Lithuanian Opposition to Probe Real Estate Data Theft Amidst Transparency Debate

Lithuanian opposition parties are preparing to launch a temporary parliamentary inquiry into the circumstances surrounding a suspected data breach at the Real Estate Cadastre (RC). The proposed investigation aims to clarify the details of the alleged theft, which reportedly involved over 600,000 property registry extracts leaking since January, causing an estimated loss of at least 111,000 euros.

“

We cannot duplicate efforts. An investigation is underway at the prosecutor's office, at the ministry, in various departments, so we need to wait for its end.

J. Olekas, speaking to journalists, stated that it is premature to start parliamentary work until the ongoing investigations by the prosecutor's office and relevant ministries conclude. "We cannot duplicate efforts. An investigation is underway at the prosecutor's office, at the ministry, in various departments, so we need to wait for its end," he said, adding that parliamentary action could follow if doubts persist.

The incident has ignited a debate about transparency and the timing of public notification. Prime Minister Inga Ruginienė faced criticism for the delayed public announcement, explaining that the General Prosecutor's Office controlled the investigation and warned that disclosing certain information could lead to criminal liability. However, President Gitanas Nausėda countered this, asserting that the public should have been informed as he believed no such prohibition existed from the prosecutor's office.

“

If there are any doubts, (...) then parliamentary work can begin, but for now, I think we need to give the institutions (time) for them to do their job, check the information, and then we will see.

The Prosecutor General's Office informed Delfi that releasing information in the early stages of the investigation could have hindered procedural actions or the collection of crucial data. Meanwhile, the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party initially posted criticism of the Prosecutor General's Office on Facebook, arguing it should have informed the public, but later deleted the post. The party's stance shifted after the Prosecutor General's Office clarified that the RC itself was responsible for reporting the incident.

“

The public should have been informed, because, according to him, there was no prohibition from the General Prosecutor's Office to publish this information.