Court upholds misconduct finding against prosecutor who served in volunteer force
Tuesday 13th October 2026 on 13:15 in
Lithuania
Lithuania’s Regional Administrative Court has rejected a prosecutor’s appeal, ruling that the prosecutor was rightly found to have committed an official violation by serving in the National Defence Volunteer Forces and receiving payment for the service, LRT reported.
The prosecutor had served in the volunteer force since August 2022. An internal investigation found the service was incompatible with restrictions on prosecutors set out in the Law on the Prosecution Service. The Prosecutor General accepted the finding and ordered the prosecutor to end the breach by choosing a position in one of the services. No disciplinary penalty was imposed.
The prosecutor argued that voluntary service outside working hours could not constitute misconduct, saying that preparing to defend the state served the public interest and that the payments were not a means of making a profit.
The court rejected those arguments, noting that the law bars prosecutors from holding other positions or working for other institutions, companies or organisations, subject to statutory exceptions. It also restricts them from receiving payments other than their prosecutor’s salary.
The court said the Prosecutor General’s Office had informed the prosecutor in 2022 that service in the volunteer force and its associated payments were incompatible with the law. It therefore upheld the finding that the prosecutor had breached the law and the professional and fairness principles in the Prosecution Service’s code of ethics.
The prosecutor also asked the court to refer the relevant legal provisions to the Constitutional Court, arguing that the restrictions unjustifiably limited the right to choose activities connected with preparing to defend the state. The court found no reason to question the provisions’ constitutionality, adding that the restrictions do not in themselves prevent prosecutors from taking part in other state-defence activities, provided those activities comply with the law. It cited participation in the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union as an example.
The ruling may be appealed.