It takes quite an imagination to see a “spy point” in an empty, unfinished building. But the elections were approaching, so after a few weeks the promise became even more concrete:
Read more Brussels welcomes Apple’s steps to comply with digital space rules
“By the end of 2023, there will be no ghost invented by Russian propagandists but failed on Juozapavičius Street.”
V. Benkunskas announced during the election campaign: “Vilnius is cleaning up.”
The end of 2023 has long passed. The summer of 2026 is already ending.
“The ‘Moscow House’ still stands. It has not been cleaned up yet…”
However, the political circus around it continues.
So, recalling Benkunskas’s own words, a simple question arises: where did the political will go, which, according to him, was all that was needed?
The first circus act – Vilnius is not involved here
There is a constant impression in the public space that the “Moscow House” is some foreign Russian object in the center of Vilnius, and the municipality is almost an outsider observer, waiting for the problem to be solved by the Construction Inspectorate, the Government, or someone else.
Documents show a much more complicated picture.
The non-profit organization “Moscow Culture and Business Center – Moscow House” has two shareholders: Vilnius City Municipality and the Moscow City State Unitary Enterprise “Moscow International Cooperation Center.”
Yes, you read that correctly: legally, Vilnius Municipality is still a shareholder of the same public institution together with the aggressor’s capital city government structure.
According to the statutes, each shareholder has one vote, regardless of the size of their contribution. So Vilnius has one of the two votes – exactly the same as the Moscow government. Thus, the city had the instruments, for example, to take over the property and initiate its demolition or remove the consequences of unauthorized construction.
Moreover, Vilnius City Municipality manages the state land on which the building stands by trust.
So Vilnius is not just an observer from the side.
It is a shareholder of the public institution. It has one of two votes. It fully controls the land.
Therefore, the mayor’s efforts to constantly shift responsibility to other institutions are running away from responsibility and his public promises.
The problem has been known since 2016
On December 21, 2016, the court annulled the construction permit.
An important detail: the court did not determine that the building had to be demolished immediately. First, the opportunity was given to revise the project documentation, obtain a new construction permit, and fix the structure. Only if this opportunity was not used should demolition proceed.
The then deputy mayor V. Benkunskas did nothing. The opportunity was lost.
In 2022, the court allowed the State Territorial Planning and Construction Inspectorate to demolish the structure and recover the costs from the non-profit organization “Moscow Culture and Business Center – Moscow House.” For non-compliance with the decision, the public institution was fined 300 euros for each day from April 16, 2022, until full compliance. In other words, from the same Vilnius municipality, because public administration entities must act responsibly and set an example. Also, court processes show that the director of the public institution was “artificially” kept in office without confirming his dismissal, thus seeing the problem, exploiting it, but doing nothing real, on the contrary, publicly declaring responsibility for resolving the situation but actually deepening it further.
“Moscow House” could have become a Ukrainian school
Already in 2023, we proposed another path.
Together with the heads of the International Ukrainian School, we inspected the building. The school representatives then assessed it as suitable for the planned activity, and a specific proposal was prepared for the Vilnius Council: to liquidate the public institution “Moscow House,” take over the unfinished structure, and transfer it to the International Ukrainian School and the Ukrainian Cultural Center.
It would be hard to come up with a stronger symbolic decision.
The building, financed by the aggressor’s money and intended to become the “Moscow House,” becomes a Ukrainian school.
Today, nearly 3,000 children who fled the war study at the Ukrainian school, all taught Lithuanian without the mayor’s urging. The paradox is that the school, lacking space, rented premises at A. Juozapavičius St. 11 at its own expense, practically in the neighborhood of the “Moscow House.”
While the mayor was demolishing on “Facebook,” bankruptcy came
Meanwhile, in the real world, processes were moving forward.
In October 2024, a bankruptcy case was filed against the public institution, and the ruling became final on December 9. In March 2025, the court confirmed creditors’ claims of 290,537.36 euros, of which 290,400 euros were the State Tax Inspectorate’s claim.
So, while the “Moscow House” was being demolished on “Facebook,” debts accumulated in reality, court cases took place, and finally bankruptcy came.
On May 6, creditors decided to write off the building and transfer it to Vilnius City Municipality. It seemed that the city had the clearest path to finally take control of the object without political risk and fulfill the mayor’s loud promises.
It seemed – what more could be needed?
Here is the building. Here is the city-owned land. Take it and solve it.
Demolish it if you are convinced that it is best.
Although it would be much more logical to legally remove the consequences of unauthorized construction, that is, to demolish the illegally built one floor and use the building for the school. Or simply sell the building at a public auction, cover losses with the proceeds, and use the remaining funds for the needs of Vilnius residents.
Read more 100 Eur fine for using navigation: where and why drivers face such sanctions?
It seemed that there was an opportunity to gracefully end the circus performance.
But the story took another strange turn – the mayor ordered Vilnius City Municipality lawyers to challenge the bankruptcy administrator’s decision to transfer the building to Vilnius Municipality!
And here we return to Benkunskas’s 2022 promise.
If “only political will is needed,” then why has it disappeared after almost four years?
The next circus act – let business pay
Since the city itself does not want to bear the financial burden of demolition, a more original idea appeared – to find a business that would demolish the “Moscow House” at its own expense.
Sounds great. It costs taxpayers nothing, the mayor gets excavators for TV cameras.
But business is not Santa Claus.
If a private company provides a high-value service to the public sector for free, a simple question arises – why and what can it expect to get in return?
Especially if the same companies work on other municipal or state projects.
When the Construction Inspectorate publicly invited businesses to contribute to demolition free of charge or for a symbolic fee, no volunteers appeared.
Then another circus act was born.
Failed with business – let’s change the law
If under current rules business does not want or cannot “donate” demolition work, let’s change the Charity and Sponsorship Law so that support can also be provided in work.
And here begins not political humor, but serious transparency issues.
The need to change the law was publicly expressed by Valdas Benkunskas himself at the beginning of March and he turned to the Social Democrats for help. A new political genre appeared: “conservatives will not demolish Moscow House without Social Democrats…”
However, the Special Investigation Service assessed the joint efforts of conservatives and Social Democrats as flawed from an anti-corruption perspective. The service pointed out the risk of conflicts of interest, unclear regulatory implementation, and lack of safeguards.
The Ministry of Social Security and Labour spoke even more clearly.
The Ministry does not support the amendments. According to the Ministry, they could distort the purpose of support, create conditions for abuse, reduce competition and transparency, and the support provider could later directly or indirectly gain economic benefits.
And here is perhaps the most important argument of the Ministry.
The Ministry notes that such a mechanism would be used not for usual support purposes, but “to finance and/or perform public functions.”
Here lies the whole essence of this story.
Because solving city problems is a public function.
When a politician promises for four years to demolish a building, in the end, responsibility cannot be turned into a game: let the Construction Inspectorate demolish it, let business pay, let the Parliament change the law, let ministries come up with a peace agreement.
The building still stands. Tomorrow the court will continue, where Vilnius City Municipality will shirk responsibility to show the political will promised by the mayor.
Therefore, this is long no longer just the story of the “Moscow House.”
It is a story about political responsibility. About how easy it is to declare before elections that “only political will is needed,” and how hard it is to turn that will into a concrete decision when you become the mayor yourself and care more about work on “Facebook.”
With unfulfilled promises added to the garbage crisis and other problems of Vilnius, the audience in this circus only grows.
Only one question remains:
are tickets to Benkunskas’s circus already too expensive for Vilnius residents?
