Doc. 8625

24 January 2000

Situation in Belarus

Opinion1

Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights

Rapporteur: Mr Gunnar Jansson, Finland, LDR

I.       Conclusions of the committee

The Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights broadly approves the draft recommendation submitted by the Political Affairs Committee. It does, however, propose the following amendments:

Amendment A

In the draft recommendation, in paragraph 6, replace “the exercise of freedom of expression and freedom of association” with the following:

Amendment B

In the draft recommendation, in paragraph 6, replace “by various methods” with the following:

Amendment C

In the draft recommendation, add a new paragraph after paragraph 6 as follows:

Amendment D

In the draft recommendation, in paragraph 11 iii., replace “freedom of expression and freedom of association” by:

Amendment E

In the draft recommendation, add a new sub-paragraph after sub-paragraph 11 iii. as follows:

Amendment F

In the draft order, add after the words “its Political Affairs Committee” the following words:

II. Explanatory memorandum by Mr Jansson

A. Introduction

1.       At its meeting on 10 January 2000, the Bureau of the Assembly asked the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights to give an opinion on the situation in Belarus. Since the Rapporteur of the Political Affairs Committee, Mr Behrendt, visited Belarus already in October 1999, I had, of course, no opportunity to accompany him. This opinion is thus based on information from various written sources. Although Mr Behrendt already touched upon the human rights situation in his report, I would like to elaborate on this question and add some further reflections.

B. The human rights situation

2.       Unfortunately, as stated by Mr Behrendt, there have been no tangible improvements on the respect for human rights in Belarus. In fact, I would even concur with the many non-governmental organisations which maintain that the human rights situation is worsening by the day.

Persecution and harassment of opponents of the regime:

Arrests, trials and abductions

3.       Ever since President Lukashenko changed the constitution unilaterally on 24 November 1996, he has used all methods at his disposal to silence the opposition in the country – or, in fact, anyone who dares to criticise his quasi-dictatorial regime. In 1997 and 1998, his method of choice seems to have been to indict and arrest his most prominent critics (or those he considered as posing a political risk to him personally) on trumped-up charges of embezzlement or misappropriation of state funds, thus effectively putting them out of action.

4. Worryingly, in 1999 a new pattern emerged, probably due to the fact that the opposition considered that Mr Lukashenko’s term of office expired on 20 July 1999, and thus organised an alternative presidential election. The President seems to have interpreted this as a direct attack on his regime. The regime thus orchestrated a clampdown on the President’s political opponents, instituting unfair trials and even organising “disappearances” 2.

5. As a result, the President of the last legitimate parliament (the 13th Soviet), Mr Semyon Sharetski, fled to Lithuania in August 1999. Several other political opponents of Mr Lukashenko also saw the writing on the wall and went into exile, including the leader of the important NGO “Charter 97”, Mr Andrei Sannikov. Those who remain are regularly subjected to harassment by the police and the secret services.

Violations of the freedom of expression

6.       All electronic media in Belarus are under the control of the State3, which ensures that the opposition has no access. Independent newspapers do exist, but the regime does its utmost to make life difficult for them. All six major independent papers are currently being subjected to a thorough tax inspection within their premises (which causes major practical problems for their operation). One independent newspaper, “Naviny”, was closed down on 30 September as a consequence of a freezing of its assets, following a libel suit initiated by Viktor Sheiman, Head of the National Security Council, for an article entitled “Who Lives in the Little Palaces?”. The article intimated that a country cottage outside Minsk belonged to Mr Sheiman. A Minsk court ruled in favour of Mr Sheiman, fining the newspaper 10 billion Belarussian rubles (US$ 33.300) and the author of the article 5 billion rubles (US$ 16,650). (The average monthly wage in Belarus is approx. US$ 30).

7.       In fact, independent newspapers operate under a constant threat of closure, through withdrawal of their licenses or other methods. After two administrative warnings, a paper may be closed down. In addition, almost all printing facilities and distribution channels are state-owned or state-controlled. On 4 October 1999, the authorities cancelled the registration of nine independent newspapers, including the successor to the forcibly closed down newspaper “Naviny”, “Nasha Svaboda”.

