Leanid Sudalenka, Homel

Chairman of the Constitutional Court of Belarus Piatro Miklashevich recently has demonstrated the government’s position on the citizens’ right to access constitutional justice.

- Today there is no need to go to Constitutional Court. Indirect access is provided at the legislative level. That is, an individual has the right to go with an initiative to examine the constitutionality of a legal act to authorized entities. If there are sufficient grounds these entities may appeal to the Constitutional Court, - said Miklashevich to the news agency BelTA.

Homel human rights activist, lawyer, the chairman of the city branch of the NGO “Legal Initiative” Leanid Sudalenka doesn’t agree with the head of the CC and declares that the question of granting the citizens the right to direct appeal to the Constitutional Court has not only escalated, it had already made a name for itself.

- It’s one thing when human rights are violated in countries ruled by laws, and quite a different thing is when it happens here where people rule. Citizens of any country, including our closest neighbors, do not necessarily have to apply to the Constitutional Court; they can directly apply to the European Court of Human Rights, which would force the country to restore the violated rights of ordinary citizens.

- In our practice, there are enough cases when we went to authorized entities, about which the head of the CC is speaking. If you speak in jest, it is better to write to the Sports Lottery - there are some chances for reply there … Officials from the “authorized entities” will never seek for “reasonable grounds” which Miklashevich is talking about, they are not interested in this topic. Our officials have learned very well - any initiative is punishable!

As the lawyer notes, Belarus remains the only country in Europe where citizens are denied the right to appeal to Strasbourg. Belarusians and their rights remain in a confined space, i.e. one-on-ones with their government. Complaints to the UN Committee on Human Rights also do not lead to the restoration of violated rights – officials from the government simply ignore them.

Citing the example of the closest allies - Russia, whose citizens have rights to the constitutional complaint, the leader of the NGO “Legal Initiative” also does not agree with the head of the CC in the question that the constitutional complaints require further work, to which Belarus may come in the future.

- Basic laws of post-Soviet countries in principle are identical, so there is no need to “reinvent the wheel”, you can just take legislation in Russia as a basis and adapt it to the national requirements. I support the idea that human rights are observed today, and not in the distant future, - the expert drew a line.

Let’s remind you that the situation of human rights in Belarus is condemns not only by the U.S. but also the leadership of the Council of Europe, human rights organization “Amnesty International” and local human rights activists.

Quoting gomelspring96.org,
Prepared by Ales LETA,
Belarusian Legal Portal,
www.prava-by.info

Minsk City Court has upheld the 4.5-year verdict to Viasna leader Ales Bialiatski, dismissing the cassational appeal lodged by lawyer Dzmitry Layeuski.

Defense lawyer Dzmitry Layeuski entered several motions, including one demanding release of Bialiatski. He also requested that a number of financial documents be attached to the case file, including receipts of money transfers and papers certifying the purchase of estate by Bialiatski. The latter motions were met by Judge Uladzimir Stsiapurka.

The lawyer also stressed that the court of original jurisdiction had failed to consider a number of documents (e.g. official statement by the Lithuanian Ministry of Justice) saying that the information on Bialiatski’s bank accounts was not true.

Source: spring96.org

Constitutional Court, Miensk

Homel pro-democratic activists Uladzimir Katsora and Uladzimir Niapomniashchykh have addressed the Constitutional Court of Belarus with a demand to provide legal assessment to the provisions of Article 8.4 of the Code for Administrative Procedures in their compliance with Article 25 of the Constitution and Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The address says that Homel police detained several local residents on 7 and 8 October and charged them under Art. 23.34 of the Administrative Code (violation of mass events restrictions). After their detention, they were taken to prison and later convicted by Homel courts.

“The issue of our detention was ignored by the courts. We believe that the police violated our Constitutional guarantees provided by Article 25 of the Constitution. Therefore, we appealed the verdicts at Homel Tsentralny District Prosecutor’s Office, who however said that the detention was a measure of implementation of the administrative procedures, with our status defined then as persons who had committed an offence. The Regional Prosecutor’s Office later upheld the conclusions of the district prosecutor, saying that administrative detention could not be applied after the pronouncement of a court ruling on the administrative offence”, says the activists.

