Titulinis

On May 15–16, the Faculty of Business Management at VILNIUS TECH hosted the international scientific conference “Business and Management 2025” for the 15th time. The event brought together over 200 participants from 31 countries. Among the presenters this year was Dr. Raimonda Bublienė, a research fellow at the Law Institute of the Lithuanian Centre for Social Sciences. She is currently implementing a postdoctoral research project funded by the Research Council of Lithuania titled „Multiple Discrimination and Labour Income: A Comparative Analysis of Legal Regulations in European Countries” (MEDALIC).

In one of the eight conference sections, “Legal Business Environment”, Dr. Bublienė presented her topic: “Impact of Multiple Discrimination to the Application of the Principle of Equal Pay”. During her presentation, she discussed how the interplay of different forms of discrimination—such as those based on gender, age, ethnic origin, and other grounds—can lead to more complex and often overlooked or difficult-to-prove forms of discrimination.

According to the researcher, the implementation of EU Directive 2023/970 plays a significant role in strengthening the application of the equal pay principle. “To effectively reduce the gender pay gap,” she emphasized, “a comprehensive approach must be taken – one that considers not only gender-based discrimination but also its intersection with other contributing factors.” The presentation concluded with a discussion on the importance of pay transparency systems, which help to better identify and more effectively address complex forms of discrimination in the workplace.

The project is funded by the Research Council of Lithuania (LMTLT), Agreement No. S-PD-24-155.

Photo credit: Vilnius Tech

A publication by the Law Institute of the Lithuanian Centre for Social Sciences (LI LCSS) has appeared in the 2025 edition of the International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, published by Oxford University Press. Dr. Agnė Limantė, a researcher at the LCSS Law Institute, together with Dr. Anna Wysocka-Bar from the Centre for Private International Law at the Faculty of Law of Jagiellonian University, co-authored the article titled “Cross-Border Child Abduction from the UK: Comparative Analysis of Polish and Lithuanian Court Cases”.

In this publication, Dr. Limantė and Dr. Wysocka-Bar examine court cases from Lithuania and Poland that deal with instances of parental child abduction—specifically, situations where one parent, a citizen of either Lithuania or Poland who had been residing in the United Kingdom, returns to their home country with the child(ren) without the other parent’s consent, thereby potentially abducting the child(ren).

The article presents a thorough comparative analysis of judicial practices over a five-year period (2019–2023), focusing on cases directly related to the application and interpretation of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

The study identifies the legal procedures courts must follow in determining whether a parental abduction has occurred and in deciding whether the child(ren) should be returned to the United Kingdom, in accordance with the 1980 Hague Convention, the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, and other relevant legal instruments. The authors also present statistical data on such legal violations and conclude with an analysis of key differences between Lithuanian and Polish judicial approaches to cases involving potential parental child abduction.

Publication by A. Limantė and A. Wysocka-Bar.

On April 28, the TeismAI project team from the Law Institute of the Lithuanian Centre for Social Sciences, in cooperation with the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), organized an international online seminar titled "Artificial Intelligence in Courts: Challenges and Opportunities", dedicated to judges and other court staff from both the CJEU and the Lithuanian court system. The seminar, which gathered over 140 participants, focused on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in judicial processes, trends in the adoption of AI tools, as well as the opportunities and challenges associated with their use.

During the seminar, Dr. Agnė Limantė, a senior researcher from the TeismAI project, delivered a presentation titled "AI in Courts Around the Globe: Current Uses and Future Perspectives", providing an overview of AI applications and usage trends across different countries worldwide. Guest speaker Dr. Miglė Laukytė (Pompeu Fabra University, Spain) presented on "AI and Judicial Independence", discussing the legal challenges emerging from the application of AI tools in courts. The head of the TeismAI project, Dr. Monika Žalnieriūtė, concluded the session with her presentation "AI and Judicial Accountability", building upon the insights shared by her colleagues while emphasizing solutions to address the challenges posed by the integration of AI in judicial settings. The seminar concluded with an active discussion between judges, court staff, and the presenters.

