration of passenger cars whose steering wheel is mounted on the right-hand side and/or requiring prior to registration that a steering wheel mounted on the right-hand side of a new passenger car or of a passenger car previously registered in another Member State be transferred to the left-hand side, the Republic of Lithuania has failed to fulfill its obligations under Council Directive 70/311/EEC. Under legal measures of the Republic of Lithuania it is not permitted to register passenger cars with the steering equipment on the right-hand side, although such cars satisfy all the requirements laid down in EU Directive 2007/46/EC. On 29 April 2009 Directive 2007/46/EC repealed and amended by Directive 70/156/EEC. The Member States had to transpose the provisions of Directive 2007/46/EC into national law before 29 April 2009 but Lithuania failed to fulfill their obligations. Article 34 of TFEU, which prohibits quantitative restrictions on trade and all measures having equivalent effect, is applicable to such prohibitions. On the basis of settled case-law of the Court of Justice, legal measures of the Member States, which are capable of hindering, directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, trade within the European Union, are to be considered measures having an effect equivalent to quantitative restrictions on trade. The refusal to register passenger cars with the steering wheel on the right-hand side in the Republic of Lithuania is not an appropriate means of ensuring road safety. In the Commission's view, a car with the steering wheel on the right-hand side does not give rise to road-safety problems, but the driver must get accustomed to driving a car with the steering equipment on the right-hand side on the right-hand side of the road so that the driving of such a car does not give rise to danger for other road users. Lithuanian authorities created prohibition to register a right-hand drive vehicles by stating that these vehicles will reduce traffic safety situation in state, but they cannot produce any kind of scientific prove for these arguments. The goal of state authorities to ensure traffic, human and public safety by applying this ban of vehicle registration, are only in theory, because in practice this kind of problem does not exist. There appears to be an assumption in Canada that in a predominantly left-hand-drive environment, a right-hand-drive vehicle is simply too dangerous to operate. Some say a lack of available claims data exists to disprove such an assumption. In fact, right-hand-drive vehicles have been safely operating on Canadian roads for more than 30 years, according to the Transport Safety Commission. From collector vehicles to Canada Post delivery trucks and garbage disposal trucks, tens of thousands of right-hand-drive vehicles are on Canadian roads on any given day. No significant claims statistics suggest these vehicles are any more dangerous to drive than LHD(left-hand drive) counterparts. By analyzing the situation of other countries on this matter, such as England or Canada, undoubted conclusion comes up: there is no greater risk to operate right-hand drive vehicle in a predominantly left-hand-drive environment, it just takes time and more skills to get used to it. Therefore, by this statement Lithuania‘s position to ban right-hand drive vehicles is absolutely unproportional against the goals they are trying to reach. |
