The General Prosecutor’s Office sought to have the case returned to the Court of Appeal for consideration.
The appeal of the prosecutor’s office is rejected – this decision of the LAT is final and cannot be appealed.
“The panel of judges did not find any fundamental violations of the Code of Criminal Procedure, stressing that the court of appeals examined in detail and compared both the justifying and the incriminating evidences, the appealed decision is motivated and based on the full range of evidence,” said judge Alvydas Pikelis during the hearing.
According to him, there was no indication of significant damage in the case when the mayor initiated a specific person becoming a member of the Business Council.
“The panel of judges stated that the indictment contains an abstract, formalized and factual description of the sign of significant damage, therefore, as established by the courts of first instance and appeals, there is no reason to conclude that the municipal mayor’s actions in violation of legislation created such a situation, which would caused great damage not only to the institutions named in the indictment (Panevėžys Chamber of Commerce, Industry and Crafts and Panevėžys City Business Council), which denied having suffered damage, but also to the municipality of Panevėžys,” the court report reads.
The panel of judges stated that the actions of the mayor cannot be qualified as abuse if the pursuit of financial or other personal gain is not established in the case.
According to the LAT, it was not established in the case under consideration that the actions of RM Račkauskas were directly caused by illegal influence, that the criminal acts were committed by persons working in the municipality or other institutions under the influence of RM Račkauskas, that he committed other criminal acts, that mistrust was expressed in him or the municipality of Panevėžys.
During the hearing in September, the prosecutor asked to annul the decision of the appellate instance, which rejected the appeal of the Panevėžys prosecutor’s office, and to return the case to the appellate procedure.
The cassation appeal was submitted to the Supreme Court “due to fundamental violations of the Code of Criminal Procedure, when the acquittal was passed.”
The acquittal verdict was passed last April by the Vilnius District Court, and in November, the Lithuanian Court of Appeal, which examined the appeal of the Panevėžys District Prosecutor’s Office, rejected it.
The prosecutor’s office requested to re-examine the case on appeal, stating that the Lithuanian Court of Appeal had committed fundamental violations of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which prevented a thorough examination of the case and a correct decision.
According to the prosecutor’s office, in the spring of 2019, while visiting the office of the head of the basketball club “Lietkabelis” in Vilnius, RM Račkauskas allegedly asked a businessman for a favor – to cover the 3 thousand. euro debt remaining after the municipal elections.
It was stated in the case that for this RM Račkauskas promised that several companies managed by Panevėžys city municipality would provide additional financial support to the basketball club led by the resident of Vilnius in addition to the already allocated from the city budget.
Alvydas Bieliauskas, president of “Lietkabelis”, was convicted along with RM Račkauskas.
The Vilnius District Court acquitted both defendants because no corrupt agreement necessary for influence trading was established and concluded that there is no evidence in the case that RM Račkauskas’ request for support was related to his intention to receive a bribe.
The General Prosecutor’s Office appealed to the Supreme Court of Lithuania against another acquittal against the mayor of Panevėžys, RM Račkauskas, in which he was acquitted along with his advisor Gintara Maskoliūniena.
The above-mentioned persons were found guilty by the court of first instance of abuse of official position while acting in a group of accomplices, and acquitted by the court of appeal.
In the mentioned cassation appeal of the prosecutor of the General Prosecutor’s Office, it is requested to annul the acquittal of the Lithuanian Court of Appeal and to leave in force the indictment of the court of first instance.
The Supreme Court will hear the case next week.
The mayor did not plead guilty in any of the cases.
window.fbAsyncInit = function() {
FB.init({
appId: ‘117218911630016’,
version: ‘v2.10’,
status: true,
cookie: false,
xfbml: true
});
};
(function(d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) {
return;
}
js = d.createElement(s);
js.id = id;
js.src = “https://connect.facebook.net/lt_LT/sdk.js”;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));
#Panevėžys #mayor #RMRačkauskas #remains #acquitted #influence #peddling
2024-09-12 00:43:57
Table of Contents
- 1 **PAA Related Questions for “The Lithuanian Court System: A Closer Look at the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court”:**[1]The Lithuanian Court System: A Closer Look at the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court
In recent news, a high-profile case involving the mayor of Panevėžys, RM Račkauskas, has brought attention to the Lithuanian court system and its processes. Specifically, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Lithuania have played crucial roles in the proceedings. In this article, we will delve into the structures and functions of these two courts, providing an in-depth understanding of their roles in the Lithuanian judiciary. [[3]The Court of Appeal of Lithuania
The Court of Appeal of Lithuania is a national ordinary court that offers the right to appeal against judgments of the regional courts (as courts of first instance) [2]]. Located in Vilnius, the court’s address is Gedimino Ave. 40, LT-01503 Vilnius, and can be reached by email at[apeliacinis@teismaslt[apeliacinis@teismaslt[apeliacinis@teismaslt[apeliacinis@teismaslt[apeliacinis@teismaslt[apeliacinis@teismaslt[apeliacinis@teismaslt[apeliacinis@teismaslt or by phone at +370 5 70 663 685
- 2 Here are a few PAA (People Also Ask) related questions for the title “Lithuanian Mayors in the Spotlight: Acquittals Upheld by Supreme Court”:
]. The court’s website, available at[https://wwwapeliacinislt/en[https://wwwapeliacinislt/en[https://wwwapeliacinislt/en[https://wwwapeliacinislt/en[https://wwwapeliacinislt/en[https://wwwapeliacinislt/en[https://wwwapeliacinislt/en[https://wwwapeliacinislt/en, provides information on its activities and decisions.
