Grina says politicians, not VSD, must judge candidates’ suitability

The State Security Department is not responsible for assessing the overall reputation of candidates, former director Gediminas Grina told LRT, as questions continue over the department’s vetting of Oleksandr Laneckis, who was appointed to the board of Lithuanian Airports.

The department said it assesses only some of the criteria set out in law, while other circumstances must be evaluated by other institutions and by the candidate themselves.

“The VSD is not the morality police. Let politicians deal with morality,” Grina said.

The department told ELTA that vetting candidates for positions at companies important to national security is regulated by the Law on the Protection of Objects Important for Ensuring National Security. The law sets out circumstances that prevent a person from being appointed to such positions.

“People appointed or already holding these positions are checked, in accordance with the procedure established by the government, to determine whether they meet the criteria set out in the law,” the VSD said in a written response.

However, the department stressed that it does not examine every circumstance listed in the law. It assesses a defined part of the circumstances and criteria related to national security, while other matters fall under the responsibility of candidates, the institutions organising competitions and the organisations conducting candidate selection.

According to Grina, the VSD’s main task is to identify information that is not public, rather than repeat publicly available information. He said that a person’s business or employment links with Russia do not, by themselves, mean that the person is acting in the interests of a hostile state.

He added that the VSD must have specific facts before issuing a negative assessment. “The VSD cannot say ‘No’ until it has some facts showing that a person is working for a hostile state,” Grina said.

Grina linked the division of responsibilities to the earlier case involving Gintautas Paluckas, when President Gitanas Nausėda criticised institutions for failing to provide sufficient information about potential risks before Paluckas was appointed prime minister.

“When politicians do not want to take responsibility for their decisions, they immediately write letters to the VSD,” the former department head said.

He said the VSD could assess national security threats, but politicians should decide whether a publicly known person is suitable for a particular position.

Questions about institutional assessments of candidates have also arisen in previous cases. In July 2025, Nausėda said institutions had provided information about Paluckas, but that it had proved insufficient.

“I need well-founded, appropriate information,” the president told reporters at the time, adding that journalistic investigations sometimes revealed more than the services did in carrying out their duties.

Article 17 of the Law on the Protection of Objects Important for Ensuring National Security sets requirements for people seeking or holding positions at companies important to national security. Among other provisions, it bars appointments when a person cooperates or has cooperated in the interests of Lithuania’s enemies, or maintains or has maintained ties with a foreign intelligence or security service or with people linked to such a service.