This article deals with insights into the analysis of shortcommings of ensuring separate human rights legal regulation in Lithuania while implementing the rule of law. The shortcomings of the Lithuania legislature are highlighted in particular the failure to ensure or inappropriate or insufficient guaranteeing of separate rights.This article has chosen to present herea selection of rights from a wider range of rights to be analysed. This choice reflects not a few but a set of the most striking examples of the shortcomings of the legislature of Lithuania. These examples could be named ‘the most striking’ because the constitutional requirements of the legislature is to ensure that human rights are explained accurately in the wide constitutional jurisprudence, despite this fact they are not sufficiently obeyed. In this article the problem of ensuring two quite different kinds of rights are identified and analysed.These include two civil rights (i.e. the right to freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degradating treatment or punishment in the context of conditions of imprisonment, the right to freedom of expression and information) and one economic right — the right to freedom of individual economic activity and initiative. They distinctly approve at least a few shortcomings of legal regulation: non-complexity/non-systematicity, inconsistency, intricacy, uncertainty, and often — instability, unconstitutionality, and in some cases nonconformity with international standards of human rights protection, as well as the inaccessibility of legal regulation. In this article the recommendations of how to improve those shortcommings are considered. In light of the inability to actually fully ensured constitutional guarantees of separate human rights it could be argued that the principle of rule of law which is enshrined in the preamble of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania which is an aspiration, remains a major challenge for the Lithuanian society.