Misiūnas went to court: appealed to the Presidency, qualifies Nausėda’s statements as “null and void”

As E. Misiūnas wrote, the complaint filed is directly related to President G. Nausėda’s refusal to entrust E. Misiūnas with the functions of a lower-ranking judge.

In addition, as the former minister wrote, the Presidency also violated the rights enshrined in the Constitution by not giving an answer on why he could not be appointed a judge.

“Today, March 1, I filed a complaint with the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court regarding the act / inaction of the Presidency of the Republic of Lithuania. The situation is not ordinary, for that reason, among other reasons, with this complaint I seek legal certainty, the formation of a legal precedent and the elimination of the legal regulatory vacuum. I think that this situation should be interesting also for the members of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, in the sense of the legislation.

I sincerely hope that professionals in their fields will boldly engage, without any doubt, in subjective assessments and in the presence of precise legal regulation, engage in politics and work for the Lithuanian people, ”wrote E. Misiūnas.

The former minister also made public the statements made to the Presidency and to the President himself.

Here are some thoughts on my complaint:

7. In accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3 of article 5 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter the Constitution) and the provisions of the Law on Public Administration of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter the Public Administration) , the Presidency of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter the Presidency) must respect the established legal imperatives and inform me in writing of my decision, give reasons for the facts and be based on legal norms. However, as of the date of the appeal to the Vilnius Regional Court, he had not received a clear document explaining the reasons why he could not be appointed as a judge.

The Presidency of the Republic of Lithuania, as a subject of public administration, is subject to the principles of good administration, the implementation of which is established by the provisions enshrined in paragraphs 2 and 3 of article 5 of the Constitution. The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania has declared that “in order to apply the principle of good public administration, public authorities must guarantee the protection of human rights and freedoms and the individual as the weakest party in relations with the public administration. And take all the facts of the case into account when making decisions. ” [Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucinis Teismas 2004 m. gruodžio 13 d. nutarimas]. The principle of responsible management (good public administration) includes the right of the person to a reasonable administrative decision (legal facts and norms) and motivated.

8. In summary, the Presidency of the Republic of Lithuania, by not giving a clear written response to my request, violated the provisions enshrined in paragraphs 2 and 3 of article 5 of the Constitution, the requirements established in the Law on Services Public. Administration and disregarded the principle of good governance.

15. In summary, it should be noted that the President of the Republic of Lithuania, by unilaterally and subjectively deciding not to appoint me a judge, ignored the requirements established in the Constitution, the Law on Courts and the Rules of Procedure of the IASB and the Regulations of the CRC , thus violating principles.

It should also be noted that in the exercise of the powers granted to him, the President of the Republic of Lithuania did not comply with paragraphs 2 and 3 of article 5 of the Constitution, the constitutional requirements of responsible management and the rule of law, and Implement the powers conferred by the Constitution and the laws.

19. It should be noted that paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 61 of the Law on Courts, as well as Article 60 “The law of a former Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, the Supreme Court, the Court of Justice of the European Union Union, the General Court of the European Union or the European Court of Human Rights to be appointed judge ”special right to be appointed judge.

This right presupposes a different reason for appointing or not appointing a former judge to the post of judge. This procedure should not be confused with the general procedures for the appointment of judges. Therefore, it must be argued that the President may ignore the right enshrined in article 61 (2) and (3) of the Law of Courts only if there are well-founded and well-founded reasons that, in his opinion as a former judge or minister or deputy minister , denies the impeccable reputation.

32. The principle of responsible management (good public administration) includes the right of the person to a reasoned administrative decision (facts and legal norms) and motivated. This means that the decision must be based on objective facts and applicable law.

Motivate the decision with unfounded statements “I left” the position of judge for a political position “, fictitious, false and humiliating statements” I will not be able to be impartial and responsible to perform the functions of judge of a district court “and fictitious subjective innovation” cooling political ”that all State institutions and officials must duly exercise the powers granted to them by the Constitution and the laws and violate the principle of the rule of law.

34 of 2016 agreeing to occupy the position of Minister of the Interior, I made the decision after evaluating the provision established in the Law of Courts, which allows a return to the previous position of judge. Working as a minister and later as a deputy minister, I did not create any reasonable reason for the President of the Republic of Lithuania to question my objectivity and honesty. Therefore, it should be noted that my legitimate expectations as a former judge have been violated, without this involving any factor that damages my reputation.

