Puchovičius denies actively engaging in businesses: 'I participate only as much as I am allowed'

A controversy is brewing in Lithuania surrounding Member of Parliament R. Puchovičius, who is accused of actively engaging in his business ventures while serving in the Seimas (parliament). Communications specialist K. Žukauskas has presented evidence suggesting that Puchovičius visited his companies' construction sites numerous times in March and April, raising questions about his adherence to constitutional and parliamentary obligations.

Puchovičius, however, maintains his innocence, asserting that his involvement is limited to being a shareholder and that his site visits are purely for observation and within legal bounds. He claims he does not make any business decisions and participates only in his capacity as a Member of Parliament. This defense, however, is being challenged by claims that his actions constitute active business management, which is explicitly forbidden by the Lithuanian Constitution for Seimas members.

“

Tikrai aš nedalyvauju įmonės veikloje, dalyvauju tiek, kiek man leidžia – būti akcininku, nuvažiuoti, pažiūrėti valdas, kas vyksta. Jokių sprendimų aš nepriimu, dalyvauju tik kaip Seimo narys. Tai šitoje vietoje tikrai nėra netgi ką man vertinti

Žukauskas argues that Puchovičius's frequent visits to construction sites, often coinciding with parliamentary sessions, indicate active participation in business. The Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania stipulates that Seimas members can be passive shareholders but cannot actively manage businesses. Such active involvement, especially during parliamentary sitting times, would be a direct violation of the constitution and the oath taken by a Member of Parliament.

Records indicate that Puchovičius's attendance at parliamentary sessions, including those of the Budget and Finance Committee, has been inconsistent since the beginning of the spring session. While he initially managed to attend most sessions, he has since been observed missing meetings or joining remotely, sometimes without camera or voice, while allegedly visiting construction sites. This discrepancy between his parliamentary duties and his alleged business activities is at the heart of the current scrutiny.

“

Pagal Lietuvos Respublikos Konstituciją, Seimo nariai gali būti pasyviais akcininkais, bet negali aktyviai valdyti verslo. Toks aktyvus verslo dalyvavimas, važinėjimas į statybų objektus, praleidžiant tą laiką, kai yra Seimo posėdžiai, mano galva, yra aktyvus dalyvavimas versle ir tai jau prieštarautų Konstitucijai