For the first time, Karl Loewenstein had used the category of militant democracy concerning the Weimar Republic. Although the world’s situation has changed, the process of political systems taking over non-democratic regimes’ characteristics is still visible. Among the indicators that can testify to becoming militant democracy, the restriction of freedom of the press is distinguished. This article attempts to analyze the dynamics of this process in Lithuania based on the Freedom House reports. The research question formulated is: What restrictions on the press’s freedom in Lithuania occurred in the period? The hypothesis is: In 2008-2019 in Lithuania, there has been a regular restriction on the freedom of the press, which may indicate a progressive process of militant democracy. Results: The hypothesis has been partially verified positively. During the period considered, there were regular restrictions on the freedom of the press but were justified mainly by circumstances, or immediate counter-action was taken.

Bulgaria is a partially consolidated democracy. Between the financial crisis of 2008 and the coronavirus pandemic, it began to take on characteristics of authoritarian regimes. However, its case is not a classically understood militant democracy, but quasi-militant democracy. This article aims to present main changes the Bulgarian system faced in 2008– 2019 and its transition from neo-consolidated democracy to quasi-militant democracy. The research questions are: is Bulgaria still a neo-militant democracy? If not, what factors determine and facilitate a departure from a neo-militant democracy?