In a setback for President Gitanas Nausėda, Lithuania’s parliament on Tuesday rejected his nominee for the Constitutional Court, Vilnius University Law School Dean Haroldas Šinkūnas, while approving the controversial candidacy of lawmaker Julius Sabatauskas.
Three candidates had been under consideration for the Constitutional Court: Šinkūnas, nominated by the president; the Supreme Court chair’s nominee Artūras Driukas; and Sabatauskas, proposed by the parliament speaker.
Sabatauskas’ nomination drew the most debate, with opposition lawmakers – and even some members of the ruling coalition – questioning his qualifications. Jaroslav Narkevič, of the Farmers and Greens Union-Christian Families group, said his support was shaken by Sabatauskas’ previous comments suggesting a justice ministry official could not serve because she was religious and from a large family.
Opposition members argued that Sabatauskas does not meet the Constitutional Court’s requirement of 10 years of professional legal experience.
“This is becoming a new and worrying trend – politicians moving straight from a warm parliamentary seat to the Constitutional Court. It’s an obvious attempt to politicise the court,” said Agnė Širinskienė of the Democrats “For Lithuania” party.
Sabatauskas, a long-time Social Democrat and former chair of the parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee, denied he would favour any political party. “If anyone thinks someone can tell me what to do, they are very wrong,” he said.
He plans to remain in the Seimas until March and resign his mandate only after being sworn in as a Constitutional Court justice.
President Nausėda criticised the appointment, saying, “I have always been against the politicisation of the Constitutional Court. It’s unfortunate that the previous government started rolling this ball, and the current one continues to follow it. This should not be the case.”
Just hours after Nausėda’s remarks, lawmakers rejected his nominee, Šinkūnas. Some suggested the move was political payback against the president. “This looks like revenge by the ruling bloc against the president for the difficult coalition talks,” said Jurgis Razma of the conservative Homeland Union–Lithuanian Christian Democrats.
Social Democratic faction leader Orinta Leiputė dismissed that claim, saying, “members of parliament have a free mandate – they vote as they see fit. Perhaps the opposition simply wanted to sow division.”
The presidential office said in a statement that Šinkūnas had received no criticism regarding his qualifications or experience during the vetting process. It described the parliamentary vote as “retaliation for the president’s veto over the so-called receipt scandal”.
Newsletter
Every Friday morning.
