ECJ: Lithuania did not ensure the independence of A. Sakharukas and do not go to court

The court in Strasbourg announced this decision on Tuesday.

The ECJ decided that the Lithuanian courts, when examining the criminal case against him, violated the principle of judicial independence and impartiality, where human rights and fundamental freedoms are affirmed by the Convention.

In his complaint submitted back in 2019, A. Sacharukas stated that the same judge of the Supreme Court of Lithuania (LAT) examined his criminal case twice, the first time when the LAT referred the criminal case to a new appeal procedure and the second time when his cassation appeal regarding Lithuania was examined of the guilty verdict passed by the appellate court.

The ECJ decided that the fear of the former parliamentarian, that the relevant judge might have formed a preconceived opinion about his guilt, is justified.

The court did not satisfy the part of A. Sacharuk’s complaint that another article of the Convention, which stipulates that there are no punishments without bail, was violated.

[{“title”:”Etikos sargai pabar irinskien, Karbausk ir Veryg”,”url”:”https://vz.lt/2017/05/31/etikos-sargai-pabare-sirinskiene-karbauski-ir-veryga”,”category”:”ARTICLE”,”profiles”:[1057,1058,1067]}. aleksandras-sacharuks”,”category”:”ARTICLE”,”profiles”:[1057,1067]}. -and-by-distance”,”category”:”ARTICLE”,”profiles”:[1057,1067]}]

Although the Seimas did not allow the abolition of my immunity, an amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure was adopted during my term of office, which made it possible to hold me criminally liable. After my term as a member of the Seimas, I became the first member of the Seimas convicted of voting instead of another member of the Seimas, although until since then, voting in the Seimas on behalf of another Seimas member was considered a parliamentary activity tradition, A. Sacharukas stated in his complaint to the Strasbourg court.

Although the ECJ partially accepted a decision in favor of A. Sacharuk, it did not award monetary compensation, claiming that the establishment of a violation of one of the articles of the Convention is in itself sufficient compensation for any claimant who suffered a loss.

In 2018, the Supreme Court upheld the indictment of A. Sacharuk handed down by the Appellate Court in 2018. The case is related to the vote for another member of the Seimas at the time, Lin Karali.

In addition, A. Sacharuk was acquitted of all charges. Therefore, for the first time, the Supreme Court will have the right to re-examine the case.

In December 2016, the judges of the cassation instance court announced that the acquittal of A. Sacharuk was based on illegal arguments. In the decisions in favor of A. Sacharuk, a lot of attention is paid to the claim that the Seimas had developed a practice of voting for other members of the Seimas.

According to the case, in 2010, A. Sacharukas used the time and time of his faction colleague L. Karaliaus as a member of the Seimas, registered in the Seimas member’s registration protocol, and voted for amendments to the draft law in the name of L. Karaliaus. L. The King was away in Asia at that time. U nusiengim A. Sacharuks and L. Karaliis were impeached in the Seimas. After the voting, L. Karalius lost his parliamentary mandate, and A. Sacharuk managed to keep it by a few votes.

At that time, A. Sacharukas complained in court that other members of the Seimas behaved similarly, but they were not punished.

In 2019, the district court of the city of Vilnius overturned the conviction of A. Sacharuk at his request, because the former parliamentarian submitted documents that he will pay the fine of 1,882 euros.

It is prohibited to reproduce the information of the news agency BNS in public information media and on Internet websites without the consent of UAB “BNS”.