In one corruption case, accusations were made against 12 judges, including special witnesses and prominent last names.

Delphi According to sources, more judges of the Lithuanian Court of Appeals also have the status of special witnesses in a large case of judicial corruption.

The status of such a witness is granted when there is evidence in the file that a crime may have been committed and that the crime may have been committed by a particular person, but that information is not sufficient to confer that person’s status as a suspect. .

Žydrūnas Bartkus, director of the Special Investigation Service (STT) conducting the pre-trial investigation, announced last week that four judges were questioned as special witnesses in the corruption of judges case and are still working in the court system.

It undermines faith and trust.

This information has sparked outrage among politicians, with conservatives appealing to the Council of Judges and urging the public to explain how judges, who investigate large-scale corruption cases, can fulfill their professional duty of justice and freedom in making decisions.

“Algimantas Valantinas, President of the Council of Judges, has just explained that it is not a good situation for the investigation against the judges to take so long, but is that explanation sufficient?” Asked MPs Laurynas Kasčiūnas and Agnė Bilotaitė.

They asked that the names of the judges who have the status of special witnesses be made public. Furthermore, in the opinion of Seimas members, the names of all former judges who have been suspected should be made public, as individuals have the right to ask questions about the resumption of proceedings in certain circumstances.

“The statements by the President of the Council of Judges A. Valantinas that, for example, if this state is revoked, that they continue to work calmly, sound strange.” Shouldn’t their actions be evaluated in terms of ethics and discipline and then provided with an evaluation of subsequent work? Have we reached such low levels that cases cannot be heard only by judges who have been prosecuted? ”Asked L. Kasčiūnas, Vice Chairman of the Committee on National Security and Defense.

According to him, the Council of Judges must provide a formal assessment of whether it is tolerable for judges investigating corruption cases and have special procedural witness status to continue to hear cases.

“Judges must be subject to the highest standards of reputation and morality. We expect that of them. The judges, who are later overshadowed by the corruption charges, undermine their faith and trust in justice. “A. Bilotaitė reminded him.

A. Valantinas: I still can’t evaluate

The President of the Council of Judges A. Valantinas, who heads the Lithuanian Court of Appeals, contacted the Attorney General Evaldas Pašilis and requested urgent information on the judges who had acquired that status as a special witness and the circumstances in which this was granted. state.

“Only with official information on judges with the status of a special witness and the circumstances of granting such status, the Council of Judges will be able to initiate appropriate decision-making,” said the head of the highest self-government judicial institution.

A week after contacting the Attorney General, the Council of Judges had still not received a response, although it had already been sent by the Office of the Attorney General.

“In the absence of official information about the judges who have been granted special witness status and the circumstances under which such status may have been granted, I am unable to assess the possibilities of such judges serving as judges or of possible decisions of the Council of Judges on these matters. ” Delphi pointed out by A. Valantinas.

He did not respond if he knew that special witness status in a corruption of judges case was also granted to A. Kruopis, president of the Criminal Division of the Lithuanian Court of Appeals, headed by him, and other judges.

“The Council of Judges has no legal basis for relying on information related to judges that is not officially provided or provided by journalists but obtained from unconfirmed sources.” Delphi A. Valantinas stated in the response sent.

At the time, A. Kruopys, president of the Criminal Cases Division, did not want to comment on the information about the STT interviews.

“I can’t comment on anything, it’s like that,” said a member of the Judicial Council.

When asked if it would not be better to dispel the doubts, the criminal judge reiterated that the situation would not comment: “You understood what I said.”

A. Kruopys has been wearing the judge’s robe since 1990 and has worked in the Lithuanian Court of Appeals since 2004. From 2015 July to 2016 In April 2012, he served as President of the Court and has been Chief of the Criminal Division since 2012. July. He is also a member of the Council of Judges for various periods.

The prosecution: we do not want to undermine the investigation

Attorney General’s Office Delphi confirmed that complaints of judicial corruption had already been filed against twelve judges, of which only eight have been publicly mentioned so far. At the time, four judges were prosecuted when they were no longer working in the courts.

“Suspicious notifications were presented to 12 previous and current judges: some of them were dismissed, others were dismissed and some judges voluntarily resigned,” the prosecution said. “Of these 12 suspects, four judges received the suspicion reports when they were no longer working in the courts.”

However, prosecutors do not disclose data on former judges who are no longer working but who have been caught as suspects. “Information about individuals should not be provided, as this could jeopardize the success of the investigation,” said the Attorney General’s Office.

According to the representative of the Prosecutor’s Office Rita Stundienė, in the case of corruption of judges, the judges are suspected of bribery, influence peddling, bribery, abuse of official position and illegal possession of a firearm.

Prosecutors are also reluctant to reveal the names of judges who have been granted special witness status, but be aware that this status was “awarded to judges at different times during the pre-trial investigation.”

“The president of the Council of Judges, A. Valantinas, was informed eight times about the judges questioned as special witnesses,” emphasized the prosecution.

“The pre-trial investigation is complex and extensive, – Delphi designated by the Attorney General’s Office. – since 2019 In the pre-trial investigation in the early 19th century, a large number of participants in the procedures were interviewed and a large number of other procedures were carried out. It should be noted that during the investigation, in its various stages, court decisions repeatedly stated that the abundance of procedural actions and investigative data confirms the fact that pre-trial investigation, procedural actions are conducted intensively, and Pre-trial investigation is currently not possible due to objective reasons – objects of investigation and other procedural steps. “

Advisor to the President: an intolerable situation

Jūratė Šovienė, the Chief Legal Counsel to President Gitanas Nausėda and the Head of the Legal Group, believe that STT investigators conducting the pre-trial investigation in the case of judicial corruption and prosecutors from the Attorney General’s Office should dispel public doubts. soon as possible.

