Judins: Government Should Have Revoked Support for Wood Industry

After a months-long investigation, the prosecutor's office concluded that the Cabinet of Ministers acted illegally by ordering AS "Latvijas valsts meži" (LVM) to change the wood pricing procedure. The Prosecutor General's Office sent a protest to the government demanding the revocation of these decisions, stating they were based on false information and caused significant losses to the state, though the exact amount of damages has not been disclosed. If the Cabinet accepts the protest, companies would have to repay the price difference resulting from the discounts.

However, the government decided on Tuesday, July 21, not to comply with the prosecutor's demand, with Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs (AS) stating that all ministers agreed that the demand cannot be fulfilled. Andrejs Judins (JV), head of the Saeima Legal Affairs Committee, voiced strong criticism on social media, calling the refusal unlawful and unfounded. He emphasized that if a decision was made based on misleading and distorted information, it must be annulled. "The fact that transactions are completed and money has already been transferred is not a reason to defend and protect the previous decision," Judins wrote.

Judins noted that the prosecutor's investigation found that the government's decisions on support for wood industry companies were based on false and misleading information, which led to the initiation of criminal proceedings against ten individuals. The Cabinet now has the prosecutor's assessment and other information revealing the true picture. Judins criticized Kulberg's explanation that the government cannot fulfill the protest because transactions have already taken place, saying this confuses two separate issues. "The prosecutor's demand is for the government to adopt a new decision acknowledging that the previous one violated legal provisions. Compensation for damages caused to the state will not be easy, but the government did not have to decide on that now. The annulment of an illegal decision must not depend on how complicated compensating for the resulting damages may seem," Judins stated.