Uladzimir Katsora and Uladzimir Niapomniashchykh argue that administrative detention is not an obligation, but a right of policemen, and the legal provision of “can be detained” was in this case used with the biased opinion of the police.

They also stress that the wording “a person who has committed an offence” mentioned in Art. 8.4 has no legal explanation, running counter to the presumption of innocence, as provided by Art. 2.7 of the Code for Administrative Procedures.

“We believe that the above-mentioned irregularities of the administrative procedures resulted in the violation of our right to freedom and personal integrity”, say the activists.

Source: spring96.org

On 23 January, experts of the Assembly of Pro-Democratic NGOs and the Center for Legal Transformation presented the results of monitoring of the situation with non-governmental organizations and freedom of association in Belarus in 2011.

According to the report, 112 public associations were registered in Belarus in 2011. Half of them are sports organizations. The experts report deterioration of legal background for the activities of non-profit organizations in the country. Meanwhile, they welcome the Belarusian Parliament’s failure to pass the controversial Law on Non-Profit Organizations heavily criticized by the civil society.

Source: spring96.org

On 19 January, deputy chair of the Human Rights Center “Viasna” Valiantsin Stefanovich lodged a complaint with Minsk City Court demanding to reverse an earlier decision of 16 December 2011 by Minsk Partyzanski District Court to exact 56 mln. rubles of fine for alleged tax violations.

The human rights defender believes that the court ruling is groundless and illegal, which should result in its reversal, as provided by Par. 1 and 2 Art. 401 of the Code for Civil Procedures.

In his appeal submitted to Minsk City Court, Valiantsin Stefanovich names the reasons sufficient for the reversal of the verdict. “In its ruling, the court concludes that the money received at my bank account in the Lithuanian AO SEB bank from sources outside the Republic of Belarus in 2009 and 2010 are liable for taxation. However, the court failed to take into account all the facts that can be considered as evidence in the case”, says Mr. Stefanovich, stressing two key issues mentioned in the judgment by Judge Veranika Abramovich.

Firstly, he emphasizes the existence of an official paper by the Lithuanian Ministry of Justice, which was adjourned to the case file:

“A copy of the paper was sealed by the Lithuanian Embassy to Belarus and signed by the plenipotentiary ambassador of the country. According to the paper, the information [on the flow of funds received at a Lithuanian bank account from sources outside the Republic of Belarus in 2009-2010] provided by the Lithuanian Ministry of Justice is false. Under Art. 193 of the Code for Civil Procedures, the paper is official, as it was issued by a body (the Lithuanian Ministry of Justice) in the framework of its authority. The claimant failed to disprove the data contained in the paper. Therefore, the content of the official paper is true (Art. 193 of the CCP)”.

During the court hearing, Mr. Stefanovich also requested that the court addressed the Lithuanian Ministry of Justice to receive explanations as to the exact parts of the submitted information that were considered false. Representatives of the tax inspection did not object to the motion either.

“The court dismissed the motion by its written order, saying that it was going to assess the paper during the pronouncement of judgment. However, the court ruling did not assess the evidence. Thus, the court abstained from examination and evaluation of the evidence which was crucial for a fair and unbiased consideration of the case and failed to take into account all the facts that could be considered as evidence in the case. Meanwhile, under Par. 1 Art. 214 of the CCP, the court assesses the evidence according to its own convictions based on full-scale and unbiased examination in a trial of all the facts that can be considered as evidence in the case, being guided by the law only”, says the appeal.

Secondly, the human rights defender notes that in her verdict the judge refers to accounting legislation, which is illegal:

“The court’s reference to the Accounting Code of 1994 is not right, since under Art. 1 of the Code it deals with legal entities registered in the territory of the Republic of Belarus, local branches and offices, including those of foreign organizations, economic groups, regular associations, state bodies, as well as individual entrepreneurs. I, as an individual, do not belong to either of the entities and the Code does not apply to me. It also does not apply to the foreign foundations that donated the resources, since they do not perform any activities nor have any registered representatives in the territory of Belarus. My relations with the foundations were of civil nature and their instructions concerning the transfer of money to third persons or the implementation of certain services for their benefit could be of any (including oral) kind”, says Mr. Stefanovich.

