Lithuanian parliament ethics committee declines to assess Jakavičius’ remarks on genocide center candidate

The Lithuanian parliament’s Ethics and Procedures Committee on Wednesday declined to evaluate statements made by Darius Jakavičius, a Social Democrat and head of the Seimas Freedom Struggles and State Historical Memory Commission, regarding Donata Kabelkė, a former candidate for director of the Lithuanian Genocide and Resistance Research Centre (LGGRTC).

In a vote, four committee members opposed launching an investigation into Kabelkė’s complaint, three supported it, and three abstained.

Audrius Radvilavičius, a fellow Social Democrat, argued there was no basis to conclude a potential ethics violation, stating that parliamentarians have the right to question candidates’ reputations, trustworthiness, or suitability for office. He added that there was no evidence Jakavičius had deliberately spread false information or overstepped the bounds of parliamentary discussion.

Lilija Vaitiekūnienė, another Social Democrat, also opposed an investigation, claiming Jakavičius had not made direct accusations but merely raised questions.

Conservative Jurgis Razma, however, insisted an investigation was necessary, as Jakavičius had publicly questioned Kabelkė’s impeccable reputation. “An accusation is still made, and it is painful. It remains on record and could affect future candidacies. If there were an investigation, at least its conclusion could state that there was no basis to doubt the candidate’s reputation,” Razma said.

Kabelkė had filed a complaint with the Ethics and Procedures Committee, alleging that Jakavičius’ remarks during a June 11 plenary session violated the State Politicians’ Code of Conduct, including principles of respect, justice, honesty, and accountability. She stated that an impeccable reputation was a requirement not only for her current role but also for the competition to lead the LGGRTC.

During the discussion of her candidacy, Jakavičius questioned whether Kabelkė was a person of impeccable reputation, capable of handling classified information, leading a sensitive institution, and representing it internationally. He also noted that she had confused historical dates, including the June Uprising, which he said occurred on June 14, not June 23.

Kabelkė responded that the date mix-up was due to emotional distress and that such remarks undermined her competence and professional autonomy.