After the mentioned match, Utena’s “Juventus” contacted the LKL, requesting an investigation into the incident between Utena “Juventus” player Maxwell Lewis and then Klaipėda “Neptūnas” player Martynas Pacevičius regarding a possibly racist and/or discriminatory statement.
Read more Hell in the sky: Terrified «Turkish Airlines» passengers shouted «we are going to die»
On July 31, 2026, the LKL publicly announced that the Disciplinary Commission had completed the investigation. The LKL statement indicated that the Commission analyzed the collected audio and video material, identified the exact phrase spoken by M. Pacevičius, consulted with experts in language, linguistics, and human rights, evaluated the practices of Lithuanian courts and the European Court of Human Rights, and, after assessing the entirety of this evidence, unanimously decided that there was no basis to claim that M. Pacevičius discriminated against M. Lewis because of his race or origin, and recognized that M. Pacevičius did not commit a disciplinary violation.
Considering the officially published result of the Disciplinary Commission’s decision by the LKL and aiming to ensure that the previously published club information is not understood as a statement about a violation by M. Pacevičius conclusively established by the LKL investigation, Utena “Juventus” issues this denial:
“In the announcement titled ‘There is no place for racism in basketball’ published on June 1, 2026, on the website of VšĮ ‘Utenos Juventus,’ it was stated that Martynas Pacevičius made racist remarks towards Maxwell Lewis. We deny this categorical statement. By the decision No. DK-2026-01 of the Lithuanian Basketball League (LKL) Disciplinary Commission dated July 31, 2026, adopted after investigating the circumstances of the incident that occurred on June 1, 2026, after the Klaipėda ‘Neptūnas’ and Utena ‘Juventus’ match, it was established that there is no basis to claim that Martynas Pacevičius discriminated against Maxwell Lewis because of his race or origin during the incident. The Lithuanian Basketball League (LKL) Disciplinary Commission also unanimously recognized that Martynas Pacevičius did not commit a disciplinary violation under point 69.8 of the LKL Regulations or other points of the LKL Regulations.”
However, the Utena club supplemented this denial with several more sentences critically evaluating the investigation process.
“At the same time, Utena ‘Juventus’ considers it necessary to disclose to the public another significant circumstance of this situation. The club has not yet been given the opportunity to familiarize itself with the entire LKL Disciplinary Commission decision, its reasoning, or the investigation material on which the publicly announced conclusions were based.
Utena ‘Juventus’ officially requested the LKL to provide the Disciplinary Commission’s decision and investigation material, including the exact phrase spoken by M. Pacevičius indicated by the LKL, audio and video material, expert conclusions, and other information on which the Disciplinary Commission’s decision was based.
Read more Flashing traffic lights are being returned to the streets: how will they work?
On September 11, 2026, the LKL refused to provide this material to Utena ‘Juventus.’ In its response, the LKL stated that Utena ‘Juventus’ was not considered a party to the disciplinary case process, and therefore, in the LKL’s view, it had neither the legal basis nor the obligation to provide the club with the Disciplinary Commission’s decision or other information related to the disciplinary case.
Therefore, Utena ‘Juventus’ currently does not know the exact phrase spoken by M. Pacevičius established during the Disciplinary Commission’s investigation, its precise context, the conclusions made by the language, linguistics, and human rights experts engaged by the LKL, the specific Lithuanian and European Court of Human Rights practices relied upon, and the detailed factual and legal reasons that led to the Disciplinary Commission’s decision.
For this reason, Utena ‘Juventus’ cannot independently assess the thoroughness of the investigation conducted by the LKL Disciplinary Commission, the content of the collected evidence, or the validity of the Commission’s conclusions. The club can only inform the public about the result of the Disciplinary Commission’s decision as publicly announced by the LKL itself.
Utena ‘Juventus’ emphasizes that the club’s appeal to the LKL was submitted to have the circumstances of the possibly discriminatory incident evaluated by the competent disciplinary body of the LKL. The club respects the competence of the Disciplinary Commission and its decision but also believes that transparent consideration of such issues is important for the trust of players, clubs, and the entire basketball community in the disciplinary system.
Utena ‘Juventus’ continues to hold the principled position that there is no place for racism, discrimination, or other behavior degrading human dignity in basketball, and every report of a possible incident of this nature must be evaluated responsibly, objectively, and transparently,” the message distributed on Facebook by “Juventus” continues.
