Businessman Normunds Lakučs: in the political trial against Lembergs they are afraid of the truth

In a conversation with Neatkarīgā, businessman Normunds Lakučs reveals that he wanted to testify in the Riga Regional Court about how the accusations against Aivars Lembergs are being fabricated, but he has been denied it.

It should be reminded that N. Lakučs was an influential representative of For Fatherland and Freedom/LNNK party (in Latvian: TB/LNNK) in its heyday, who was directed to represent the party in the councils of the Privatization Agency, Latvenergo, Latvijas Gāze, Latvijas Kuģniecība and Ventspils nafta. He was also the state trustee at Latvenergo.

Yes, there were times in Latvia when, in accordance with the law, each party elected to the Saeima (including the opposition) delegated its representative to the council of the Privatization Agency. Representatives of parties were also delegated to the councils of large companies with state capital shares. Such an arrangement was criticized, but at the time it seemed that there was also someone to demand political responsibility from if these companies worked poorly.

Lakučs had earned many millions in private business, which he also declared in his public official’s declaration. N. Lakučs no longer maintains active contacts with the political force that has now joined the National Alliance party (in Latvian: Nacionālā apvienība). However, he is still following the political process and is always ready to express a national conservative view.

Everything was recorded

In September 2009, Aivars Lembergs asked the Riga Regional Court to attach documents from the terminated criminal proceedings of the Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau of Latvia (KNAB), which were initiated in the summer of 2003, to the materials of the criminal case.

The protocols of the confrontation between N. Lakučs and businessman Jūlijs Krūmiņš were featured in the criminal proceedings investigated by KNAB. KNAB had initiated criminal proceedings for J. Krūmiņš's allegations that he - J. Krūmiņš - at that time had transferred USD 50,000 to the representative of TB/LNNK N. Lakučs for the privatization of JSC Ventspils Nafta. It was deduced in the criminal proceedings that these statements of J. Krūmiņš are untrue.

The Riga Regional Court rejected A. Lembergs' request. In 2016, the court also rejected a request to summon N. Lakučs, whom defense wanted to question on, among other things, how J. Krūmiņš urged the witness N. Lakučs to fabricate evidence against A. Lembergs.

Urged to come up with compromising information

In a conversation with Neatkarīgā N. Lakučs recalled the following about the role of J. Krūmiņš in accusing A. Lembergs: “In the summer of 2003, information about the money being given to me by Jūlijs Krūmiņš appeared with amazing regularity in various media. It was clear that structures funded by George Soros stood behind it at the time. I was summoned to KNAB. I told the investigator that I know of /Jūlijs/ Krūmiņš, but I don’t know him personally. When I told him what I knew and what I didn't, the investigator explained that he had opposing information. I proposed a confrontation. It happened in probably a week. I arrived at KNAB. I entered the office. Jūlijs Krūmiņš and the investigator sat there. Long before this confrontation, other entrepreneurs told me that Jūlijs Krūmiņš was walking around and asking different people to look for a compromising information about Aivars Lembergs and, if there is none, to come up with some. When the time for asking questions started in the confrontation, I asked: "Jūlijs Krūmiņš, please tell me if it is true that..." and told what I had heard before. I asked him, "Why do you walk around and ask people to do such things?" There was a pause. Krūmiņš did not know what to say. A very awkward situation arose. After a while, he switched to the informal "you" and asked me, "Why are you nosing in on this? What do you care about what we do with Lembergs?” I was stunned. The investigator saw and heard all this. By encouraging people to look for compromising information about Lembergs, and if none can be found, to invent it, Jūlijs Krūmiņš himself unequivocally participated in the process of accusing Lembergs. This was also clearly visible to the investigator, and with that the KNAB case ended. A month later, I received a document from KNAB stating that Jūlijs Krūmiņš's testimony is questionable and cannot be taken as testimony. Jūlijs Krūmiņš no longer talked about this topic at all, only criticized me retelling the case. In the confrontation, our conversation was definitely recorded, because we were warned beforehand that it would be recorded."

Lakučs' testimonies do not fit in the political trial

Businessman N. Lakučs expressed disappointment that the Riga Regional Court found it important to hear J. Krūmiņš's lies about A. Lembergs, but did not want to hear what happened to J. Krūmiņš's testimony at KNAB: “Several years later, this political process against Lembergs began /as is known, the first hearing in this process took place on 16 February 2009/ - I emphasize that this is a political process. I considered it my duty as a citizen not to remain silent on this case. Jūlijs Krūmiņš was called as a witness in the case against Lembergs, where he again began to repeat the same thing that he was confronted with me, and then it turned out that it was all invented. He had probably already received some instructions or an order somewhere, or just wanted to exact some kind of personal revenge. I wanted to be summoned to the Riga Regional Court as a witness, because I could testify about what was revealed in the confrontation with the KNAB, that he was lying, and how false are all his statements and the subsequent publications in Soros-supported press. I personally called KNAB and asked if I could receive recordings of the confrontation. I wrote a letter to judge Boriss Geimans, in which I expressed a request to call me as a witness, and I attached to the letter the opinion of KNAB, in which the testimonies of Jūlijs Krūmiņš were questioned. The judge accepted the documents but refused to let me be a witness in the proceedings. KNAB was very kind and confirmed that there are such records, but they can’t give them to me. They can only be given if the court so requests. If I had been questioned in court, I would have asked the court to request these materials from the KNAB in order to confirm what I said. Unfortunately, I was not invited to testify."

Political vision

Lakučs explained: “I am very well aware that for any testimony given in favor of Lembergs - for any kind of support to Lembergs, you are entered in the list of “villlains”. It doesn't scare me. However, we have a historical experience that must not be allowed to recur. In 1940, you might see that militia detainment car has arrived for your neighbor, and pretend that nothing has happened, because it does not affect you. Then this car comes again, for the second neighbor and again you think - maybe he isn’t guilty, but it does not affect you. For the third time, it comes for you, and then you realize that no one will defend you either, because the others will also think that same thing - it may be that you are not guilty, but it does not affect them.

I am well aware that Lembergs has not been persecuted for decades on whether or not he has broken the law. Lembergs' main sin, for which he is actually being tried, is that he has been very principled in his stance for the national interests of his country and has thus earned the hatred of globalists, left-wing liberals, or Sorosites /Soros supporters/. He is a highly visible politician who has been in the top three in the rankings for decades. A politician with an authority that is heard and listened to - such a politician, according to the globalist scenario, must be removed from the stage. Lembergs and I share political views. I, too, am a national conservative. I, too, see the dangers of globalization, in this neo-Marxist course towards the destruction of nation states. Lembergs, being a patriot of his country, a politician who has done a lot for the benefit of both his country and the city, has also earned hatred in all Soros mass media. His name is always appended with "who is accused of serious crimes". At the same time, the same Soros mass media conceal that their ideological father and, in many cases, directly or indirectly, financial donor, has been convicted of serious crimes by a decision of the French Supreme Court. Here it is either omitted completely or mentioned only in passing. For such a person, network-like structures have been established here in Latvia, for example, Delna, Soros Foundation - Latvia, now known as Foundation DOTS and others. It turns out that in the public sphere Sorosites are the ones who determine which politicians are honest or not. Of course, the Sorosites are turning against nationally minded people who are able to express their opinions and realize their intentions. This is not only the case in Latvia, but also in other countries. Hungary and Poland have now gotten rid of these networks."