35. The statements of the President of the Republic of Lithuania that “I have lost my job as a politician”, “I will not be able to be impartial and responsibly perform the functions of a judge of a district court”, and that I need “political cooling” are void and worthless, undermine any evidence and degrade my honesty and dignity, the honor and dignity of a person, undermine my high reputation as a professional attorney, which I deny and appreciate, as well as denying my reputation as a transparent and honest STT Official and judge ”Said E. Misiūnas

At the time, President G. Nausėda repeated to reporters on Monday that E. Misiūnas, who ran for the Seimas last year with a list of “peasants,” was unreasonably seeking to return to the post of judge immediately.

Last week, almost two months after the first appeal, E. Misiūnas received a negative written response from the Presidency.

“I have received a letter from the Presidency informing that the president has such a right and has exercised that right, without commenting in principle on the oral reasons, that is, political cooling is needed anyway,” E. Misiūnas told BNS.

This response from the Presidency, of which the SNB keeps a copy, affirms that decisions on the appeal to the Judicial Council and the appointment of a judge are taken by the President, but that “he can, but he is not obliged to do so” to reappoint a former judge. ”

According to the Presidency, the head of state, when appointing judges, assesses all significant circumstances and is guided by the public interest.

“In response to your letter, we want to inform you that the decree of the President of the Republic on the requested issue has not been adopted,” says the letter from the Office of the Presidency.

In response to the SNB in ​​late January, the Presidency stated that “people who have interrupted the career of a judge as a result of their political participation or their appointment to political office and seek to reinstate them have lost their political position” not complying with the principles of political neutrality and motivation.

E. Misiūnas ran for the Seimas last fall on the “peasant” list.

According to the former member of the Government, G. Nausėda, by making a decision on his appointment, he could and should have benefited from the assistance of the Judicial Selection Commission, and by failing to do so, he violated the procedure for selecting judges.

According to him, both G. Nausėda and the head of the President’s Legal Group, Jūratė Šovienė, could not claim that he, as a judge, could not perform his duties in an impartial and responsible manner and due to the fact that the institute for dismissal and removal of doubts from a judge.

E. Misiūnas also emphasized that by making the decision not to renew the status of judge, the president “could not get anything new”: the political cooling.

“The Law of Courts establishes a special rule according to which a judge can return to his previous position within a period of two years and give a fictitious reason without being bound by any argument or without following any rule of law, the only right he has The President has the right not to appoint, I would say wrong, wrong from the point of view of the fifth article of the Constitution that public authorities serve the people ”, the former judge told BNS.

He assured that he would see no problem if Nausėda wanted to introduce a new standard of political neutrality in the public administration or initiate amendments to the laws that would ensure that politically committed people do not hold important positions. However, this rule should apply to all newly appointed officials.

According to him, the president is currently applying the cooling-off period individually: former attorney general Evaldas Pašilis, former deputy foreign minister Darius Skusevičius, who has returned to the judges in Canada, is not necessary, nor is G. Naus deda’s adviser Simon Krėpšta considering his possible candidacy duties.

He said he believed he had sufficient legal grounds for the Vilnius Regional Court to accept his appeal and, later, a decision in his favor. However, if this cannot be achieved, he did not rule out the possibility of filing an individual complaint also with the Constitutional Court.

Speaking to journalists in Kaunas on Monday, the president declared that he would not appoint E. Misiūnas as a judge because he participated in the elections as the candidate of the Lithuanian peasants and the Greens.

“It seems to me that it is already quite obvious in this place that Mr. Eimutis Misiūnas participated in the elections not as an independent candidate, but rather expressed himself very clearly as a candidate for a political party. And it seems to me that it is not entirely justified to claim the post of judge immediately, at least it seems to us, ”said G. Nausėda.

He said he could not “directly answer the question” of whether the Presidency had already responded to the former vice minister’s request.

Of course, you have the right to defend your position, to defend your interests in court and if you consider it appropriate, you will do so. We did what we had to do, “he said.

E. Misiūnas headed the Ministry of the Interior in the government of Prime Minister Saulius Skvernelis from December 2016 to the summer of 2019, but after the renewal of the ruling coalition, Rita Tamašunienė, representative of the Polish Lithuanian Election Campaign – Christian Union Families, they took over.

In October 2019, E. Misiūnas became Deputy Minister of National Defense, before that month he worked as an advisor to Minister Raimundas Karoblis.

Before becoming a minister, E. Misiūnas worked as a judge at the Vilnius District Court for a year.

Before becoming a judge, E. Misiūnas worked in the Special Investigation Service and taught at the then Police Academy.