Lithuanian ministerial candidate refuses to apologise to officials

Martynas Katelynas, Lithuania’s nominee for interior minister, has declined to apologise for past remarks comparing Lithuanian officials to Belarus’s OMON forces, though he acknowledged he would not use such language today, LRT reports.

During a meeting with conservative lawmakers on Tuesday, Katelynas faced questions about how he would regain the trust of statutory officials after previously equating their crisis management actions to those of an authoritarian regime’s repressive structures.

“Wouldn’t this be an opportunity to apologise to the officials?” asked Laurynas Kasčiūnas, leader of the conservative group. Katelynas responded that he no longer avoids the question but stands by his earlier comparison, citing what he described as poor crisis management at the time.

He argued that the decision to deploy officials in Rūdininkai—where migrants were relocated without community consultation—was necessary, though he admitted the situation had been mismanaged. Katelynas emphasised that politicians, not the officials he compared to OMON, had made the relocation decisions.

“A minister’s job is to prevent such situations from arising,” he said. When pressed again on an apology, Katelynas stated: “I can say that today I would not choose such rhetoric, but I do not disown my statement and have explained why that choice was made.”

Former interior minister Agnė Bilotaitė noted that Katelynas’s past comments had targeted officials directly, not politicians, and urged him to apologise, stressing the importance of trust between a minister and officials, especially in challenging times.

On wages, Katelynas ruled out immediate pay rises for officials but discussed a long-term salary increase plan for around 2030–2032. He cautioned against making fixed promises, citing budget constraints, and identified national defence as the top funding priority.

“It’s not just about salary levels but predictability in what officials can expect,” he said, adding that a long-term plan would be more responsible than short-term commitments.