Interview with Emilija Švobaitė: Lithuanian Human Rights Lawyer & Innovative Lawyers Awards Winner
Emilija Švobaitė of Sienos Grupė and ReLex Law Firm, winner of one of REDRESS’s Innovative Lawyers Awards, has challenged torture in the Lithuania’s border area and other places hidden from the public view. She sat down with REDRESS to talk about the challenges Lithuanian human rights activists and lawyers face, and the opportunities she sees to advance the anti-torture movement.
Why did you become a human rights lawyer?
I studied history of art and then French literature, but I was active in the Labour movement, so I was always surrounded by activists. I felt that activists in Lithuania lacked skill and competence in law, so I decided to study law.
In 2021 when the crisis on the Belarus border started, I went into the forest with a grassroot activist organisation and observed people suffering on the border, people being left alone in terrible conditions, almost dying because of the freezing temperatures, because of the lack of food and water. It seemed illegal to me. I could not justify the torture that was ongoing at the border. At the same time I believe every lawyer is a human rights lawyer. The rule of law is the thing that protects humanity, so the way we choose to work matters in any field you’re in.
What does it mean to be a human rights lawyer in Lithuania? What kinds of pressures have you faced, and how have you addressed them?
The biggest challenge in Lithuania is our geopolitical context. We have a war happening very near to us in Ukraine, and our history is one of occupation over many years. Because of that, in the minds of many, Russia is a threat that justifies a lot of human rights violations. Human rights activists and lawyers are often presented as being in opposition to national security.
I think the other challenge is that there are few international NGOs established in Lithuania. Our civic space is still weak. We have some brave grassroots organisations that are able to organise publicity when it comes to torture cases, but we lack representatives from international NGOs in Lithuania. For the NGOs that have mutual agreements with the government, raising issues legally is completely out of the question.
Pressures in Lithuania
The two main pressures we face are first this narrative that human rights are an obstacle to national security, and the second is the lack of competence and also resources. Another challenge, which I always feel stressed thinking about, is there is a large group of people that we cannot help because they don’t speak the [English] language.
For instance, the last criminal case relating to the Foreigners’ Registration Centre was related to sexual violence performed by a psychologist from the State Border Guard Service. One person contacted Doctors Without Borders because he could speak the language, but there were 4,000 people detained, many of whom interacted with the same psychologist. They’ve left the country now so it’s impossible to contact them and seek justice.
Who are the principal perpetrators of torture in your country and what are the main contexts in which torture occurs?
Torture can happen in Lithuania in these places that are closed to the public eye, that are grey zones, so detention centres, prisons, psychiatric hospitals, and since 2021 the border area, which I believe is the most dangerous one right now. The people who come to Lithuania in high numbers are those from Ukraine and Belarus.
Lithuania has a major role in seeking universal jurisdiction, because the mass of people here is huge. We become responsible because they cannot contact their countries’ institutions, especially those coming from Belarus.
In terms of perpetrators, we lack the competence of the institutions that control forces like the police or State Border Guard. It should be the role of the Ombudsperson, but they lack financial and human resources in Lithuania.
What initiatives you have worked on that have contributed to advancing the global movement against torture?
The thing I’m proud about is the recent claim we had. We represent 25 applicants who were detained arbitrarily, and this detention was confirmed by our constitutional court as illegal, as arbitrary. At the same time we had the politicians who initiated this detention saying that they would breach the law again, and it was completely necessary because of national security.
For a very long time nobody addressed this detention, and I’m happy we made this successful cooperation with Amnesty International and managed to submit a group claim. Apart from this we had four families that were detained with their children and the children experienced violence in the camps. All these cases are still open but I do believe they’re going to be successful, if not here in Lithuania then in the European Court of Human Rights.
Border Violence
Two important cases when it comes to border violence addressed the direct violence and torture for people who lost their limbs, so they were left alone in the forest being frozen, beaten to the level that both of their legs had to be amputated at the end. One of the people was a Sri Lankan citizen and he did not speak English. We managed to finance the case and go through all the criminal procedure in Lithuania, to the exhaustion of local remedies, and the case is now pending at the European Court of Human rights.
I do believe that if not for us this person would be hidden and let go to France so the government could forget what happened. When it comes to the green border people still have this need of proof that it’s dangerous, and also that the border guard uses violence because people can’t believe it’s happening.
