Lithuanian prosecution warns early disclosure of leaked registry data could have hindered investigation

The Lithuanian Prosecutor General’s Office has stated that publicly releasing information about the Centre of Registers (RC) data breach in its early stages could have obstructed procedural actions or even made it impossible to gather evidence, news agency ELTA reports.

In a response to ELTA, prosecutors emphasised that “disclosing information at an early stage of the pre-trial investigation could have hindered procedural actions or rendered the collection of data necessary for establishing the factual circumstances impossible.” The investigation into the leak was launched on April 15, the same day authorities received the initial report of the incident.

The breach first became public on May 22, when news outlet 15min.lt reported on the potential leak of RC data. Later that day, prosecutors issued an official statement confirming the ongoing pre-trial investigation, asserting that the disclosure would no longer significantly impact the probe’s success.

“Understanding that the public should receive reliable and accurate information about this incident and the investigation from official sources, a statement was prepared and released once it was assessed that it would no longer have a meaningful effect on the pre-trial investigation’s outcome,” the Prosecutor General’s Office stated.

When asked whether institutions or officials aware of the leak were prohibited from disclosing the information, prosecutors cited Article 177 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which mandates that pre-trial investigation data remains confidential until a case reaches court. Such data may only be published with the prosecutor’s permission and to the extent deemed admissible.

President Gitanas Nausėda has publicly questioned why the public was not informed sooner, arguing that the delay was unjustifiable. “It is certainly inexcusable that public notification occurred, one might say, a month or two late, only after the first problems emerged,” he told journalists on Wednesday.

“You cannot hide behind the Prosecutor General’s Office requirements. This information should have been disclosed because there was no prohibition from the Prosecutor General’s Office—such a disclosure would have allowed people to take appropriate measures and reduce the risk they face,” Nausėda stressed.

The president also noted he had not received a clear explanation for why neither he nor the public was informed in real time. “I still have not received an answer as to why I was not informed immediately and why the public was not informed. Once again, I repeat: the Prosecutor General’s Office does not prohibit providing information, and if there was such a prohibition, they should show where it is written that the Prosecutor General’s Office forbids disclosing what is happening,” he said.

Nausėda underscored that such incidents should have no place in Lithuania, calling it a matter of national security.

Prime Minister Ingrida Ruginienė earlier confirmed she was notified of the breach in April but stated that public disclosure was not possible at the time, as the investigation was under the Prosecutor General’s Office control. “Even during such a critical process—a pre-trial investigation—we took action without delay,” she said.