Source: spring96.org

Andrey Yurov, Russia

Well-known Russian human rights activist Andrey Yurov, head of the International Observation Mission of the Committee on International Control over the Situation with Human Rights in Belarus, wrote a brief article in which he summarized the main results of 2011 and noted the important trends for the future of the human rights movement in the CIS countries.

Andrey Yurov names the situation in Belarus after the presidential election in December 2010 as a landmark. “There is still harassment of civic leaders, human rights activists and journalists, mass deportation of foreigners, including Russians, which has never been seen before,” says the human rights defender.

Andrey Yurov called the establishment of the Committee on International Control over the Human Rights Situation in Belarus as a successful step. “It’s a huge coalition of nongovernmental organizations around the world who chose to work in Belarus unless the human rights situation there improves. We have created this coalition with the intention of working for a long time, responsibly and professionally. This is the first serious challenge for the solidarity of civil society in the post-Soviet region. It seems to me that this very structure, including its separate parts – the rapporteur, the observation mission, a group of international advocacy – can be a unique model of how to act. At the same time, I cannot yet say that we have achieved brilliant success in Belarus”, noted the head of the Observation Mission of the Committee.

“Having observed the example of Belarus, we are now convinced that such major organizations as the UN and OSCE, which are designed to change situation of human rights for the better, have proven to be powerless. There are no effective international mechanisms, which could quickly remedy the situation”, stated Andrey Yurov.

Source: spring96.org

Mikalai Autukhovich

Political prisoner Mikalai Autukhovich has stood closed trial at a penal colony in Ivatsevichy. As a result, he will be transferred to a stricter prison for alleged repeated violations of regime restrictions while serving his 5.2-year term.

The prisoner is said to be transferred to Hrodna.

Source:spring96.org

The delegation of the International Federation for Human Rights took part in the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee meeting to discuss the situation in Belarus held in Brussels on 12 January.

In his brief address, FIDH representative Jean-Marie Rogue emphasized the current situation with the imprisoned FIDH Vice-President Ales Bialiatski.

“The authorities should immediately release the arrested persons and drop criminal charges brought against them, in case they want to escape sanctions. This is a matter of a few days, not weeks”, said Stefan Fuhle, Commissioner responsible for enlargement and European neighbourhood policy.

Source: БелаПАН

Raman Kisliak, Brest

The Brest Regional Court confirmed the ruling of the Leninski District Court of Brest concerning the ban of a series of pickets under the slogan “Freedom to Political Prisoners!” by the Brest City Executive Committee in autumn 2011.

According to Brest-based human rights defender Raman Kisliak (in the photo), in the lawsuit to the Brest Regional Court it was stated that the Leninski District Court had violated the process norms by considering the appeal against the ban in closed court proceeding. There is n wonder then that the court sided with the authorities and supported the prohibition of the street actions.

Now the applicants are going to apply to the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus.

Source: Radyjo Svaboda
Photo: Аles’ Lapicki (Licviny-INFA)

Leanid Sudalenka, Homel

On 12 January Siarhei Shytsikau, Judge of the Tsentralny District Court of Homel, turned down the appeal of the Homel human rights defenders Anatol Paplauny and Leanid Sudalenka against the refusal of the Homel City Executive Committee to authorize their picket, dated to the Human Rights Day, 10 December.

As stated by a representative of the executive committee, the action wasn’t authorized as the applicants failed to conclude service agreements with medics and police. Paplauny and Sudalenka, in their turn, stated that such refusal violates their constitutional rights. In their lawsuit they asked the court to declare the ruling of the executive committee as unlawful and contradictory to Articles 19 and 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Anatol Paplauny, Homel

They stated that they hadn’t concluded the agreements because the ruling of the executive committee that obliges organizers of mass events to conclude such agreements contradicts to the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus.

“Such rulings destroy the essence of the law… For instance, people use the public transport, but they are not required to conclude service agreements for the protection of their security or cleaning of the transport after them,” commented Leanid Sudalenka.

Predictably enough, the judge ignored all arguments and took the side of the local authorities.

Quoting gomelspring.org

Photo: Аles’ Lapicki (Lic’viny-INFA)