[ad_1]
“The (complaint – ELTA) affirms that information has appeared in the public sphere, (…) whose content is clearly directed against the participant of the campaign and his candidates”, Lina Petronienė, representative of the administration of the commission, presented the complaint to the LLRA-KŠS at the CCA meeting on Saturday.
L. Petronienė noted that LLRA-KŠS representatives had repeatedly requested the CEC to evaluate A. Tapinas’ activities during the election campaign. According to her, the CCA, for its part, inquired both Laisvės TV of A. Tapinas about the publication “Todo bien, Valdemara?”, Published in early October, and the author of the complaint, LLRA-KŠS.
L. Petronienė also stated that he had received a reply that “Laisvės TV”, when creating this publication, had asked the party for a contrary opinion, but had not received it. However, the party itself denies having received a television address.
For its part, the prosecutor’s office, representative of the CEC, also intervened, refusing to open an investigation prior to the complaint received by the LLRA-KŠS, without recording the instigation of discord and pointing out that the condition of the politicians obliges them to be extremely tolerant.
During the hearing, L. Petronienė also listed the financing rules for political advertising and spoke about judicial practices. According to her, the content of the programs and the publication of A. Tapinas focused more on the call of voters to vote actively in the elections.
“It is considered that, according to the law, (…) there are grounds for submitting the collected material to the Public Information Ethics Commission for it to assess whether the Code of Ethics has been violated,” L. Petronienė spoke about the entire campaign organized by Laisvės TV and A. Tapinas. noting that there is no record of active actions of the parties to give an answer
At the same time, it noted that the information received from the police refuted LLRA-KŠS’s suspicions that the Freedom TV campaign was funded or created in the interest of other politicians.
“Although the publication has the name of a discussion publication, given its content and title, (…) it is considered negative electoral publicity. (…) We see no reason to recognize the publication as a hidden political advertisement, ”noted L. Petronienė, emphasizing that no specific beneficiary has been identified in the Laisvės television campaigns mentioned above.
“The decrease in the number of votes received by LLRA-KŠS (in elections – ELTA) is in line with trends,” noted L. Petronienė.
A. Tapinas affirms that he and “Laisvės TV” do not participate in the political campaign: LLRA-KŠS lies
For his part, A. Tapinas, who attended the meeting remotely, requested the dismissal of the CEC member, Valdemar Urbano. The member himself refused to withdraw from decision-making, but the CEC members supported the removal of V. Urban.
Tapin also pointed out that there were two campaigns: “All good Voldemort” and “All good Valdemara?”.
“Tomaszewski’s party is lying, saying we are not targeting them,” Tapin said.
The journalist emphasized that he did not agree with the opinion of the CEC that the publication should be recognized as a negative electoral advertisement, because A. Tapinas emphasized that he was not a politician and did not participate in the elections, and both campaigns were financed by non-political organizations.
“This does not meet the definition of political advertising,” Tapin said.
LLRA-KŠS: Laisvės television and A. Tapinas campaign resulted in poor election results
Meanwhile, Valdemar Tomaševskis, President of LLRA-KŠS, regretted that the complaint was processed too late. It lacked validity in the conclusions proposed by the CEC.
“It is obvious that the whole campaign had a decisive influence (on the electoral results – ELTA),” said V. Tomaševskis.
He was seconded by Rita Tamašunienė, representative of LLRA-KŠS.
“Such an electoral campaign, such an insignificant scale of electoral campaigns and possibly non-transparent campaign financing, (…) this is a very serious violation of the electoral campaign here. (…) Without making a strict decision and fair, we let the land behave in accordance with the applicable law during the next elections, ”said R. Tamašunienė. According to her, Laisvės TV did not deliberately register as a participant in the political campaign, calling it“ manipulation ”.
For her part, Gabija Milašiūtė, director of Laisvės TV, also supported A. Tapinas, pointing out that the content created by television is satirical, and Laisvės TV is not a means of informing the public.
“Laisvės TV” is not the Freedom Party, if no one is clear about it so far, “A. Tapinas emphasized.
Jaroslav Narkevičius, party member, Renata Cytacka, former party delegate candidate in Paneriai-Grigiškės constituency, and the Lithuanian People’s Party also attended the meeting to support LLRA-KŠS.
After nearly three hours of comments and discussions from CEC members, the CEC finally decided to acknowledge the post “Okay, Valdemara?” evaluation. The CEC will also approach the Seimas with a request to clarify all the nuances of third-party content creation during the political campaign.
ELTA recalls that the LLRA-KŠS also appealed to President Gitan Nausėdas and the Seimas to annul the results of the Seimas elections in the multi-member constituency and the single-member constituency Paneriai-Grigiškės, where the representative of LLRA-KŠS, R Cytacka, did not remain in the third round. Electoral round of the Seimas, thus losing the opportunity to win the mandate of a member of Seimas.
During the Seimas elections in the multi-member constituency, LLRA-KŠS did not exceed 5 percent. cartels and did not enter the Seimas of the 2020-2024 legislature.
LLRA-KŠS also asks the president and the Seimas to address the Constitutional Court (CC). This party would like to know the conclusion of the CC on whether during the Seimas elections in the multinominal constituency A. Tapinas and VaisĮ Laisvės TV were carrying out a “large-scale information campaign of 300 thousand. The circulation of the publication “¿Todo bien, Valdemara?” It did not violate the legal norms that regulate the requirements to mark advertising and political upheaval, indicate the origin of the funds and clearly distinguish it from other information disseminated during the period of political society. “
For his part, the president said that a decision on the aforementioned LLRA-KŠS appeal will be made after the lawyers for the Presidency assess the situation.
No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written permission of ELTA.
[ad_2]
