European court to examine Lithuanian librarian’s €150 conviction

The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg has accepted a complaint from Indra Tamašauskienė, a former director of the Jonas Lankutis Public Library in Klaipėda District who was convicted over the appropriation of €150, LRT reported.

The court informed Tamašauskienė that it would examine her case against Lithuania based on the material submitted. The preliminary procedure will be conducted in writing and as quickly as possible.

“The librarian, having won at the Constitutional Court but still not finding justice in Lithuania, has hope of winning her case at the European Court of Human Rights,” her lawyer, Gintautas Danišauskas, told ELTA on Monday.

On April 30, 2024, the Lithuanian Court of Appeal found that a colleague had placed €150 in Tamašauskienė’s coat pocket. She was convicted of abuse of office, which at the time was classified as a serious crime, and fined €7,500.

Danišauskas argues that, under Lithuanian law and the practice developed by the Supreme Court of Lithuania, his client committed no crime. He said the conduct recognised by the Court of Appeal should have been addressed under administrative offence law rather than criminal law.

Tamašauskienė’s complaint repeatedly refers to the case of Jonava Mayor Mindaugas Sinkevičius, who was acquitted over the appropriation of a larger amount.

In March 2025, the Supreme Court ruled that lower courts had incorrectly applied and interpreted the requirement of “significant harm” in an abuse-of-office case. It said the amount of expenses improperly reimbursed to Sinkevičius over four years was well below the threshold of significant financial harm generally associated with damage exceeding 250 basic social benefit units, or €12,500.

The Supreme Court terminated the case against Sinkevičius, stating that his actions could not lead to criminal liability and that he had returned the misappropriated funds. He had been charged with fraud, abuse of office and document forgery.

The court that acquitted the politician said that criminalising low-risk offences without assessing whether the conduct was sufficiently harmful, or whether other branches of law could effectively restore the violated rights, was inconsistent with the purpose of criminal law.

Danišauskas said Tamašauskienė’s prosecution for abuse of office was unlawful and seriously violated Lithuanian law and relevant provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights. She is also complaining to the Strasbourg court that her right to a fair trial was violated.