Fined for Doing Human Rights Work
We saved the life of a Syrian national in the border area by calling an ambulance, and he was in terrible condition, he could not walk. We then got fined for being in the area, and it had a chilling effect on our organisation because, though the fine was not huge, the way the government communicated it made us out to be contributors to the Belarusian regime.
It was shocking for us and it made a huge damage, and that’s why we decided to appeal these fines. The fines were cancelled in the end, which was already a victory, but we still have a notification for breaching the rules of visiting the border area. In order to make it clear to the public that it was legal and done out of necessity to save someone’s life, we also appealed this decision through the European Court of Human Rights.
What do you see as being the next steps in challenging torture in Lithuania?
The most challenging thing in Lithuania is the situation with Belarus. In 2020 when the mass protests in the streets of Minsk and the whole of Belarus appeared, Lithuania was the country actively inviting people fleeing Belarus, fleeing violence, to move here and find safety here.
Right now the situation changes and Lithuania sees Belarus as a country that cooperates with Russia. There are some politicians who openly state that Belarus is Russia. Many people who came here under humanitarian visas or circumstances who later found jobs or made a family here now are being declared a threat to national security, and they don’t get quality legal help from the State. They’re really at risk of being deported to Belarus. As with the border, it’s the same thing here, if you start seeking justice for these people, you’re already being blamed for spreading Belarus propaganda.
Universal Jurisdiction
Another challenge is everything that is related to universal jurisdiction when it comes to war in Ukraine, and I think that State legal professionals lack competence and practice in that field, so obviously the help from the international community is essential once again. I think Lithuania is one of the countries that should take leadership in seeking justice.
How do you see the work of anti-torture lawyers such as yourself developing in your country in the near future?
I really feel my work in a private law firm that represents both NGOs and victims of torture is only a tool to seek justice, while the actual power lies within civic society. I do believe that strong civic society is the main actor when it comes to communication and when it comes to attracting the international community’s attention.
The thing is that these organisations lack the understanding of law, and that’s the question of resources once again. Governmental institutions such as the Ombudsperson can also contribute to bringing the attention to what is happening here. Of course it’s always tricky because they are still governmental institutions, and I guess there’s a philosophical question of whether it’s better to cooperate with institutions and organisations that are involved in one way or another in government decisions and actions or whether it’s better to remain completely independent.
All the cases that reach the European Court of Human Rights are also something that builds a platform for human rights lawyers to exchange the experience. It immediately brings attention to the country and has this effect on other countries that are trying to impose the same practices as the country against which the petition was filed.
This is a very difficult field to work in. What motivates you to carry on working?
I see everything I do as a system, and I think justice is a system. It doesn’t make sense if it only works for rich people or Europeans. It is important to understand that every small thing you do at the end contributes to that particular system. The proudest moment is when people you meet start to believe they can seek for justice.
What is your proudest moment in this field so far?
I feel proud every time I gain the trust of a person who reached out to me. Every day I feel proud knowing there is a watchdog, there is legal help in Lithuania, and also sadly feeling that if I stop doing what I do we will not have the same quality of help for these people in Lithuania because there are not many people working in this field.
For me I really feel that what we do with other organisations and what we do in our law firm, and feeling how important the role in which I work is, and feeling that if I stop doing what I do we will miss a chance of actually protecting people from torture or seeking justice. That makes me proud every day and that’s what motivates me a lot.
About the Awards
REDRESS’s Innovative Lawyers Awards, funded with the support of the United Against Torture Consortium, aim to to recognise the vital work of new and emerging anti-torture champions, expose them to a broader peer support network, offer them some financial support to pursue public interest litigation, and to inspire other lawyers and practitioners.
The United Against Torture Consortium (UATC) brings together six of the world’s leading anti-torture organisations with the aim of strengthening and expanding the anti-torture movement by pooling their expertise in torture prevention, protection, survivor rehabilitation, and strategic litigation against torture.
The UATC harnesses the strengths of REDRESS, the Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT), the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT), the International Federation of Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture (FIACAT), the Omega Research Foundation, and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT).
Funded by the European Union, the Consortium works in partnership with over 200 civil society organisations and other partners in over 100 countries.