The Sovereign Voice issue 4 | Page 15

By Lewis Montague, ITNJ TRUSTEE APRIL, 2016 discussion with the lawyers, following a speech from Sacha, the questions from the lawyers were intelligent and piercing into the heart of the ITNJ. Lewis once again outlined the procedures for both the ITNJ and the IPS. The consensus of the lawyers was that a small case should be heard first, rather than the landmark case concerning high level government corruption. A case of government abuse against an individual would set a wide-ranging precedent for all others suffering similar abuse at the hands of corrupt government officials. At one point there seemed to be a reluctance to accept that the ITNJ could help their situation. Lewis asked them directly whether their current judiciary system could bring them a satisfactory result — they answered, NO. Then Lewis asked them whether their media in all its forms could bring them a satisfactory result — they answered, NO. Lewis then asked them, so what have they got to lose by going down the route with the ITNJ and IPS. They unanimously agreed that, YES, they should use the ITNJ and IPS. Lewis finished with the question, would they all like to join the International Prosecution Service and take part in the procedure — a resounding YES was received by the Trustees present. On 14 April, Lewis and Lina met with two university law professors in a meeting room in Parliament. The meeting was scheduled for 30 minutes — it lasted two hours. Lina discussed a number of issues first and then Lewis was invited to explain more about the ITNJ and the IPS. After much discussion, the Law Professors confided that their concern was F SUBSCRIBE DONATE HERE F corruption with government officials and the fact that no remedy was available through the Judiciary system. Once they fully understood the remit of the ITNJ and IPS they became very enthusiastic about the concept and agreed wholeheartedly that the only way forward to achieve any form of justice was by “name and shame in the public domain”. They believed that the ITNJ would be a perfect vehicle for achieving that aim and gave their unequivocal support in pursuing such a claim using the ITNJ. They also agreed that the larger government case and the small case should be heard at the same time, and if there could be a connection, then so much the better. Their last words were — how can we help? This was a massive endorsement for the ITNJ, and rounded off a very successful visit to Lithuania by three members of the Board of Trustees.