Constitutional Court: Semas findings to rehab Paksas run counter to main law

Rolandas Paksas
DELFI / Karolina Pansevič

According to the ruling, the commission’s conclusions deny the Constitutional concept of the institute of impeachment stipulated in the official doctrine. Based on the conclusions, the parliament would have been granted the mandate that is not stipulated in the Constitution and have the authorization of the Constitutional Court.

At the end of last year, the 2012-2016 parliament adopted a resolution to endorse the conclusions of an ad hoc commission, suggesting that the 2004 impeachment against Paksas, then leader of the Order and Justice Party, can be canceled by way of a political decision. The commission was initiated by then ruling Order and Justice Party, it did not include any representatives of the opposition, which dismissed the goals as absurd.

Advertisement

Boycotted by the opposition, the conclusions suggest that the charges against Paksas for granting the Lithuanian citizenship by exclusion to his financial sponsor Yuriy Borisov were ungrounded,” and “the commission’s opinion is that impeachment of the president was a political decision, which can be annulled by another political decision in the light of new circumstances.”

Paksas cannot run for president and parliament since he was ousted from the President’s Office in 2004. The Constitutional Court has ruled that impeached persons cannot hold any position involving a Constitutional oath for life. It said changing the provision would require amending the Constitution.

Advertisement

The European Court of Human Rights three years ago dismissed the current life-long ban as disproportional.

Paksas was ousted from the President’s Office in an impeachment procedure in April of 2004. The Constitutional Court found him guilty of gross violation of oath of office and the Constitution by granting the Lithuanian citizenship to his financial sponsor, Borisov. In May of 2004, the parliament amended the election law to bar persons who had violated their Constitutional oath from taking any position involving the oath.

Advertisement
You may like

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*