Concerned about ensuring the protection of human rights in Lithuania, as
well as ensuring the maintenance of constitutional order in the State
of Lithuania, feeling our professional and civic duty to intervene, when
in the background of the events of Garliava the Parliament of the
Republic of Lithuania addresses the question of whether our State
institutions are capable of ensuring the protection of constitutional
values, members of the
Public Commission present these conclusions on
the events in Garliava:The Commission having evaluated over 50 oral and
written testimonies, as well as a wealth of video and audio material,
states that that violence was used against the constitutional order of
the Republic of Lithuania in implementing the decision of the Kedainiai
District Court of the 16th of December, 2011.
The Kedainiai District
Court ruling of the 22.03.2012 to handover the girl to her biological
mother without the use of violence/force was implemented on the
17.05.2012 using violence and force not only against the girl, but also
against her guardian Judge Neringą Venckiene who has immunity, as well
as against citizens. This means that in implementing the court
decision, on behalf of the State. using force, the following Articles 3,
20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 29, 33, 36 and 11 of the Constitution of the
Republic of Lithuania were violated. In addition, there were serious
breaches of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child
Articles 12, 19 and 34 and its provisions supported by national legal
acts (Republic of Lithuania Civil Code Article 3.164, Republic of
Lithuania Civil Process Code Article 764 and so on).
The Commission has
sufficient data to state that in implementing the court decision that
the people’s right to free movement was unjustifiably violated, people
were unduly harmed, their dignity humiliated, they were subjected to
cruel treatment, people’s personal property rights were violated, public
dissemination of misinformation took place, there was failure to comply
with the provision that all persons are equal before officials, in
addition, without the consent of the Parliament Judge Neringa
Venckiene’s freedom was restricted, furthermore a clear disrespect of
the Lithuanian flag was displayed.
The Commission drew attention to the
fact that the
use of such force and the violation of the Constitution in
the State’s name were implemented in an organized manner, actions were
prepared in advance and many government officials from various State and
municipal authorities were included in these illegal acts. Furthermore,
discussions took place in advance as to how to conceal the traces of
violence; without a court sanction the video cameras installed in the
house were turned away, people who could testify to the use of violence
were removed from the premises; protective shields were prepared and so
on. Taking all of this into account, the Commission is of the opinion,
that every participant of this act of violence – from the organizers to
the implementers – actions should be assessed from the point of view of
the Criminal Code and Civil Code and other legislative acts. The
Commission also ascertained that such an unlawful act of violence on
behalf of the State is in part due to the decision of the Kedainiai
District Court Judge Vitalijus Kondratjevo, which does not conform to
the principles of justice and reasonableness; it was not waited for the
most important in this entire story the outcomes of the pedophile case,
it was failed to comply with the UN Convention on the Rights of the
Child Article 12 requirements whereby it is essential to take into
account the child’s opinion and wishes. The child cannot be quickly
wrenched away from the environment in which she was born and grew,
separated from her grandparents, relatives and close friends, as this is
contrary to the principles of humanity.In the opinion of the Commission
this sexual abuse against a young child case is further complicated by
the fact that since 2007 the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania,
for hard to understand reasons, delayed ratification of the Council of
Europe Convention on “The Protection of Children from Sexual
Exploitation and Sexual Abuse.”
The Commission drew attention to the
fact that up until now the independent Parliamentary Ombudsmen and the
Children’s Rights Protection Ombudsman have not reacted to the gross
violations of human rights in Garliava. It is not publicly known that
the Parliamentary Ombudsman and Children’s Rights Ombudsman would have
started their own investigations, as this year on the 17th of May in
Garliava not only were a minor, a young girl, but also Neringa
Venckienė’s son were the subject of psychological abuse. Also, in the
three month period since the 23rd of March 2012 the violence against the
young child, Judge Neringa Venckiene’s ward, has not been investigated
regardless of the fact that the Republic of Lithuania Code of Criminal
Procedure Article 2 obliges the prosecutor and the investigating
agencies in the shortest time possible time to investigate and uncover a
criminal offense.The Commission notes that it is not possible to
objectively evaluate the question of Judge Neringa Venckiene’s immunity
for the following reasons and circumstances: The illegal actions of
officials and other persons cannot lead to legal consequences.Without
examining the circumstances of the use of violence against a minor girl
on the 23rd of March and 17th of May this year, the allegations against
Judge N. Venckiene can be one-sided.