Project „Artificial Intelligence in Courts: Challenges and Opportunities“ (TeismAI) is funded by the Research Council of Lithuania (LMTLT), Grant Agreement No. S-MIP-23-73.

Every year, members of the Prison Working Group of the European Society of Criminology gather to discuss the latest research findings and develop ideas for joint projects. This year’s meeting took place in the springtime city of Timișoara, Romania, and brought together more than 30 prison researchers from various countries. Among the participants were representatives from the Law Institute of the Lithuanian Centre for Social Sciences – Senior Research Fellow Dr. Rūta Vaičiūnienė and Goda Dainauskaitė.

This year’s meeting stood out from previous ones – for the first time in the history of the working group, the event was hosted in a correctional facility. During the meeting, held on April 10–11, 2025, researchers, PhD students, and representatives of NGOs from Romania, Norway, Denmark, Greenland, Belgium, Germany, Spain, the United Kingdom, Ireland, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, Israel, Switzerland, and Austria presented their most recent research findings.

The conference featured wide-ranging discussions on topics such as human rights challenges within prison systems, strategies for correctional officers, the role of social workers and chaplains in prisons and their integration into prison staff, the experiences of marginalized social groups in places of detention, and issues related to parenting while incarcerated. Topics particularly relevant to Lithuania were also addressed, including the significance of prison architecture and environment, and the prospects for developing small-scale prison facilities and halfway houses.

Several prison-based programs were also presented during the conference. A Danish researcher introduced a dog training program implemented in prisons and discussed its impact on inmates. Meanwhile, PhD students from Leiden University in the Netherlands led a session on food in prison, providing an overview of prison meal systems – from traditional cafeterias to community-based cooking models.

The second day of the meeting was dedicated to a visit to Timișoara Prison. Correctional officers guided the guests through various parts of the facility, including prisoner living quarters, recreation rooms, the chapel, family meeting areas, and the kitchen. Participants also had the opportunity to sample the meals served to prisoners.

The unique prison setting – with limited access to communication devices and a complete detachment from the outside world – fostered deeper engagement in academic discussions and exploration of new opportunities for collaboration. The environment proved to be a productive space not only for sharing research ideas but also for initiating new international partnerships and discussing possibilities for internships and joint project development.

Dr. Agnė Limantė and PhD candidate Monika Šukytė, researchers at the Law Institute of the Lithuanian Centre for Social Sciences, have published a new academic article titled "Comparative Insights and Future Directions of AI in the Courts of the Baltic States". In this work, the authors provide an in-depth practical analysis of the processes involving the application of artificial intelligence (AI) within the judicial systems of the Baltic States, while also outlining possible future directions for AI development in this field.

To achieve the aims of the study, the authors analyzed publicly available data, legislation, and academic literature, and conducted interviews with ten experts from all three Baltic countries. The interviewees included judges, representatives of court administrations, and academics. The interviews followed a set of guidelines covering topics such as AI use cases, human rights protection, transparency and accountability, public perception, professional training, and emerging trends.

The research revealed that, currently, AI in the courts of the Baltic States is primarily used for auxiliary, technical tasks. However, looking forward, there is an expectation that AI applications will expand into more complex areas involving judicial decision-making. The study also emphasizes the importance of mandatory initial and continuous training for court personnel on AI capabilities, risks, and implementation prospects. In addition to these insights, the article discusses further opportunities for AI integration and offers recommendations on its development—focusing on digitalization, efficiency, transparency, and alignment with fundamental legal and ethical principles.

You can find this scholarly article here.

