2024-03-28 09:25:05
Although she tends to evaluate the commission’s conclusions very cautiously, according to the Head of the Government, if she has nothing to hide, she can definitely answer the questions.
When asked on Thursday whether the conclusions of the commission assembled in the Seimas convince her, I. Šimonytė admitted that it is not easy to comment on this, both due to her own personal experience and the context of the elections.
“I have some personal experience about the events described in the conclusions, so I have made my conclusions based on my personal experience as well.
Those persons whose activities or whose activities are being investigated are somehow very inclined to simplify all of this, write it off to some kind of political competition or grievance due to one or another election results, again, since we have a presidential election campaign now, apparently, here is the simplest way, but what kind of comment of mine should be considered that way.
I try to evaluate this situation very carefully so that it does not seem to someone that I have some kind of personal interest”, I. Šimonytė told “Žinių radio”.
However, she emphasized that it is important to mention several essential points. According to the Prime Minister, during her political career, she has testified in at least four parliamentary investigative commissions, where she did not always think that the questions asked were correct, and that the people who headed the commission or participated in it were sufficiently objective.
“But it never occurred to me that I could refuse to testify before the commission and answer the questions, whatever those questions might be. Because if you have nothing to hide, you can simply answer all the questions. In words, in writing – this is already a matter of technique.
As I understand it, the commission agreed to the fact that the president would answer the questions in writing and, as it were, such an almost public promise or reasoning from Mr. Nausėda, I think we all heard it. I don’t know why that didn’t happen,” I.Šimonytė pondered.
According to the Prime Minister, G. Nausėda’s move to refuse to testify before the commission shows disrespect for the representation of the nation.
“Without going into more detailed evaluations and qualifications of this behavior, it shows minimal disrespect for the Seimas as an institution. (…) You can try to downplay it to some kind of political battles, V. Bak’s grievances about S. Skvernelis, but those questions will not disappear anywhere.
I think the simplest way to eliminate those questions is to answer them,” said I.Šimonytė.
Speaking about the possible impeachment of G. Nausėda, the Head of the Government emphasized that it is far too early to talk about it, because such a step requires many different stages.
“I’ll just say again what I said, that, in my understanding, G. Nausėda has repeatedly shown in various ways during his tenure that it is not easy for him to be equally fair to everyone, and if something does not seem politically acceptable or somehow convenient to him, then everything is attempts are being made to write it off as a political struggle or grievance, although, in my understanding, officials of this rank, who are subject to the highest transparency requirements, must have the courage to answer questions,” said the Prime Minister.
I. Šimonytė also did not begin to assess whether the Seimas would approve the conclusions of the commission, but did not doubt that the questions regarding G. Nausėda would not disappear.
“Still, that information will not disappear anywhere and those questions will still hang, someone will ask them. And people who are not satisfied with the answer or did not hear it will continue to ask those questions,” she predicted.
We would like to remind you that on Monday, the Seimas commission that examined the history of VSD speaker Tomas Gailius confirmed the conclusion of the parliamentary investigation. After several months of analysis and the testimony of a dozen officials, it was established that the head of the Security Service, Darius Jauniškis, helped the then candidate G. Nausėda by collecting intelligence information about his environment.
The Seimas investigators conclude that the VSD directors’ material about the candidate’s environment reached G. Nausėdas himself or a person acting on his behalf. It is also indicated that the information collected in the department could have been disclosed to G. Nausėda himself.
At that time, the president who refused to answer the questions submitted by the commission, in the opinion of the parliamentarians, prevented the Seimas from fulfilling its duties and violated the Constitution and the provisions of the oath to respect and execute the laws.
The parliamentary investigation casts a shadow over STT head Linas Pernavos, who, according to the conclusions, abused his duties by refusing to provide the commission with information gathered during the criminal intelligence investigation and by misleading the commission members.
The conclusions of the investigation also state that during the parliamentary investigation it became clear that the VSD investigated possible violations in financing the election campaign of the then candidate G. Nausėda.
It was also found out that G. Nausėda and members of his electoral staff in 2018-2019 maintained contacts with representatives of the Belarusian fertilizer business, met with them, and after becoming the head of the country, invited these persons to the events held in the Presidency.
It is noted that the members of G. Nausėda’s team, who testified to the commission and held high positions in the Office of the President, concealed this information. As a result, the parliamentary commission intends to apply to the prosecutor’s office.
The president disagrees with the conclusions and emphasizes that the commission is politicized. According to the Presidency, this is a “desperate attempt to influence the results of the presidential election” and at the same time an attempt to “discredit the state and its constitutional principles”.
2024-03-28 09:25:05