Proposed amendment to the education law – marginalization of minority languages?

In April 2025, representatives of the opposition Homeland Union – Lithuanian Christian Democrats (TS-LKD) registered a draft amendment to the Education Act, which proposes a significant increase in the use of the Lithuanian language in the educational system of kindergartens and schools for national minorities. Although the changes are justified by the need to better prepare students to function in Lithuanian society, the proposal is raising serious concerns among representatives of minority communities in Lithuania.

Project Assumptions

According to the proposal, preschool education would be conducted exclusively in the Lithuanian language, with only optional instruction in the language and literature of the national minority. This marks a departure from the current practice, under which minority kindergartens are allowed to conduct classes in the children’s native language. At later stages of education, it is proposed that social subjects – such as history, geography, civics, philosophy, and entrepreneurship – be taught in Lithuanian (so that half of all lessons would be conducted in Lithuanian).

The changes would affect, among other things, Article 30 of the Education Act, which regulates education in schools of national minorities. According to the TS-LKD proposal:

• Preschool education would take place exclusively in Lithuanian (with only the optional study of minority language and literature).
• In primary and secondary schools, the share of instruction in Lithuanian would increase to 50%.
• All so-called “social subjects” (history, geography, civics, economics, entrepreneurship, philosophy) would be taught in Lithuanian.

Concerns from Minority Communities

These proposals have raised concerns – currently, there is a lack of qualified Lithuanian language teachers (capable of teaching Lithuanian while accounting for the specific needs of minority schools), and there is also a shortage of appropriate textbooks and teaching materials (currently, children in Polish and Lithuanian schools use the same Lithuanian textbooks, despite differences in language proficiency and context). The proposed changes are not supported by any real implementation measures, and although TS-LKD representatives claim the aim is to improve Lithuanian language proficiency among youth, concerns arise not only from the lack of infrastructure but also from a lack of systemic coherence. The mere proposal to increase the number of Lithuanian language lessons has not been adequately consulted with affected communities, and decisions are being made in a purely formal manner. Furthermore, the education plans for 2025–2027 already include an increase in Lithuanian language instruction – for example, up to 8 hours per week in grade 1 and 7 hours in grades 2–4.

The amendments are primarily directed at Russian-language educational institutions in Lithuania – due to signed international agreements, the Polish language is to be treated as an exception. However, the fact that Polish schools are currently exempt does not mean their situation is stable or secure. In recent years, these institutions have also faced challenges, including reorganization attempts, limitations on autonomy, and even closures. Thus, the protection of minority languages and their associated educational institutions requires lasting, systemic guarantees, not merely ad hoc solutions or formal exceptions.

EFHR’s Position: Lithuanian-Language Education – Yes, but not at the expense of minority rights

The bill proposed by the conservatives fits into a broader trend of increasing pressure for linguistic integration. As highlighted in EFHR’s (European Foundation of Human Rights) analysis of the Ministry’s recent proposals, the organization does not oppose the need for proficiency in the state language—on the contrary, it supports initiatives aimed at improving the quality of Lithuanian language instruction. However, such measures must be proportionate and consistent with the principles of equality and the protection of national minority identities. EFHR reminds that Article 37 of the Lithuanian Constitution, as well as the Law on National Minorities and ratified international agreements (including the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities of the Council of Europe), guarantee the right to preserve minority language, culture and education. The proposed changes, EFHR warns, may violate both the Lithuanian Constitution and Lithuania’s international commitments.

In 2023, the European Foundation of Human Rights (EFHR) submitted an alternative report regarding the implementation of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in the Republic of Lithuania. In this document, EFHR emphasized the need for actions aimed at improving the situation in the area of education for national minorities, particularly highlighting noticeable disparities in exam results between students from different linguistic groups. The report pointed out entrenched systemic issues significantly affecting the effectiveness of the teaching process and educational achievements. The Foundation highlighted that increasing the number of hours of Lithuanian language instruction should not come at the expense of minority languages. As a result, subjects such as social education, natural sciences, mathematics and technology should be taught in Lithuanian as a complement to existing practices, taking into account the real needs of students. EFHR also noted significant language barriers, including insufficient support for translating textbooks into minority languages, which significantly hinders the knowledge acquisition process.

The current Education Act already requires schools to teach the state language, while also allowing school communities to decide which subjects should be taught in Lithuanian. This ensures a balance between integration and the preservation of students’ national identity. Instead of focusing solely on intensifying the teaching of the state language, a more effective approach would be to implement integrative multilingual education, as recommended by UNESCO. Research by this organization shows that developing skills in the mother tongue leads to better academic outcomes. UNESCO’s 2004 report by Carole Benson (The Importance of Mother Tongue-Based Schooling for Educational Quality) demonstrates that education in the mother tongue results in improved learning outcomes, reduces dropout rates and increases parental involvement. It also argues that teaching exclusively in a foreign language can lead to educational exclusion (The Importance of Mother Tongue-Based Schooling for Educational Quality, link). In this context, it’s worth pointing out two other reports: Education in a Multilingual World (link) and Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education: The Key to Unlocking SDG 4 (link), which should form the basis for language policies for minority groups. UNESCO emphasizes that mother tongue-based instruction significantly improves educational outcomes—especially in reading, writing and mathematics—and also makes it easier to learn foreign languages. The latest 2025 report indicates that children learning in a language they know have a 30% greater chance of mastering reading comprehension and information synthesis skills. Introducing bilingual education can significantly boost all key statistical indicators, including literacy (Languages Matter: Global Guidance on Multilingual Education, link; also noteworthy is the case study – Mother Tongue-based Literacy Programmes: Case Studies of Good Practice in Asia, link).

EFHR holds the view that a more effective solution would be to invest in the professional development of Lithuanian language teachers working in minority schools, and to ensure access to high-quality, properly translated teaching materials—a solution also supported by representatives of the teaching community.  While the proposed legislation might improve Lithuanian language proficiency among students, it poses a risk of marginalizing minority languages and may ultimately fail to address the root educational challenges in the long term.

EFHR Conclusions and Recommendations:

1. The proposed amendment must not restrict the constitutional rights of national minorities to receive education in their mother tongue.
2. The implementation of changes should be preceded by a comprehensive analysis of social, staffing, and financial impacts and should involve consultations with representatives of minority communities, including school communities.
3. It is essential to develop appropriate textbooks and train teaching staff – not only in terms of language proficiency, but also in methodology for teaching Lithuanian as a foreign language.
4. All changes must respect Lithuania’s international obligations, particularly the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities.
5. The mother tongue should be the foundation of education, and all reforms should be based on scientific data and UNESCO recommendations (see: Mother-Tongue Education: Policy Lessons for Quality and Inclusion, link)

Legal Concerns

The Legal Department of the Seimas (Parliament of Lithuania) has also raised concerns about the bill. In its opinion, it reminded that Lithuania, as a signatory of the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, is obliged to ensure the right to education in the mother tongue for persons belonging to national minorities (as per Article 14 of the Convention). According to legal experts, an overly radical increase in the use of the Lithuanian language in minority schools could effectively erode their distinct identity, constituting a violation of both the Constitution and international agreements. The current law provides a balance between ensuring knowledge of the state language and the right to mother-tongue education—a balance that the conservatives’ proposal would disrupt. (The full opinion of the Seimas Legal Department is available here).

EFHR will continue to monitor the legislative process surrounding the proposed amendment. If necessary, it is prepared to take legal action both domestically and internationally to defend the rights of minority communities.

Translated by Klaudia Korona within the framework of a traineeship programme of the EFHR