Lithuanian parliament committee rejects proposal to permanently archive investigative commission materials

The Lithuanian parliament’s National Security and Defence Committee (NSGK) on Monday rejected a proposal to indefinitely preserve materials collected by the so-called “whistleblower commission” that investigated the State Security Department (VSD), LRT reports.

The committee voted against a motion by conservative MP Mindaugas Lingė to transfer all documents gathered during the parliamentary probe to the archives for permanent storage. Four opposition members supported the proposal, while six ruling coalition representatives either opposed it or abstained.

The debate follows last December’s move by the committee’s Social Democratic members to draft two parliamentary resolutions calling for the annulment of both the commission’s formation and its findings, which had been approved by the Seimas. Committee chairman Rimantas Sinkevičius (Social Democrats) previously stated this would implement a Constitutional Court ruling.

Lingė argued that repealing the resolutions would create grounds to discard the investigative materials. He noted that while the Constitutional Court invalidated the commission’s formation and conclusions in June last year, it did not challenge the substance of the investigation itself. The court’s decision automatically nullified the Seimas resolutions, making further annulment redundant, he claimed.

“These resolutions are already non-binding—even the document registry marks them in red as inapplicable,” Lingė told the committee. “Without clear motives, this raises suspicions that the real goal is to destroy the collected material.”

The Seimas is scheduled to debate the annulment of the whistleblower commission’s formation and findings on Tuesday. Lingė emphasized that the commission had gathered extensive evidence, including documents, written and oral testimonies, meeting transcripts, stenograms, and partially declassified information.

“Regardless of the Seimas decision on these resolutions, we need a neutral guarantee that the collected material remains permanently archived,” he said, citing potential future academic or legal reviews of the commission’s work.

VSD representatives opposed Lingė’s proposal, arguing that sensitive intelligence data had been shared with the commission under strict legal conditions. A VSD spokesperson, who did not identify themselves, stated that the Constitutional Court’s ruling invalidating the commission removed the legal basis for retaining the transferred intelligence.

“All intelligence information provided by VSD—including current and former officers—must either be returned to the department or destroyed in accordance with legal procedures,” the spokesperson said.

Lingė countered that the VSD’s position confirmed fears the resolutions were aimed at eliminating the investigative materials.