Conservatives challenge election commission ruling on Paluckas

Lithuania’s parliamentary conservatives have appealed a decision that former Prime Minister Gintautas Paluckas did not commit a serious Election Code violation, LRT reported. The Homeland Union-Lithuanian Christian Democrats faction asked the Regional Administrative Court to overturn the Central Electoral Commission’s September 3 ruling.

The faction also wants the commission to reconsider a complaint filed by conservatives and Liberal MP Eugenijus Gentvilas, and issue a reasoned decision taking into account the court’s findings and legal interpretation. It asked the court to obtain documents related to the commission’s investigation, including Paluckas’s explanations and responses from public authorities.

The commission found that Paluckas had not committed a serious violation by providing information about his criminal record in his 2024 parliamentary candidate questionnaire. It said a 2010 court ruling had suspended the execution of his two-year prison sentence for one year and ordered him to pay damages as a court-imposed obligation, rather than as a criminal measure.

The commission said the fact that Paluckas had not paid the remaining damages when he ran for parliament did not show that he had failed to serve his sentence or was still subject to a criminal measure. It also cited a response from Vilnius municipality saying that, because procedures for handling money owed to the municipality had not been regulated, it could not identify the employees responsible for failing to enter Paluckas’s debt into its financial accounting system.

Some commission members questioned whether public institutions had properly carried out their duties and oversight, given that the court-ordered obligation to pay damages had gone unfulfilled for more than a decade.

The commission began its investigation in mid-May after receiving the complaint in late April. The complaint said Paluckas answered “no” in his August 2024 candidate questionnaire when asked whether he had an unserved court sentence or criminal measure. It also noted that he had stated his conviction for an intentional moderately serious crime expired in 2013, while records indicated he paid the court-ordered damages only in 2025, after becoming a member of parliament.

The conservatives have also asked the court to refer the case to the Constitutional Court if it has doubts about the constitutionality of the applicable rules.