In Lithuania, an emigrant who has lost his children will not be returned for the moment: the lawyer was shocked by the court decision

The lawyer agreed with his frustration at commenting on the news portal more widely and was heavily criticized, both for the child abduction procedure and for the trial.

“I am very surprised by several aspects. First, the court refused to accept the father’s independent appeal to the court against the actions of the children’s rights service and the kidnapping of children. That right is clearly established in the new amendments to the law, which came into effect on January 1 of this year, the appearance of which has been so constantly sought by lawyers, politicians and the public.

The court based the refusal to accept the claim that everything will be examined in the case initiated by the Children’s Rights Service on permission to bring children, which, incidentally, started later, ”said S. Dambrauskas.

“However, a case initiated by the Children’s Rights Service is considered by law according to the simplified procedural procedure and does not even record the course of the procedure (thus established by law). So now the court has made a decision based on the statements of the witnesses written in it, which I consider to be presented selectively: what was blacker, blackened, what was white, is not mentioned and the facts are distorted.

It gives the impression that, if the court so decides, the decision should be drafted in such a way as to raise the least possible doubt, even if it is incorrect. Therefore, this data has been listed, which cannot be verified, because the course of the process has not been recorded, ”he said.

According to S. Dambrauskis, in such a case it turns out that it is necessary to trust what is written by the court and what the witnesses supposedly said, even if the testimony of the witnesses is distorted or selectively selected, but no one can verify them.

Meanwhile, the case started by the father, he explained, raised much broader infringement issues, and the case had to be dealt with in the usual way.

“That is why the refusal to accept the father’s claim violates his right to judicial protection, and the simplified procedure simply restricted the father’s procedural rights and seriously violated the fundamental human right, the right to a fair trial,” said the attorney.

The lawyer emphasized that he was very critical of both the court’s decision that refused to accept the father’s claim and the decision that authorized the separation of the father’s children. He stated that both court orders had been appealed to a higher court and that only on October 22 was an appeal filed against the father’s permission to take children. Before midnight.

“In the Superior Court, I ask that both cases be joined and that both appeals be heard together. The Lithuanian Supreme Court has ruled that the adoption of a child from his parents is a last resort when it is not possible for the child to remain in the care of his parents, as this would be incompatible with his best interests and only when there is a real risk for the life or health of the child. the probability of such harm and when the parents do not take the necessary measures to guarantee the child’s safety ”.

According to the lawyer, this also guarantees a modification of the law in force since January 1 and, in his opinion, there is no evidence in the present case of a last resort such as the abduction of a minor, and the father has shown his willingness to accept any help from the family. that only children are not taken away.

“Furthermore, it cannot be ignored that the family lives in England, and there are also social services that also ensure that the interests of the children are not harmed. Therefore, in Lithuania, it is feared that the interests of children in their family environment in England could be harmed, that information could be passed on to the relevant English services and the situation could continue to be monitored.

Therefore, there is no real danger to the life or health of children, and their excellent development while studying in England is confirmed by the abundant achievements in extracurricular activities and the data sent by the school ”, assured S. Dambrauskas.

So, the lawyer considered, the father came to the funeral and lost the children and most likely the process is not easy as the situation is complicated.

“However, I am surprised that the clear right of parents to go to court established by law does not work. And that practice of disregard for human rights is again shaped by the court itself, which has a constitutional duty to administer justice After all, the father applied to the court earlier, and he did so only because the service he took from the children did not apply to the court itself within the legal three-day period.

So after the father submitted an application to the court himself, and I reported such application to the service and that service also asked the court for permission to take the children away from the father. However, this request was presented to the court for more than ten days instead of the three prescribed by law. “

Meanwhile, he continued, throughout this period, as long as the children are separated from the father, neither the father nor other relatives (on their part), nor the adult sister of the children still have the opportunity to speak or see the children, without information about them. learning and place and conditions of residence, parents and relatives cannot speak with children even in the presence of child rights specialists.

“And all this is happening by speculating on the abstract ‘interest of the children’. Do you think this is not a violation of rights? “The lawyer rhetorically concluded his remarks.