| Sixth Seimas of Lithuania | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||
| Overview | |||||
| Legislative body | Seimas | ||||
| Jurisdiction |  Lithuania | ||||
| Term | 1992—1996 | ||||
The Sixth Seimas of Lithuania was the first parliament (Seimas) elected in Lithuania after it restored independence on 11 March 1990. Elections took place on 25 October 1992, with the second round on 15 November. In a surprisingly decisive outcome, the elections were won by Democratic Labour Party of Lithuania (LDDP), with 73 seats. The result reflected widespread dissatisfaction with the economic situation and the policies of the ruling Sąjūdis political movement in the preceding Supreme Council of Lithuania.
The Sixth Seimas commenced its work on 25 November 1992 and served a four-year term, with the last session on 19 November 1996. Algirdas Brazauskas, the leader of LDDP, became the Speaker of the Seimas, before assuming the role of the President of Lithuania. He was succeeded as the Speaker by his party colleague Česlovas Juršėnas, who served for the rest of the term.
Three LDDP-led governments changed during the term of the Sixth Seimas. The government of Bronislovas Lubys, an independent business manager, served for a short period before the presidential election in 1993. The government of Adolfas Šleževičius was in power for most of the term, but the Prime Minister was forced out after a financial scandal in December 1995. Laurynas Stankevičius led the government for the rest of the term.
The Sixth Seimas adopted a number of laws, mostly related to agricultural reform, implementation of the Constitution of Lithuania and the introduction of Litas as the national currency. Supervision of financial markets was enhanced after a number of early financial institutions collapsed and other financial scandals came to light in 1994. On the other hand, the slow pace of market reforms, failure to restore the ownership of confiscated private property and weak efforts to fight corruption were criticized by the opposition. The chaotic process of privatization of public assets also came under criticism for allowing well-connected individuals and groups to take control of state enterprises.