Supreme Court: "Using a career post to facilitate a procedural decision on your family member undoubtedly reduces public confidence in the entire judiciary." Picture of Romualas Jurgutis (LŽ)
Former judge Virginia Kazlauskienė has done a lot of moral damage to the state, so its actions can not be recognized as formal or disciplinary offenses announced by the Lithuanian Supreme Court (LAT)
The then judge Šiauliai V. Kazlauskienė, having learned that the question of her son's detention would be settled in court, took advantage of his acquaintance with another judge. Speaking on the phone, she hinted she was asking her not to take her son.
"The claim that another judge should not impose a religious son who has been tested by the clergyman to justify his mother's care is incompatible with the duty of each judge not to abuse his position to influence the decisions of other persons and to act in such a way that there is no doubt that such a conflict is not to use the personal profit function to not use their duties, powers and names to influence the decision of others. osopon that would cause a conflict of interest, "- said the Supreme Court.
Despite the request of V. Kazlauskiene, her son was arrested. The media then announced that the son of a judge was suspicious of having organized a group of accomplices whose members, wearing a uniform, robbed entrepreneurs from the city and the Šiauliai district.
The condemnation of the justification complained about the excessive attention of the media in its case.
The Supreme Court ruled that the interest in the case also relates to the duties of another judge of V. Kazlauskienė whereas the use of the official position of a favorable procedural decision on her family member has undoubtedly diminished public confidence not only as a judge but also objectivity, Sincerity also raises serious doubts about the entire judicial system.
V. Kazlauskiene and two other colleagues at the Special Research Sphere (STT) took in 2011. At that time, corruption was suspected against the chair of the local court in the Telšiai district. However, this case is definitively closed only now, while the Supreme Court has issued a final and unusual decision.
The case was initially dealt with by Kaunas Regional Court, then it was reviewed several times by the Court of Appeal. Courts changed, condemned and condemned the judges. It was examined by the Supreme Court in 2016.
V. Kazlauskienė has been surrendered to the court with several allegations of abuse, bribing another judge. The bribe case ended after the expiration of the limitation period, as a result of the abuse category, it was acquitted without any fault. The cases were interrupted and the judges were meeting with V. Kazlauskiene.
In February of this year, the Court of Appeals of Lithuania replaced the decision of the District Court of Cairo in 2014, and its section on the sentence imposed on V. Kazlauskienė and imposed a new sentence on her.
Mr V. Kazlauskiene was fined EUR 7532 by requiring him to pay him to the State budget within one year.
The disappearance protested that it was punished twice, because with the imprisonment the Lithuanian Court of Appeal imposed a second sentence in February of this year – fine. A sentence for B. Kazulakkeni was a one-and-a-half-year imprisonment, suspending her sentence for one year. This sentence was not final until the case, the judge made an arbitrary sentence and the new sentence was a new fine – a fine.
The Supreme Court found that V. Kazlauskienė, when he was a lawyer and having realized that the sentence to end the imprisonment had been lifted, did not submit a request for further fulfillment of the obligations to the competent authorities (the oversight service), nor filed a complaint with the courts or other instruments.
According to the court, the fine is correct and corresponds to the purpose of the penalty.