Širinskienė was detained by the police: she announced that the management would be questioned about the violations.

The politician, outraged by the new restrictions, argued that these “paramilitary” changes were irrational.

Here is A. Širinskienė’s record:

„On Sunday evening I decided to return to Vilnius from my home in Dūkšte. Monday is a weekday. However, there are only 50 kilometers left on the fuel tank and the question: “What about an empty refrigerator?”

“I just didn’t have time to shop, because Thursday’s session at the Seimas lasted until night, and then I drove home, and then, driving control was introduced,” I try to justify myself, fully understanding that a man at risk really eat food all week. will not drive.

He did not drive in the spring, and even now the month has not been driven. We just don’t want to risk seeing what supermarkets are like. So it all ends with the fact that before going to Vilnius, I will go to the nearest gas station in Visaginas, and at the same time buy food there. Especially around 9 pm, when traffic control on the roads will be reduced and movement will be freer before the work week.

20 h 50 min. I am at the Visaginas border. Although the workday of the position is coming to an end and the police position will be retired soon (as it was when I returned), the policeman is stopped. “Maybe you will at least stop buying fuel?” – there is a sufficient objective reason for it. Fuel is added quickly (20 hours 55 minutes, as shown on the receipt from the gas station). And on the way I stop at the local LIDL, already at 9 pm The store is almost empty, so I throw the essentials and quickly in the box. The 21.08 is made the check and … the police are already waiting here. It turns out they think that he no longer had the right to buy food after fuel. So “we will definitely inform our management and you will probably be invited to a survey.”

My attempt to explain that I have to buy food for a man is insufficient. So I look forward to hearing from you and answering all your questions. Including the reasons why I buy food for my husband at Visaginas and we can discuss whether buying food for an at-risk person who does not go to the supermarket himself is an objective enough reason to visit the store after buying fuel.

Now about the residences and declared properties. I live in Dūkšte my whole life, except for my studies. I do not have any property here because our house was inherited by my mother and we do not see the need to “rewrite” that property in any way. During my studies, I declared my place of residence in Vilnius.

It was also convenient at work, so the need to re-declare residency never arose. I have not returned home to the declared place of residence since March. I am protecting my Mother and we find other ways to communicate. I have always thought that my private life is my own and the police or the state will not have to explain it. It seems I was wrong.

With such logic of the paramilitary state, which was approved by the rulers last Sunday, to my family home in Dūkšte, which has been my home since 1975. When I was born, I could not have come: neither my declared place of residence nor my property. Monday’s changes, made by the government after turning the stick on Sunday, allowed “other objective reasons” to leave the municipality of declared residence.

So, he allowed me to go home from Vilnius to Dūkštas. I hope that the desire to return with the spouse at least on the weekends is an “objective reason”. I wanted to believe that buying food, in my circumstances, not in the municipality where you have declared your place of residence and where you do not have property, is an objective reason to move. Especially when you buy food for a week at risk even for someone who belongs to several factors. Unfortunately, I was probably wrong, because, as I have experienced today from the police officers, shopping is only possible in the municipality of your declared residence, even if that municipality is about 130 kilometers away and the person who will eat the food is here.

I do not know how far we will go with such a perception of state governance, but I hope that the forceful application of restrictions does not end up putting people in the stores at risk just because someone did not think about all life situations when preparing a government resolution and tried to judge all the people by One shoe“, – wrote the member of the Seimas.