We cannot evaluate Judge N.
Venckienė’s actions, without firstly evaluating the infringements on the
Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania Article 114 by the officers
and the people who used violence against the girl “A judge cannot be
prosecuted, arrested, his freedom cannot be in any other way restricted
without the consent of the Parliament, in the event that it is between
sessions without the consent of the President of the Republic” and
taking into account the Republic of Lithuania Law on Courts, Article 47,
paragraph 2 “It is prohibited to enter into the living space or office
facilities of a Judge, to undertake there or in the personal or official
work car of the Judge, or any other personal transport vehicle an
inspection, search or seizure, furthermore to inspect or search the
Judge personally or search, inspect or seize his/her belongings and
documents, except for those cases prescribed by law.”On the 17th of May
this year Judge’s N. Venckiene’s immunity was not repealed and was still
effective regardless of her location. It is not possible to blame the
child’s guardian N. Venckienė because the Kedainiai District Court
decision was not implemented; the girl herself expressed a clear
intention to remain with her guardian. Under these circumstances the
guardian did not have a moral or a legal responsibility to handover the
girl by force to the mother. We note that there are no facts to show
that N. Venckienė abused her responsibilities as a guardian. We cannot
blame Judge, N. Venckienė for her words of sincere criticism against the
real evils of the judicial system. The Commission notes that the
current persecution of Judge, N. Venckienė, not only causes material
harm to her, but also oppresses her personality psychologically, damages
the country’s legal system and demoralizes society. The Commission is
surprised that up until now the Interim Commission of the Parliament has
not been given all the (footage of the child being taken) data
demonstrating Judge, N. Venckienė’s potential culpability. Is this not a
way of covering up breaches of the constitutional order?The Commission
finds that following the implementation of the Kedainiai District Court
decision that the young child who is a witness and a victim in the
criminal case, has been handed over to the biological mother, against
whom, adhering to the set order, she gave evidence. The current total
isolation of the girl after the forced handover to her biological mother
creates all the conditions for the girl’s psychological oppression and
the possibility to impact on her with the aim to potentially change her
evidence.
Members of the Public Commission express hope that at this
critical moment, when the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania
addresses the question of revoking Judge Neringa Venckienė’s legal
immunity and when it is very important to protect the Lithuanian legal
system and constitutional order, that the members of the Lithuanian
Parliament will be very careful in their evaluation and will not adopt
legally unfounded irresponsible decisions. Chairman, Commission Dr.
Saulius Arlauskas Professor Mykolas Romeris University Deputy
Chairman, Commission Dr. Zita Šličytė Member of the group responsible
for the development of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania,
Deputy of the Restoration Parliament, lawyer
Commission members: Vytautas Budnikas Chairman, Lithuanian Human Rights Association
Kęstutis Milkeraitis
Former General Prosecutor’s Office Former General Prosecutor’s Office
investigator of particularly important cases, former Ombudsmen for the
Parliament
Kazimieras Motieka Member of the group responsible
for the development of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania,
signatory of the March 11th Act, former Vice President of the
Restoration Parliament, solicitor Associate Professor Dr.
Romualdas Povilaitis Chairman, Lithuanian Human Rights Protection Association
Liudvikas Narcizas Rasimas
Member of the group responsible for the development of the Constitution
of the Republic of Lithuania, signatory of the March 11th Act,
solicitor
