[ad_1]
E. Misiūnas stated that the arguments he saw in the press also raised doubts.
“I know as much as I read those arguments in Delfi’s article, I have not yet investigated the judicial system. It is argued that the president is not a public administration entity and so on. I understand those arguments and also had my doubts as to whether this dispute was a matter for the Administrative Tribunal or, nevertheless, for a court of general jurisdiction. That’s what I was thinking about when I made that complaint, “said the former minister.
He promised to continue to seek legal ways to prove that his rights had been violated.
“I will definitely seek legal options to appeal or initiate a court of general jurisdiction. I believe and firmly believe that my rights have been violated. And if there is no rule of law in the rule of law that allows the protection of violated rights, then it is necessary to go to the legislature. Because even if the president thinks that rights may have been violated, he can go to court, so let the court speak in the normal course of the dispute, rather than refusing to accept and cross out just a few arguments. Delphi E. Misiūnas said.
The interviewee argued that the arguments presented in his complaint must be accompanied by a clear legal assessment.
“I believe that the rule of law should be an attempt to examine this situation normally and give a legal assessment. However, can the President, without arguments, for normal reasons, waste statements that warm me and I cannot objectively examine? Will we leave this speculation between the margins of legal regulation in this way, ”said the interlocutor.
Former Interior Minister Saulius Skvernelis in the government said he did not intend to stop.
“It just came to my knowledge then. From what I have seen, they are very much in line with administrative law, the administrative law of litigation. Because we know what is defined as a public administration entity and the court is going the most simple. And it says that the president is not a public administration entity. It was such a prediction, but there was a belief that perhaps there would be a desire to look more deeply, “he said.
The complaint was rejected
According to the court, the complaint is rejected because it does not fall within the jurisdiction of the administrative courts.
The judgment establishes that when deciding on the appointment of a judge, the President does not perform the function of public administration, but exercises state power, so this decision cannot be the subject of an administrative dispute.
Delphi recalls that E. Misiūnas appealed to the court when the president refused to consider the question of his reinstatement as a former judge at the Vilnius City District Court.
Addressing the court, E. Misiūnas asked to admit that the Office of the President and the Counsel of the Law Group, by failing to provide a written response to the request, violated not only the provisions of the Constitution but also the Public Administration Law. and the principle of responsible management.
It also requested a statement that “the President, acting alone and subjectively, decided not to appoint me as a judge, disregarding the provisions of the Law on Courts and the Procedure for Summoning and Organizing the Selection of Judges and the Rules of Procedure for the Selection of Judges. Principles of equity, objectivity, transparency and professionalism “.
It is strictly forbidden to use the information published by DELFI on other websites, in the media or elsewhere, or to distribute our material in any way without consent, and if consent has been obtained, it is necessary to indicate DELFI as the source.
[ad_2]
