Context: Lithuania became the first NATO country to allocate over 5% of its GDP — nearly €5 billion — to defense. Just a few years ago, the figure was just over 3%. In 2025, alliance members agreed to increase defense spending to 5% of GDP by 2035. However, Lithuania reached this goal nine years ahead of schedule. The funds are being allocated toward air defense systems, heavy equipment, and the establishment of its own army division by 2030.
The newspaper SB. Belarus Segodnya found a different reason to write about its neighbor. In a June 12, 2026 article, staff member Liudmila Hladkaya criticized amendments to the Lithuanian Criminal Code regarding offences against sexual integrity. She claimed that lawmakers wanted to reduce penalties for pedophiles.
“Those who call themselves lawmakers are proposing, first of all, to reduce the punishment for perverts. Second, they want to enshrine a legal provision stating that if a child later confirms that ‘they didn’t say no to the man,’ it’s as if the crime never happened. The pedophile won’t be jailed,” wrote Hladkaya.
In fact, the proposed amendments do not apply solely to offenses against children; they also cover sexual offences against adults. These amendments define sexual violence as not only acts accompanied by physical or psychological violence, threats, or coercion, but also sexual contact without voluntary consent.
According to the existing logic, it was necessary to prove that the victim had been threatened or coerced in each case. However, a person may be unable to resist due to shock, fear, or psychological pressure. This is why Lithuania is proposing to enshrine the principle that sexual contact is considered a crime in the absence of explicit, voluntary consent. Physical or psychological abuse, as well as threats, would be considered aggravating circumstances and carry more severe penalties.
The same logic applies to a draft article on child sexual abuse, which is an act committed without free consent. It was precisely this wording that upset Hladkaya. She interpreted it to mean that if the child consented, the abuse would not be a crime. But that’s not true. In this provision, acts committed without free consent are defined as those that did not involve threats or violence. The same article further provides separate penalties for the same acts when committed through threats or violence.
Additionally, Article 151-1 of the Lithuanian Criminal Code makes it illegal to have any sexual contact with a child under the age of 16. There are no clauses regarding consent in it. This provision is currently in effect, and it will remain so after the amendments are adopted.
Hladkaya also wrote:
“Lawmakers believe that the penalty for the gang rape of a boy or girl could be reduced even further, to two years in prison.”
However, the current Criminal Code of Lithuania does not contain a separate provision specifically covering the gang rape of a child. Specific provisions exist regarding the sexual abuse of minors and gang rape. The court considers both when imposing a sentence. Therefore, it is incorrect to claim that the penalty threshold has been lowered. It is impossible to compare the new provision to an existing article because no such article currently exists.
The draft amendments propose a minimum prison sentence of two years for group sexual acts involving children that do not include threats or violence. The same acts committed with violence or threats would carry a sentence of at least six years.
In the SB. Belarus Segodnya article, Liudmila Hladkaya portrayed the amendments as an attempt to reduce liability for crimes against children. However, the bill establishes the principle of voluntary consent, categorizes crimes according to the presence of threats and violence, and maintains an absolute prohibition on sexual contact with children under the age of 16.