“The President sets the highest standards of reputation, ethics and professionalism for judges, in accordance with these principles, the President decides on the professional affairs of judges,” said J. Šovienė.

According to her, a judge suspected or accused of committing a crime cannot fulfill his obligations: his powers are suspended until the final decision in the pre-trial investigation or the decision in the criminal case takes effect.

“The status of a special witness is not identical to that of a suspect and in this case the suspension of powers does not apply,” said J. Šovienė. “Special witness status will be granted when there is evidence in the case record that a crime may have been committed and may have been committed by a particular person, but that information is not sufficient to confer suspicious status on that person.” .

According to the Chief Advisor to the Head of State, pre-trial investigative authorities should do their utmost to collect sufficient data to obtain the status of a suspect during the investigation, and in the absence of such data, the person remains a witness in the process.

“It is intolerable that when there is enough data to raise a suspicion, this is not done, only a clear and transparent pre-trial investigation, while guaranteeing human rights, can facilitate the administration of justice,” he said.

A. Širinskienė: decisions must be made by the municipality

At that time, Agnė Širinskienė, the chair of the Seimas Law and Order Committee, emphasized that she never makes comments on specific cases, because “it is not the politicians who have to comment on the cases and it is not the politicians who have to evaluate what the court does. “

“The courts have their own government and guarantee the independence of the judiciary, so these matters must be evaluated first by the autonomous government of the judges,” said the chair of the Law and Order Committee. – As we have seen in previous cases, everywhere the initiatives came from the judiciary and there were presidential presentations. It is a legal way of expressing doubts and doing something in a normal state governed by the rule of law, where it is not the politicians who direct the courts and the forces of order, but those who have their own autonomy and act accordingly. “

A. Širinskienė pointed out that there is no reason to doubt the self-government of the judges: during the last term of the Seimas, the powers of the Council of Judges were expanded, moreover, more independence was granted.

“If the judiciary makes any decision, I think that we, as politicians, will respect them,” said the committee chair. – And personally I find the statements of colleagues very strange when they start working as judges in cases and explain how the courts should work, how the institutions of pre-trial investigation should work in the state, because our function is to guarantee a mechanism in the state, legislate to make the courts more independent. Our role ends with guaranteeing independence. Everything else is for cleaning and grooming. “

According to A. Širinskienė, institutions of judicial self-government, not only the Council of Judges, but also the Court of Honor of Judges “can receive all material from pre-trial investigative institutions” and evaluate the conduct of judges.

“Yes, it is possible to evaluate through the prism of criminal law, but it is also possible to evaluate through the prism of a judge’s ethics by having certain data from the pre-trial investigation material,” he emphasized.

The STT and the Attorney General’s Office launched a pre-trial investigation into the corruption of judges case in 2019. in February. Law enforcement officials reported that the judges of the Lithuanian Court of Appeal, Viktoras Kažys, Konstantinas Gurinas and Valdimaras Bavėjanas, a judge of the Supreme Court of Lithuania, former President of the Judicial Council Egidijus Laužikas, a judge of the Regional Court Vilna Jenagag, a member of the Vilnius Regional Court, are suspected of abuse, corruption, corruption and corruption trade. Judge of the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court Arūnas Kaminskas, Judge of the Kaunas Chamber of the Gintaras Čekanauskas Regional Regional Administrative Court, Judge of the Vilnius City District Court Robertas Rainys.

Four other former judges have now been charged.

Drąsutis Zagreckas, Romualdas Mikliušas, Giedrė Cimbolienė, Gintaras Ruseckas and Klaipėda’s lawyers, Aivaras Surblys and Marius Navickas, who work in Vilnius, were also arrested during the pre-trial investigation. Suspicions were also raised against Aring Kartanas, Assistant Justice of the Supreme Court of Lithuania, Ričardas Malinauskas, Mayor of Druskininkai, his adviser Aivars Kadziauskas, as well as Žilvinas Povilonis, the owner of Vijūnėlė Manor.

Currently, more than fifty people are being arrested as suspects in the case, and more than one hundred episodes of the crime are under investigation.

Bribes ranging from 1 to 100,000 are suspected to have been promised and paid by various favorable decisions of the judges. EUR. According to data collected during the pre-trial investigation, the amount of bribes agreed to can reach 400,000. EUR.

Although officials conducting a pre-trial investigation into possible corruption by judges and lawyers are still unwilling to reveal the courts in which the cases may have been prosecuted, a suspect appears to be mentioned in some episodes. of crime, with open and ambiguous evidence. with judges and with participants in various cases seeking favorable decisions. This attorney is Mr. Zagreck, who has been defending defendants in various cases since 1998. He has also previously worked as a judge.

Attorney General E. Pašilis has said that this case is exceptional not only because of the magnitude of corruption or the size of the bribes, but also because of the consequences for society at large.

“Corruption, bribery, trading influence to make illegal decisions favorable to someone compel us to speak not only about the harm that can be determined by calculating the amounts of bribes received,” said E. Pašilis. – These are selfish, illegal decisions, the fate of the victims, the unfulfilled justice that has been “pressured” on behalf of the court. It is a loss of people’s trust in justice. Therefore, after receiving data on possible crimes, there was only one possible solution: open a pre-trial investigation and answer all the questions. “

“This pre-trial investigation is a signal to the entire judicial system that cardinal decisions and changes must be made to avoid any possible manifestation of corruption,” said the Director of STT Ž. Bartkus “The transparent administration of justice must be guaranteed in Lithuania; this is, above all, the civic duty of all of us, the basis of the rule of law.”

Read more about the judicial corruption case in related Delphi articles.