[ad_1]
Photo 2President of Seimas Viktoras Pranckietis. Photo by Irmantas Sidarevičius.
“In the opinion of the President of Seimas, the Constitutional Court, acknowledging that the Seimas Temporary Inquiry Commission was established illegally due to possible illegal influence and influence on Lithuanian politicians, officials and political processes in Lithuania, only reaffirmed that the motives of This commission was dubious. According to him, the work of the commission was used above all clearly and successfully to generate publicity and popularity. This was an obvious, even orthodox, case of populism. ” Elta, the spokesman for the Seimas, was informed by his spokesman Paulius Žeimys.
“It is also worth noting that this commission is a paradoxical precedent, because the Seimas procedures have created a large amount of interpretable material used for propaganda against Lithuania itself.” In the opinion of the President of Seimas, this caused long-term damage to the political system of our country. However, we can at least rejoice that the legal damage of the entire process was repaired by the decision of the Constitutional Court, ”he says.
ELTA recalls that the Constitutional Court announced on Friday that the commission headed by A. Širinskienė was formed in violation of the Constitution and that its conclusions are illegal.
The work of the so-called A. Širinskienė Commission raised many questions for the opposition. They repeatedly praised the work of this commission as simply a campaign of revenge by the ruling “peasants” against disgruntled political opponents. Addressing the Constitutional Court, the opposition emphasized that the purpose of the commission in charge of the investigation was defined very broadly and abstractly, both in terms of its time and the scope of the problems. It was also emphasized that one or more specific issues of state importance were not formulated, but that it was planned to investigate basically everything that had taken place in the political process for eight years, therefore, the formation of the commission contradicts the concept of commissions research and parliamentary control periods.
The petition also stated that the tasks formulated for the temporary commission under the legal regulation in dispute are inconsistent with the constitutional objectives of implementing parliamentary control of the Seimas, do not meet the requirements of the Constitution to investigate matters concluded only in recognition of the need to examine a matter of national importance. Furthermore, such investigations conducted by Seimas, among other things, to obtain and publicly disclose classified information in accordance with the law (intelligence, pre-trial investigation data), in the petitioner’s opinion, represent a threat to the principles of the state of straight.
Las Seimas on May 14. approved the conclusions of the commission chaired by A. Širinskienė. The Commission was created to investigate the possible illegal influence and impact of stakeholders or groups on political processes in the country, the conduct of elections, the formation of parliamentary coalitions, the work of parliamentary groups, individual politicians, and the activities and financing of political parties. The Commission also announced its intention to investigate the possible illegal influence and impact of interested parties on the legislative process.
The range of objectives of the investigation was adjusted after the commission began its work by including in the parliamentary investigation the conservatives’ appeal to the Constitutional Court regarding pension funds. It was also decided to investigate the possible illegal influence in the Official Central Ethics Commission (COEC).
The conclusions of the controversial study are presented according to three episodes of the study: the possible aspiration of interest groups and state politicians to influence the COEC, the possible pressure exerted by politicians on the prosecutor’s office and the possible influence of private pension funds in Seimas members that request the Constitutional Court. In the latest episode of the investigation, Gabrielius Landsbergis and his wife Austėja Landsbergienė were on the commission’s agenda. However, due to this episode, the influence of pension funds, the commission was unable to draw conclusions. By failing to gather enough material, the commission confirmed not the findings but the circumstances.
[ad_2]