Violations of the freedom of assembly

8.       On 17 October 1999, the opposition organised a “March of Freedom” in protest of President Lukashenko’s rule. An estimated 20.000 people took part in the official demonstration. At the end of the march, things turned ugly. Reportedly, police officers attacked the demonstrators, some of whom retaliated by throwing stones. At least 200 demonstrators were arrested, and many opposition leaders went into hiding for a time, fearing the demonstration would serve as an excuse for their arrest.

9.       Recently, the President issued a new decree (No. 36), which curtails the freedom of assembly by a requirement that the organiser of a demonstration must pledge to cover the cost of police supervision and clean-up. Since it is the police itself which determines how many officers it sends to “supervise” a demonstration, the implementation of this decree is not only likely to result in arbitrariness, but also to discourage people to organise a demonstration.

Violations of the freedom of association

10.       Non-governmental organisations, in particular those defending human rights, but also many other private organisations (e.g. youth organisations), are intimidated by various means. In 1999, the regime’s weapon of choice was re-registration, a complex procedure which apparently involved sending charters, lists of members, lists of regional branches, etc. to the authorities. Most NGOs active in the field of human rights succeeded to be “re-registered”4, but not all.

11.       In fact, repressive action against NGOs seems to have reached a new level recently, as several organisations have been subjected to raids of offices and confiscations of equipment5, as well as overt surveillance of their officers and members. Active members of NGOs are apparently furthermore likely to be harassed by the police and the secret services, and may even lose their jobs, in particular if they work in the public sector.

Infringements upon the independence of the judiciary and lawyers

12.       It is quite clear that the judiciary in Belarus is neither independent nor free, but is being used by the regime as a means of persecution of its political opponents. Few are the judges that dare to defy the regime. Political trials have sadly become a feature of Belarus: Criminal cases are brought against political opponents of the regime (usually on financial grounds); the accused are usually convicted. The same applies to libel suits, where the fines handed down are totally disproportionate (see “Naviny” case). But even ordinary citizens have a lot to fear: Belarusian prisons and pre-trial detention centres are badly overcrowded, mostly due to the heavy-handedness of the judiciary, which favours Soviet-style lengths of incarceration often disproportionate to the crime.

13.       Furthermore, there is no independent bar in Belarus. Practising barristers in criminal cases must belong to the official “Collegium” in order to be able to perform all their functions. Lawyers for administrative cases have more freedom from the Collegium but less access to the system (e.g. they may not meet their clients in pre-trial detention or take criminal cases). Members of the Collegium are subject to its supervision, which includes billing and receipt of client fees (with the Collegium taking a considerable share of the fee, estimated at between 30% and 40%). The Collegium itself is under direct control of the Ministry of Justice, which confirms its charter and at times intervenes to discipline lawyers. The Collegium’s leadership consists of prosecutors and other state officials.

14.       Several practising lawyers who have had high-profile human rights cases have lost their membership in the Collegium6. Others have been harassed by the police and the secret services, up to the point that (fabricated) administrative or criminal charges were filed against them7.

The death penalty

15. The death penalty in Belarus is widely and regularly enforced. In 1998, 36 persons were executed. At the beginning of 1999, 56 persons were on death row. By August 1999, 24 executions had taken place. Since the application of the death penalty is still secretive, it is difficult to obtain further information. The date of executions is not announced to the inmate or his family, and the bodies of the executed are not returned to the relatives, but are buried by the State.

16.        Lawyers now have access to persons on death row. Some of the lawyers and human rights activists who have worked on death penalty cases fear that executions are being speeded up, in particular if the case is receiving international attention. Reportedly death row conditions are particularly terrible.

Other human rights violations

17.       President Lukashenko’s regime has also attacked academic freedom. Non-governmental organisations report that the government has suppressed research on controversial topics, re-centralised academic decision-making, and maintained a ban on political activity on campuses. At the same time, outspoken students and lecturers are threatened with expulsion, often even for their off-campus political activity.

