Lithuania pledged to hold Antonov in Vilnius prison but he is in Šiauliai

Lithuania committed to France to detain Vladimir Antonov, the former shareholder and head of Snoras Bank, in a Vilnius prison, but he was instead placed in a prison in Šiauliai, his lawyer Aivaras Alimas told ELTA.

“For Antonov to be extradited, the Lithuanian state had pledged to hold him in a Vilnius prison—this was clearly stated in the documents submitted to the French court. After bringing him [from France], it seems the opinion changed, I don’t know why. I also don’t know why Vilnius prison was specified—perhaps the conditions are better. Sometimes foreign states do not extradite convicts if the requesting state’s prisons are in poor condition,” the defence lawyer told ELTA.

ELTA recalls that in 2013, Ireland did not extradite its citizen Liam Campbell to Lithuania. Lithuania had sought his extradition on suspicion of involvement in an operation to acquire weapons and bombs for the Real Irish Republican Army (IRA). An Irish judge ruled at the time that the conditions in Lithuanian prisons were inhuman and degrading.

This week, Lithuania’s Court of Appeals, reviewing the criminal case of Snoras, granted Antonov’s request to begin serving his 10-year and six-month prison sentence before the court’s ruling takes effect. The ruling will enter into force once the Court of Appeals makes its decision.

The court’s decision takes effect immediately and is not subject to appeal. Normally, if an appeal is filed, the district court’s ruling is not enforced. However, the law provides an exception: if the convicted person submits a written request to begin serving the sentence before the case is reviewed on appeal, the ruling can be enforced.

The Court of Appeals, which examined Antonov’s request, saw no obstacles to granting it—the convicted person had submitted a written request to begin serving his sentence, and the Criminal Code does not provide for any additional conditions or criteria under which the court could refuse to allow the convicted person to begin serving the sentence.

According to the lawyer, it is not yet known in which Lithuanian prison Antonov will serve his sentence. “This is certainly not decided by him; his wishes do not determine it. It is decided by the Lithuanian Prison Service. Wherever they assign him, that’s where he’ll be—though the regime will be different from now. The person will be able to study, do other things,” Antonov’s lawyer told ELTA.

The Lithuanian Prison Service has established certain criteria for selecting the place of serving a prison sentence. “The specific place where the convicted person will serve their sentence is chosen by the detention facility, taking into account the danger posed by the convicted person, public safety, the severity and nature of the criminal act committed, the convicted person’s health, psychological characteristics, age, employability, their profession, and, if possible, the interests of the convicted person’s minor child(ren) and the permanent place of residence of the convicted person or their close relatives. The availability of spaces in detention facilities and other circumstances are also considered,” the service has previously stated.

Prosecutor fears escape risk

Prosecutor Darius Stankevičius asked for Antonov’s request to be denied due to the risk of him fleeing—Antonov had been wanted for 15 years. However, the Lithuanian Court of Appeals noted that detention facilities must ensure both the isolation of convicts from society and their safety, as well as prevent convicts from leaving these institutions.

“I believe that the Lithuanian Prison Service does its job excellently and ensures that no convicted person escapes. How many have escaped recently? We haven’t heard of any in recent years. There are no indications that my client is considering or preparing to flee—absolutely none, and there can’t be,” the lawyer said.