Our Story
How two Dutch entrepreneurs were invited into Lithuania's open economy — and how the system slowly closed around them.
2016 — The invitation
Onne Frederikus Gerardus Lelie and Job Van Den Berg are Dutch citizens. Both arrived in Lithuania during a period when the country was actively courting foreign capital with promises of EU-grade rule of law, low taxes, and a harmonised single market. Lelie obtained Lithuanian citizenship in 2016, and the two of them registered UAB "Clean and Solve" (CLSO), code 304231452, as a Vilnius-based trader of industrial chemicals.
Illustration 1
Image: Vilnius airport arrivals area / OR an investor brochure cover ca. 2014–2016 "Invest Lithuania". Desaturated, archival feel.
2018–2024 — Cross-border business under EU rules
For five years CLSO operated under the EU’s REACH regulation, registered with the European Chemicals Agency, supplying gamma-butyrolactone (GBL) — a substance with thousands of legitimate industrial uses (resin and polymer manufacturing, electronic-component cleaning, paint stripping). Goods moved from a German producer (VladaChem) to a Czech logistics hub (Transforwarding/Quick Delta) and on to a Dutch buyer (Trade Chemicals Europe BV). The cargo never physically entered Lithuanian territory.
Illustration 2
Image: industrial chemical drums on a pallet, EU-flag tape detail / OR cross-border truck on European highway at night.
May 2025 — The freeze
On 27 May 2025 the Vilnius Regional Prosecutor’s office, under investigation No. 01-1-44850-24, ordered a temporary freeze of €700,521.07 + PLN 12,945.32 across CLSO’s bank accounts and assets — framing the case under article 202(1) of the Lithuanian Criminal Code (unlawful business activity). At that moment, no formal indictment had been issued. None has been issued since.
Illustration 3
Image: prosecutor’s official seal up close / OR a bank account statement with frozen line items, redacted.
The Kafka trap
Each judicial review of the freeze — by judges Mikužytė (July 2025), Telksnienė (August 2025 appeal), Bakanauskaitė (November 2025) and Balkaitienė (May 2026) — upheld the measure. None engaged with the EU-law arguments raised by the defence: the free movement of goods (TFEU Art. 34–36), the supremacy of REACH in chemical regulation, or the EFTA Court’s decision in E-9/16 (Norway v ESA, PFOA) which protects cross-border traders from disproportionate national restrictions.
Illustration 4
Image: courtroom hallway in Vilnius regional court / OR a stack of court rulings on a desk.
The escalation pattern
Instead of resolving the dispute, the prosecutor’s office added new theories of liability each time the defence challenged the freeze. November 2025 saw the addition of article 216(1) — money laundering. May 2026 saw the addition of article 260(3) — narcotic precursor handling. The freeze was extended in eighteen-month tranches, the latest to November 2026, despite the procedural code’s default ceilings.
Illustration 5
Image: timeline visualisation / OR the case-file dossier (binder spine showing No. 01-1-44850-24).
Where it stands today
As of May 2026, CLSO has been operating with its assets frozen for eighteen months. No charge has been confirmed by a trial court. No EU-law issue has been referred to the Court of Justice. The owners continue to seek redress through every available channel — national, European and international — and have agreed to publish the primary documents so the public can verify the record for itself.
Illustration 6
Image: empty office desk with a single open dossier / OR a small Dutch and EU flag on a window sill.