Members of the Domeikava community based their complaint primarily on the fact that the Kaunas halfway house is a newly established independent institution, for the establishment of which the LKT had no legal basis.
Read more On the Neris River, you can notice an unusual sight: research is being conducted
The extended panel of judges of the LVAT in the ruling adopted on September 2, 2026, stated that an independent budgetary institution of the penal enforcement system is a service, not a separate place of its activity. The service implements the functions assigned to it through its administrative units, therefore halfway houses are considered not newly established independent institutions, but one of the open-type penal enforcement activity locations of the prison – a service administration unit.
Thus, the expansion of the halfway house network is a means of organizing the service’s activities when the functions assigned to it begin to be carried out in new respective prison activity locations.
The opening of the Kaunas halfway house was part of a consistently implemented reform of the state penal enforcement system, planned in the documents of the Ministry of Justice and the service.
When deciding whether the local community was properly informed about the planned halfway house activities, the extended panel of judges noted that the legislation did not establish a special procedure for coordinating this activity location with the community. However, this does not mean that the service was not obliged to comply with the general requirements of publicity, transparency, and good administration.
According to these requirements, interested persons must be provided with sufficient information and a real opportunity to express their position.
Read more Your gait is like an open book: psychologists reveal what it says about personality
The case established that the local community was informed about the planned halfway house activities at the specific address before the start of these activities by holding meetings with residents. The concerns expressed by the community had a real impact on determining the conditions of the halfway house activities: the plan to establish a Lithuanian Probation Service unit in the same building was abandoned, the number of inmates housed was limited, their selection was tightened, and additional security measures were foreseen.
Therefore, the court concluded that despite the shortcomings in information at the initial stage, the local community was given a real opportunity to express its position. The indicated security risks were assessed, appropriate control measures were taken, and further consultation with the community was planned.
The case emphasized that the public interest in ensuring effective resocialization of inmates, their gradual and controlled return to society, restoration of social ties, and reduction of recidivism of criminal acts is directly related to the safety of the entire society. This interest must be balanced with the local community’s interest in living in a safe environment, receiving sufficient information, and ensuring that objectively justified risks are properly assessed and managed.
However, such balancing of interests does not in itself mean that the local community’s opposition must be given unconditional priority or that the halfway house activities cannot be carried out in a residential area at all.
Read more Thomas Walkup leaves Olympiakos and moves to another EuroLeague club