C.       Conclusions

18.       From the above, it is clear that the human rights situation in Belarus is very bad. Especially worrying is the fact that the regime, not content with silencing its opponents by way of arrests and unfair trials, has even resorted to orchestrating “disappearances”. The fact that the opposition has no access to the electronic media, and that independent newspapers are systematically harassed, are further causes for concern, as is the lack of independence of the judiciary and the bar. Freedom of expression, assembly and association are strongly curtailed in the country. The many executions in Belarus can only be condemned in the strongest possible terms.

19.       In these difficult circumstances, one wonders whether negotiations between the regime and the opposition in Belarus are at all possible. I would even go so far as to question the sincerity of the regime in agreeing to such negotiations, pledging improvements in the human rights situations while simultaneously orchestrating the “disappearance” of prominent opponents of the regime, closing independent newspapers and clamping down on demonstrations and other forms of articulated dissent.

20.       Nevertheless, I agree with Mr Behrendt that a constructive, yet critical engagement is the only alternative the Council of Europe has. We must try to support the democratic forces and human rights groups, secure the release of political prisoners, and thus create an atmosphere in which real negotiations between the opposition and the regime can take place. If these negotiations succeed, there is a chance the elections scheduled for this year will be reasonably free and fair, and Belarus might find itself back on its way to freedom, democracy and the respect for human rights and the rule of law.

*

* *

Reporting committee: Political Affairs Committee

Committee for opinion: Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights

Reference to committee: decision of the Bureau of the Assembly of 17 December 1998

Opinion approved by the committee on 24 January 2000

Secretaries to the committee: Mr Plate, Ms Coin and Ms Kleinsorge

1 See Doc 8606.

2 All of the following persons have been accused of bribery, misappropriation of state funds, and other financial irregularities, unless otherwise stated. All of them are prominent critics of the President; most of them are considered prisoners of conscience by Amnesty International and the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights:

Mrs Tamara Vinnikava, former Chairperson of the National Bank of the Republic of Belarus, was arrested on 14 January 1997, held in pre-trial detention until November 1997, and then placed under house arrest (under close guard of the KGB). She “disappeared” on 7 April 1999 and has since then been unaccounted for.

Mr Vasily Starovoytau, former Chairman of an agricultural firm, was arrested on 14 October 1997. He was sentenced to two years in a strict-regime penal colony on 30 May 1999 and was not allowed to appeal his sentence.

Mr Vasily Leonau, former Minister of Agriculture, was arrested on 11 November 1997. He is still being held in pre-trial detention.

Mr Mikhail Chygir, former Prime Minister, was arrested on 30 March 1999. He was conditionally released on 30 November 1999, after much national and international pressure.

Mr Andrei Klimov, member of the last legitimate parliament (13th Soviet), was arrested on 11 February 1998. He is still being held in pre-trial detention, and is currently being tried. On 13 December 1999 Mr Klimov was reportedly beaten and kicked by prison officials and dragged into the Minsk courtroom. An ambulance was called to the Court, but the Court refused to let the defendant be taken to hospital, despite his having suffered severe bruising, a dislocated arm and concussion.

Mr Yuri Zakharenka, former Minister of the Interior, was charged with “resistance to the police” on 16 April 1999. On 7 May 1999, he “disappeared”. He was last seen being bundled into a car by a group of unidentified men. He had complained to his wife of being tailed by two cars prior during the two weeks prior to his abduction.

Mr Victor Ganchar, Deputy Chairman of the last legitimate parliament (13th Soviet), “disappeared” on the evening of 16 September 1999.

Mr Anatoly Krasovsky, a well-known publisher, also “disappeared” on the evening of 16 September 1999.

Mr Vladimir Kudzinnov, member of the last legitimate parliament (13th Soviet), is currently serving a sentence in a Minsk penal colony, where he is reportedly being ill-treated.

3 There are some commercial radio channels, technically non-governmental, which remain loyal to the State in political coverage, or rather, non-coverage.

4

In fact, the Belarusian Helsinki Committee even won a minor court battle, to have an official “warning” rescinded (three such “warnings” constitute a legal basis for banning an NGO under Belarusian law).

5

The official explication for such actions are often “bomb threats”.

6 For example, Mr Garri Popgonyailo.

7 For example, Mr Oleg Volchek and Mrs Vera Stremkovskaya.