DistantNews
Support us
After vetting scandal, former VSD head comments: The service is not a morality police
๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡น Lithuania /Crime & Justice

After vetting scandal, former VSD head comments: The service is not a morality police

From Delfi · () Lithuanian

Translated from Lithuanian, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Sources not specified Context piece
  • Lithuania's State Security Department (VSD) clarified its role in vetting candidates for sensitive positions.
  • The VSD stated it is not a "morality police" and focuses only on national security aspects.
  • Former VSD head G. Grina commented that vetting responsibilities are shared, with politicians ultimately accountable for decisions.

Lithuania's State Security Department (VSD) has clarified its procedures for vetting individuals considered for positions in companies vital to national security. The department explained that the Law on the Protection of Objects Important for National Security defines the circumstances under which a person cannot be appointed to such roles.

The VSD is not a morality police. Let politicians deal with morals.

โ€” G. GrinaFormer VSD head G. Grina's statement on the department's role.

According to the VSD, candidates are checked against criteria outlined in the law. However, the department emphasized that it only verifies a specific portion of these circumstances related to national security. Other criteria are the responsibility of the candidates themselves or the institutions organizing the selection process.

Former VSD head G. Grina commented that the VSD should not be seen as responsible for evaluating a candidate's overall reputation. "The VSD is not a morality police. Let politicians deal with morals," Grina told Elta. He stressed that the VSD's primary task is to uncover non-public information, not to repeat publicly available data. Grina added that business or work ties with Russia alone do not automatically indicate actions against the state's interests; concrete facts are required for a negative VSD assessment.

The VSD cannot say 'no' unless it has some facts that the person is working for a hostile state.

โ€” G. GrinaGrina explaining the need for concrete evidence in VSD assessments.

Grina also linked this division of responsibility to past instances, such as when President Gitanas Nausฤ—da criticized institutions for insufficient information regarding potential risks before Gintautas Paluckas's appointment as prime minister. Grina suggested that politicians sometimes shift responsibility to the VSD when they are reluctant to take ownership of their decisions. While the VSD can assess national security threats, the ultimate decision on a publicly known individual's suitability for a specific role rests with politicians.

Politicians... when they don't want to take responsibility for their decisions, they immediately write letters to the VSD.

โ€” G. GrinaGrina commenting on politicians potentially shifting responsibility.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by Delfi in Lithuanian. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.