Pre-trial investigation into management of financial activities undertaken by the Labour Party
On 17 May 2006 State Security Department of the Republic of Lithuania forwarded information that activities of the Labour Party were allegedly financed from other funds than officially declared; consequently, Department of Organized Crime and Corruption Investigation Department of Prosecutor General’s Office initiated pre-trial investigation into legitimisation of proceeds of crime, submission of false statement about income, profit or assets and fraudulent accounting (Articles 216, 220 and 222 of the Criminal Code). Pre-trial investigation in this case lasted from 17 May 2006 to 28 December 2007.
On 17 May 2006 notifications about suspicions were served to Mrs. Vitalija Vonžutaitė, Deputy Head of the Main Office of the Labour Party, Mrs. Marina Liutkevičienė, the Treasurer of the Labour Party and Ms. Nijolė Steponavičiūtė. Coercive measure written promise not to depart was also imposed on the above-listed persons.
On 13 June 2006 notification about suspicions against Mr. Viktoras Uspaskich, the Head of the Labour Party was drawn up and summons to the interview on 23 June 2006 was sent to him. However, V. Uspaskich failed to come to the interview, even though he sent written notification to the Prosecutor’s Office informing that he was aware of the pre-trial investigation being carried out and thus he was ready to come.
On 22 June 2006 notification about suspicions was served to Mr. Vytautas Gapšys, the high-level Secretary of the Labour Party. Coercive measure written promise not to depart was also imposed on him.
On 29 June 2006 notification about suspicions was served to the representative of the Labour Party which was deemed to be legal entity subject to criminal liability.
On 18 July 2006 summons to come to Prosecutor Genera’s Office addressed to V. Uspaskich was served to V. Uspaskich’s wife. However, V. Uspaskich failed to appear in the Prosecutor’s Office, and neither informed about the reasons of failure to come nor indicated his location. Head at interim of the Labour Party Mrs. Loreta Graužinienė was interviewed as a witness; in her statements she confirmed that she was unaware of location of V. Uspaskich.
By 23 August 2006 prosecutor’s decision, V. Uspaskich was acknowledged to be a suspect.
On 25 August 2006 pre-trial judge of District Court No. 2 of Vilnius City imposed coercive measure arrest on V. Uspaskich. On the same day international search for V. Uspaskich was announced, and European arrest warrant on V. Uspaskich was issued.
On 15 September 2006 V. Uspaskich was detained by Moscow Police; V. Uspaskich requested for political asylum and later he was released from custody. The Russian Federation made the decision to refuse satisfaction of Lithuania’s request for extradition, and did not extradite the suspect to the Republic of Lithuania.
On 9 October 2006 audit of objects of economic-financial activities of the Labour party was started.
On 31 October 2006, having examined the appeal submitted by V. Uspaskich’s defence lawyer, Vilnius Regional Court rejected the appeal, and the ruling on imposing arrest remained valid.
On 7 September 2007 specialist’s conclusions about the economic-financial activities of the Labour Party were received.
On 26 September 2007 V. Uspaskich was arrested in Vilnius International Airport.
On 27 September 2007, having considered the fact that V. Uspaskich returned to Lithuania on his own efforts, pre-trial judge of District Court No. 2 of Vilnius City imposed coercive measure home arrest on the defendant.
On 12 October 2007 during the interview the Head of the Labour Party at that time Mr. K. Daukšys stated that he was not able to confirm that the Labour Party had submitted all documents requested by prosecutors.
On 15 October 2007 the specialist presented additional conclusions about the economic-financial activities of the Labour Party. Specialists were not able to make their reports for a long time, because the Labour Party was slow in fulfilling the requests to present all official accounting documents of the Labour Party.
On 14 December 2007 pre-trial investigation into management of fraudulent accounting of the Labour Party and other related crimes was separated.