In the case of RM Račkauskas, the Court of Appeal examined the appeal of the Panevėžys District Prosecutor’s Office and rejected it, leading to the General Prosecutor’s Office submitting a cassation appeal to the Supreme Court. The Court of Appeal’s decision was based on a thorough examination of the evidence, which did not establish any fundamental violations of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The Supreme Court of Lithuania
The Supreme Court of Lithuania is the highest court in the country, responsible for hearing cassation appeals against decisions of the Court of Appeal and other lower courts[[[[
]. In the case of RM Račkauskas, the Supreme Court will hear the cassation appeal submitted by the General Prosecutor’s Office, which seeks to annul the acquittal of the Lithuanian Court of Appeal and to leave in force the indictment of the court of first instance.
The Supreme Court’s role is to ensure that the law is applied correctly and that justice is served. In this case, the court will review the decisions of the lower courts and determine whether any fundamental violations of the Code of Criminal Procedure occurred.
The Role of Cassation Appeals
Cassation appeals play a crucial role in the Lithuanian court system, allowing for the review of decisions made by lower courts. In the case of RM Račkauskas, the cassation appeal submitted to the Supreme Court is based on allegations of fundamental violations of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which prevented a thorough examination of the case and a correct decision.
The Supreme Court will examine the appeal and determine whether the lower courts’ decisions were correct or not. If the court finds that the lower courts’ decisions were incorrect, it can annul the acquittal and return the case to the appellate procedure for re-examination.
Conclusion
The Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Lithuania play vital roles in ensuring that justice is served in the country. By understanding the structures and functions of these courts, we can better appreciate the complexities of the Lithuanian court system and the processes involved in high-profile cases like the one involving RM Račkauskas. As the Supreme Court prepares to hear the cassation appeal, the public’s attention will remain focused on the outcome of this important case.
Lithuanian Mayors in the Spotlight: Acquittals Upheld by Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of Lithuania has recently made headlines with two notable cases involving mayors of different municipalities. In both instances, the acquittals of the mayors were upheld, sparking interest and debate about the legal system and the role of mayors in Lithuania.
The Case of Anykščiai Mayor Kęstučius Tubi
According to [1], the Supreme Court of Lithuania upheld the acquittal of Anykščiai district mayor Kęstučius Tubi. The Molėtai Court, which initially heard the case, found the mayor not guilty of the charges brought against him. The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the acquittal is final and cannot be appealed.
The Case of Panevėžys Mayor RM Račkauskas
In another high-profile case, the Supreme Court of Lithuania rejected the appeal of the General Prosecutor’s Office against the acquittal of Panevėžys mayor RM Račkauskas. The mayor was accused of abuse of official position and influence trading, but the Vilnius District Court acquitted him due to lack of evidence of corrupt agreement necessary for influence trading.
The Lithuanian Court of Appeal later rejected the appeal of the Panevėžys District Prosecutor’s Office, leading the General Prosecutor’s Office to seek a cassation appeal to the Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court panel of judges did not find any fundamental violations of the Code of Criminal Procedure and upheld the acquittal.
Analysis and Implications
These two cases highlight the complexities of the legal system in Lithuania, particularly when it comes to the role of mayors and their potential misuses of power. While the acquittals of the mayors may be seen as a victory for the defendants, they also raise questions about the effectiveness of the legal system in holding public officials accountable.
The cases also underscore the importance of the Supreme Court as the highest authority in the Lithuanian judicial system. The court’s decisions are final and binding, and they play a crucial role in ensuring that justice is served and that the rule of law is upheld.
Public Perception and Reaction
The acquittals of the mayors have sparked interested and diverse reactions from the public. Some have expressed concern about the perceived leniency of the legal system towards public officials, while others have welcomed the decisions as a vindication of the mayors’ innocence.
As seen in [2], Lithuanians seem to have strong opinions about the mayor of Kaunas, with some loving him and others hating him. This polarization of opinions highlights the emotional investment that people have in the actions and decisions of their public officials.
In Conclusion
The acquittals of the mayors of Anykščiai and Panevėžys serve as a reminder of the complexities and challenges of the legal system in Lithuania. While the cases have sparked controversy and debate, they also underscore the importance of upholding the rule of law and ensuring that justice is served. As the country continues to navigate the intricacies of democratic governance, these cases will likely be closely watched and scrutinized by the public and the media.
References:
[1] Ground News: Supreme Court upholds acquittal of Anykščiai Mayor Tubi
[2] YouTube: Lithuanians Either Love Or Hate The Mayor Of Kaunas…
[3] BNN News: Week in Lithuania | former MP asks Supreme Court for acquittal
