The application to the Supreme Court of Lithuania (LAT) argues that the provisions recognized as unconstitutional were directly related to the obtaining and transmission of intelligence information used in R. Kurlianskis’s criminal case to the criminal process.
Read more Test: how to understand if a person is addicted to gambling
Therefore, the court is asked to reopen the case and reassess whether the obtaining and use of this data complied with constitutional requirements of legality, justification, and proportionality.
The constitutionality of the Intelligence Law was challenged from the beginning of the case
Doubts about the defense of the provisions of the Intelligence Law were raised during the case in all three instances. The admissibility of data collected under these provisions was also challenged, but the courts, including the Supreme Court of Lithuania, at that time saw no reason to refer the matter to the Constitutional Court (KT).
After the case ended, R. Kurlianskis filed an individual constitutional complaint with the Constitutional Court. On July 7, the KT issued a decision: part of the contested provisions of the Intelligence Law were recognized as unconstitutional.
“We raised questions about the constitutionality of these provisions of the Intelligence Law during the case. The Constitutional Court has now confirmed that part of the regulation did not comply with the Constitution. When intelligence information collection and use in criminal proceedings were based on such rules, the court must assess whether this also affected the conviction itself,” says R. Kurlianskis’s representative, NOOR partner and lawyer Giedrius Danėlius.
Read more The «Storm» festival has started in Kaunas: three more days of music, art, and dance await
Request to verify whether intelligence data was used legally in the case
One of the episodes highlighted in the application is the conversations recorded in 2015 at the “Amberton” hotel restaurant between R. Kurlianskis and then head of the State Tax Inspectorate Dainoras Bradauskas. The application states that information collected under the Intelligence Law was transferred to the Special Investigation Service and became one of the factual grounds to initiate a criminal intelligence investigation.
A question is also raised regarding a 2018 memo prepared by the State Security Department, which summarized intelligence information collected over a longer period and was relied upon in the criminal case proceedings.
The lawyer emphasizes that the Constitutional Court’s ruling does not automatically mean either the annulment of the guilty verdict or the automatic recognition of the data used in the case as inadmissible. LAT is asked to reopen the process so that specific data and their significance to the conviction can be assessed according to constitutional standards relevant after the Constitutional Court’s ruling.
“The Constitutional Court did not decide on Raimondas Kurlianskis’s guilt nor evaluate specific evidence in the criminal case. That is why the assessment by the court hearing the criminal case is necessary. The question is very specific: could data whose legal regulation of obtaining, storage, and transmission was later recognized as not meeting constitutional requirements have been used for a person’s conviction,” says lawyer Giedrius Danėlius.
Read more The Minister of the Interior hopes that the new head of VSAT will be announced in September