On 28 December 2007 the suspects in this case were notified about the end of pre-trial investigation, and suspects started getting acquainted with the collected material of pre-trial investigation. On request of suspects and their defence lawyers, the term for getting acquainted with the case file was extended several times.
On 14 April 2008 the criminal case accompanied by the indictment was handed over to Vilnius Regional Court for examination.
By 29 April 2008 decision of Vilnius Regional Court, coercive measure home arrest imposed on V. Uspaskich was replaced with bail (1 500 000 LTL) and written promise not to depart.
On 18 June 2008 the first hearing in Vilnius Regional Court took place; considering V. Gapšys’s request, the court provided him with additional time to get acquainted with the case file till 1 September 2008. During the court session prosecutors maintaining public prosecution submitted civil claim for the damage of 6 050 475 LTL incurred by the State due to subsidies and compensations received unlawfully by the Labour Party. In addition, civil claims in this case were submitted by Vilnius County State Tax Inspectorate (3 009 043 LTL) and Vilnius Division of State Social Insurance Fund Board (855 347 LTL).
On 13 October 2008 the appointed court session did not take place, as the defendant Marina Liutkevičienė fell ill.
On 10 November 2008 during the court session, the representative of the legal entity which was subject to criminal liability submitted petition for returning the case back to the prosecutor due to improperly drawn indictment. The defendant V. Gapšys and his defence lawyer requested for a break in order to prepare for expressing their opinion about the above-mentioned petition. Such request was satisfied by the court.
On 13 November 2008 the appointed court session did not take place due to the absence of defendant V. Gapšys’s defence lawyer in the session, as he was participating in another court session.
On 26 November 2008 the criminal procedure was not possible during the court session, because no consent of the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania to bringing the defendants Viktoras Uspaskich and Vytautas Dapšys who had become Members of Parliament to criminal liability was obtained.
On 27 November 2008 Mr. Algimantas Valantinas, Prosecutor General of the Republic of Lithuania addressed the Parliament with request for granting its consent to bringing Members of Parliament V. Uspaskich and V. Dapšys to criminal liability and restricting their freedom by applying the imposed coercive measures.
On 9 December 2008 the Parliament granted its consent to bringing Members of Parliament V. Uspaskich and V. Dapšys to criminal liability and restricting their liberty.
On 14 January 2009 Vilnius Regional Court rejected the petition for returning the case back to the prosecutor due to improperly drawn indictment that was submitted to the court by the representative of the legal entity which was subject to criminal liability in November 2008. Defendants’ defence lawyers and representative of the legal entity submitted request for applying to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania.
On 15 January 2009 the court session did no take place, because V. Dapšys’s defence lawyer was participating in another court session.
On 27 February 2009 Vilnius Regional Court made the ruling on applying to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania and requesting that it examined whether liability of the legal entity as specified in the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania did not contradict the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania. Meanwhile, the examination of the criminal case was postponed till the decision was made by the Constitutional Court.
On 8 June 2009 Constitutional Court made the decision in which it explained that Articles 20 and 43 of the Criminal Code did not contradict the Constitution, and therefore, a legal entity could be brought to criminal liability.
The length of the pre-trial investigation was determined by the following factors:
- large extent of investigation (financial activities of the Labour Party during the years 2004-2006 were being investigated);
- quantity and nature of performed procedural actions (more than 300 persons were interviewed; 12 long-lasting computer examinations were performed; 32 examinations of handwriting and signatures were carried out; economic-financial activities of the Labour Party were audited; activities of the company UAB “Aguomina” were audited; examination of political campaign in the weekly newspaper “Laikas” was conducted; a number of tax audits were performed by drawing up specialists’ conclusions and on the basis of pre-trial investigation material; and documents on official accounting and book-keeping of the Labour Party and other related legal and natural entities were collected);
- large scope of documents under investigation (155 volumes containing the pre-trial investigation material were handed over to the court);
- V. Uspaskich being hiding in the Russian Federation for a long time.
Version in Russian