[ad_1]
This investigation began in 2015, when A. Katinas was suspected of bribery by STT. He was later charged with abuse alone and convicted in the Panevėžys Regional Court on January 9, 2019.
However, after reviewing the decision, the judges of the Lithuanian Court of Appeal acquitted both convicts.
Already in the Regional Court of Panevėžys, A. Katinas was acquitted due to commercial influence, and Dž. Žiugždienė was acquitted due to abuse of power, squandering of low-value assets and legalization of assets obtained through crimes.
On appeal, the prosecutor asked Katina to be found guilty of the effects of traffic, but to dismiss this part of the case due to the statute of limitations. In the prosecutor’s opinion, A. Katin together with the fine imposed for more than 8 thousand. The right to be elected or appointed for state or municipal institutions, establishments, companies or non-governmental organizations will be private for three years.
Photo by Sigismund Gedvila / 15min / Gitanas Nausėda and Alvydas Katinas
The prosecutor asked J. Žiugždienė to be found guilty of money laundering and to assign almost 19 thousand. a fine of EUR.
Defendants’ defenders demanded that their defendants be fully acquitted.
The Lithuanian Court of Appeal rejected the appeal of the Prosecutor’s Office, the defense lawyer was satisfied and A. Katinas was acquitted for abuse of power, J. Žiugždienė for genuine falsification of the document and its use.
The Lithuanian Court of Appeal conducted an examination of the evidence and, in accordance with the obligation of the judging panel, data on the factual basis of the criminal intelligence actions was presented to the case.
The panel of judges, having examined this data, as well as other material in the case, concluded that the data obtained during criminal intelligence actions and during the application of coercive coercive coercive procedural measures could be reasonably substantiated as evidence.
A. Katin’s actions, asking a municipal official to assess the state of the roof of J. Žiugždienė’s residential house, requesting the general director of a certain company to repair the roof of a private house, knowing that this company regularly participates in municipal acquisitions that mediate property keys were not linked to the performance of their functions and were clearly private.
“Such actions should be seen as a confusion of public and private interests, but not as a criminal act: abuse of service for which criminal liability is provided,” says the panel of judges at the Lithuanian Court of Appeal.
When deciding on the responsibility of A. Katin for such actions, it was also assessed that the director of the company had misinterpreted the situation, the mayor did not give instructions to carry them out free of charge.
Nor has it been established that A. Katinas has caused significant moral damage to the state and the municipality by such actions, which is a necessary sign of abuse of service.
Likewise, the jury valued that after publicly disseminating information about the possible abuse of office of A. Katinas, the latter was re-elected Mayor of the District Municipality of Utena and member of the Municipal Council, thus recognizing that it undermined the prestige of the Municipality of the District of Utena and discredited the name of the mayor.- There is no basis either.
Commenting on the acquittal of J. Žiugždienė, the court concludes that there is no evidence in the case that J. Žiugždienė falsified the application, and the fact that it was filed at a later date does not confirm the fact of the falsification. No significant damage was caused to the company, no legally significant consequences were caused for the state.
This judgment of the Lithuanian Court of Appeal shall enter into force on the day of its adoption and may be appealed against in cassation before the Lithuanian Supreme Court within a period of three months.
[ad_2]