On April 4, the fifth joint criminal justice conference, organized by Vytautas Magnus University (VDU), Mykolas Romeris University (MRU), and the Law Institute of the Lithuanian Centre for Social Sciences (LCSS), was held, this time joined for the first time by Vilnius University (VU). This year, the conference took place in Kaunas at Vytautas Magnus University. Two researchers from the Institute delivered presentations: Dr. Rokas Uscila presented “The Penal Enforcement System in Lithuania: Quo Vadis”, and Dr. Skirmantas Bikelis spoke on “Standards of Proof in Asset Confiscation Proceedings in Lithuania and Europe”.

In his presentation, Dr. Rokas Uscila emphasized the importance of consistently pursuing strategic objectives established in the strategic documents of both the Lithuanian Prison Service and the Lithuanian Probation Service. The most significant challenges faced by the Prison Service include the phasing out of outdated and inadequate infrastructure and addressing fundamental personnel issues: the transition of staff to dynamic security and resocialization roles, balancing core job responsibilities and prison work, shaping a new generation of officers, and shifting the relationship between correctional officers and service providers (such as social workers, psychologists, therapists, and program facilitators).

Dr. Skirmantas Bikelis highlighted the absence of a unified standard of proof in civil proceedings, both at the national and international levels. Paradoxically, the standard of proof regarding the origin of assets (though not culpability) in criminal proceedings may be lower than in civil proceedings, where it can be higher. A cause for concern is the observable trend of exceptionally low standards of proof being tolerated in establishing guilt in criminal proceedings - such as in Latvia for asset legalization cases and in Lithuania for unlawful enrichment cases. Dr. Bikelis also adressed the importance of distinguishing between the standard of proof and the nature of evidence. Indirect (circumstantial) evidence should not be equated with a lower standard of proof. Full conviction regarding the criminal origin of assets can indeed be reached through indirect evidence.

On March 21 of this year, the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Lithuania hosted the conference “Confiscation Perspectives in Lithuania and Europe”. Before an audience that nearly filled the venue’s largest auditorium, the event opened with welcoming remarks by the Minister of Justice, Rimantas Mockus, and the Prosecutor General, Nida Grunskienė. This was followed by a presentation of the results of the scientific project “Money Laundering in the System of the Criminal Gains Control Strategies“ (LEKOSTRA), which is nearing completion at the Law Institute of the Lithuanian Centre for Social Sciences. The conference also featured discussions on the latest strategies for confiscating criminal assets, with particular attention to their effectiveness and the risks they entail.

The presentations were delivered by the project team: project leader Dr Skirmantas Bikelis, along with Goda Dainauskaitė, Dr Darius Pranka, and Dr Laurynas Pakštaitis.

Pranešimų skaidrės:

• Skirmantas Bikelis, Konfiskavimo koncepcijos ir įrankiai, jų efektyvumas ir darna su teisės principais;
• Goda Dainauskaitė, Skirmantas Bikelis, Viršnacionalinės tendencijos turto konfiskavimo reguliavime;
• Darius Pranka, Išplėstinio turto konfiskavimo reguliavimo ydos ir jo taikymo perspektyvos Lietuvoje;
• Laurynas Pakštaitis, Ar turime ko pasimokyti iš britų?;
• Skirmantas Bikelis, Efektyvus konfiskavimas po įtarimo dėl turto legalizavimo: lietuviškos, vokiškos ir latviškos inovacijos.

Key messages expressed by the conference speakers:

• A declining emphasis on formal requirements is observed in the European confiscation regulatory framework.
• The fundamental safeguard ensuring the legitimacy of a confiscation decision lies not in formal prerequisites, but in the court’s conviction that the property was obtained through criminal means.
• Essential conditions for effective confiscation include:
  • systemic coherence between legal definitions and confiscation tools;
  • clarity in regulation and practice;
  • high-quality investigation into the criminal origin (context) of the property;
  • the judiciary’s capacity to make firm decisions based on practical conviction, through logically rigorous and strict evaluation of contextual and factual circumstances.
• The EU rejects civil confiscation proceedings and affirms the preference for criminal confiscation.
• The scope and substance of money laundering offences have already been maximally expanded, effectively enabling their use as a tool in confiscation processes.
• At the EU level, formal requirements (restrictive conditions) for confiscating criminal assets are being almost entirely removed.
• The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has taken a partially shifting and at times ambiguous stance.
• The current threshold of €12,500 for extended confiscation is unjustifiably high and lacks a sound legal rationale.
• Basing the application or non-application of extended confiscation on the principle of proportionality is problematic and incorrect.
• In the United Kingdom, a civil law-based alternative to criminal confiscation has proven effective, enabling the lawful seizure of assets derived from illicit activities.
• Nonetheless, even the most refined civil confiscation tools in the UK are used infrequently, face considerable challenges, and their application is evolving slowly.
• The German breakthrough in the area of criminal asset confiscation deserves attention not only for its strong practical outcomes but also as a model implementation of Directive 2024/1260.
• Noteworthy European developments include: the Lithuanian model (confiscation through the mechanism of ownerless property), the German model (standalone extended confiscation), the Latvian model (preliminary civil confiscation). Continued research and discussion are necessary to assess whether these represent a long-awaited solution or are simply “too good to be true”.

Following the presentations, an expert discussion took place featuring contributions from Vilnius University (VU) doctoral candidate and attorney Laura Martinaitytė, VU Professor and Justice of the Constitutional Court Aurelijus Gutauskas, Mykolas Romeris University Professor and Justice of the Supreme Court of Lithuania Olegas Fedosiuk, Associate Professor at Vytautas Magnus University and Prosecutor at the Kaunas Regional Prosecutor’s Office Marijus Šalčius, as well as other conference participants.

The discussion focused on which procedural model - criminal or civil - holds greater potential for future application. Participants also debated the appropriate definition of confiscable property: whether it should be limited to assets of criminal origin or more broadly defined as property of unexplained origin. Further deliberation addressed the role of judicial conviction regarding the origin of the property, as well as the relevance of formal conditions and the presumptions based upon them in the confiscation of criminal assets. The participants emphasized the importance of clarity regarding both the objective and the subject matter of confiscation for all parties involved in the process.

The outcomes of the project have been made publicly available:

• Bikelis, S., Pranka, D., Dainauskaitė, G. (2025). Penal vs. Confiscation-Only Approaches in Money Laundering Control. Baltic Journal of Law & Politics, 17(2), 188–206. https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2024-00021.
• Bikelis, S. (2025). Confiscation Beyond the All-Crime Approach and the Proportionality Principle – A Case of the Lithuanian Illicit Enrichment Offence Concept. Laws, 14(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws14010001.
• S. Bikelis. The Fight Against Unjust Enrichment - Where are the Limits of the Principle of Proportionality? (article written in Lithuanian). 2 January 2025, „Teisė.Pro“ and „Infolex.lt“.

The project is funded by the Research Council of Lithuania (LMTLT), Agreement No. S-MIP-23-40.

Photo credit: Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Lithuania.

On March 19, the Penal System Oversight Council began its work at the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Lithuania. Among its members are criminologists Dr. Rūta Vaičiūnienė and Dr. Simonas Nikartas, delegated by the Law Institute of the Lithuanian Centre for Social Sciences.

Aiming for a more open and modern penal system focused on support and resocialization, the Ministry of Justice has assembled ministry and penal system representatives, criminologists and other researchers, human rights experts, as well as non-governmental organizations and representatives of prisoners.

During the first meeting, participants discussed the importance of staff competence and psychological well-being in the penal system; the transparency, clarity, and effectiveness of prison regulations, probation, and parole systems; the expansion of work opportunities for prisoners; and other topics aimed at building a more progressive penal system.

More information: https://tm.lrv.lt/lt/naujienos/teisingumo-ministras-inicijavo-bausmiu-vykdymo-sistemos-prieziuros-taryba/

Photo by the the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Lithuania.