GOVERNMENT CRITICS AND OPPOSITION UNDER FIRE
Criminal Sanctions
The Trial of Vadim Labkovich and Alexei Shidlovsky
"Thank God you have been behind bars since August"
Presiding Judge Lavrev to Alexei Shidlovsky, Minsk, February 18, 1998.
Pavel Syverinets and Dmitri Vaskovich When they grabbed us, they immediately started to threaten us. They started to pull us by the hair. They threatened that they would beat our heels. They said that my parents had abandoned me, that they didn't want me anymore.115

At the police station, Vaskovich was denied food and physically and verbally abused:

I was held in a cell and was fed once in three days...only once, no more. That was on the second day. They put me in handcuffs when they moved me from cell to cell, like a criminal. On the last day [of detention] a policeman stood me against the wall with my legs spread and hands apart, closed the door and started to kick me around and said "I'm going to bash your head in, because you don't like Russia!!"116

Such treatment is a clear violation of the Convention, on the Rights of Child, which prohibits the arbitrary arrest of children and requires that the detention of children be limited to the shortest possible time. Article 37 (b) of the Convention states:

No child shall be deprived of his or her liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily. The arrest, detention or imprisonment of a child shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time (emphasis added).

Article 37 (c) of the Convention requires states to treat minors in custody with respect and "in a manner which takes into account the needs of persons of their age." Vaskovich was held with adult prisoners on the second day of his detention. Article 37 (c) further states that children in detention must be separated from adults and that they have the right to "maintain contact with his or her family through correspondence and visits, save in exceptional circumstances." Clearly, the way in which the police and men in plainclothes abused Vaskovich can in no way be construed as respectful or fitting for an adult, let alone a fifteen-year-old boy. Vaskovich gave Human Rights Watch this example of his wilfully negligent treatment in custody by police:

I said to them several times that my stomach hurt and that I needed something to eat. The policeman said to me "If your stomach hurts, how come you went to the demonstration?! So sit down!"

When I was in the cell, they called me for questioning and took me to an office. There were four young men in leather jackets with closely cropped hair. The first time, they said "If you help us, we'll help you." They wanted me to say something against Pavel Syverinets. They threatened me, that if I didn't say something against him, I would be sentenced to seven years in jail. They wanted to put something else of a criminal nature on Pavel Syverinets. [T]hey questioned me at night, on the first day...on Thursday night at 4:00 a.m. Viktor Gonchar and Andrei Klimov Bearing in mind my status as a Supreme Soviet deputy [sic], I naturally informed the procuracy of the Republic of Belarus I would only give an account of the commission's activities to the Supreme Soviet....A decree was then issued compelling me to come for questioning after this refusal...and the police forcibly took me to the Belarusian prosecutor for questioning. The same day the prosecutor's office conducted a search of my apartment under the pretext of searching for documents related to the work of the commission.121

The search failed to produce any incriminating materials, and, although according to Gonchar the case remains open, there have since been no arrests or prosecutions of commission members under this article.

Non-Criminal Sanctions Repercussions at University and Schools [T]he history department is very politically active and a large number of [the history faculty] students go to demonstrations. [Since I am] a human rights activist, all the students who are summoned to the dean's office came to me in the history department for advice. I also attend all of these demonstrationsand walk in the front row, and moreover, I organized a couple of demonstrations, for example on December 10 - International Human Rights Day - which was shown on TV, and naturally when I went to work [following the demonstration] everyone commented that I was so open in expressing myself and that I have no fear. A journalist from the Times [of London] said to me "Strange that you are involved in such actions and you haven't been fired." I said, "well yes," and a month later they did.125 On Belarusian TV they showed a clip from a meeting at which Lukashenka said, pointing his finger at our rector, "Incidentally, your lecturers are using the auditorium for promoting their views, instead of to teach." After that many rectors thought that they could lose their jobs. Following that meeting of the [BGU] rectors, [President Lukashenka] summoned the deans and evidently gave them some kind of order. He warned the rectors, "Whoever's students are most often present at demonstrations will be the first to be fired."126

While Lunyova was not present at this meeting, she discussed in detail the security provisions for the president surrounding the meeting, noting that the entire area around the university had been cordoned off, and that students had been sent away for the day.

He said that he couldn't do anything [there was no money for my salary] although he had a good relationship with me. The personnel department told me that there was money to fund two positions. Many lecturers came to me when I said that I was leaving, took me by the hand and said that they sympathized. The men said that they admired me but they were afraid themselves, they have families, children.127 Our female students were working in school number 156 on Yanki-Mavra street and they called and asked me to come. I went to the school and they said to me "We'll take you first thing tomorrow, we need someone." I went to meet the director of the school. The director said "If I give you a job, then I'll be fired within half an hour." He apologized for a long time and said that he has no political opinion and...said that he would call me, but didn't, because I think he is afraid. I understood that the education system is a closed road for me.128 In the beginning there were no problems, because I hadn't advertised the fact that I was teaching at an institute, but it was impossible to keep that secret because the students studying there talked about who was teaching them etc. Then there was talk and this reached the presidential administration. [The Institute] received inspection after inspection, from the tax inspectorate, from the Ministry of Education....In the end they [the government] said to the rectorate "If you continue to employ [Grib] we will close down the institute." I didn't want to put my interests above the interests of the institute, so that the students and lecturers [would] suffer. I said that I understood, gathered my papers...and left.129

The education sector is closed to Grib, who is now unemployed:

I am not working at the moment, because I can't find a job....In principle I could work as a lecturer...when I started to teach, other institutes found out, and I received three or four invitations to work in my spare time...But as soon as I started to teach - inspections, inspections and blunt conversation...As soon as I was dismissed, all the invitations evaporated.130

[I]t later transpired that parents amicably came to my defense and said that I was absolutely satisfactory, that they were happy with the level of education that their children were getting, therefore they are categorically against my being fired.131

The parents reportedly demanded a meeting with representatives of the school's administration, which took place on April 6. Liubov Lunyova attended the meeting:

[A] journalist from the Belapan news agency, Gennady Barbarich, came in order to take part in the meeting, and similarly a journalist from Radio Liberty, Eduard Tarlevsky also came. When [Tarlevsky] took out his microphone, they saw that there was an outsider and the administration became indignant and said that there would be no meeting with journalists present. He then took out his recorder and said "Please just tell me your surname and I'll leave. I am here at the editor's request,I need to report that you wouldn't allow me in here." Then the head (of the regional education department of the Minsk central region) [Yury E. Kanzas] went up to this journalist, grabbed him and with all his strength threw him over the table. He fell and hit the ground heavily, the microphone hit the floor and was damaged. This took place in front of the parents at the parents' meeting, it was yesterday right at the beginning of the meeting. One of the mothers started to feel ill, the scene was of course awful. The parents were sitting in a half circle and the head of the regional educational department, the educational system, leaped on him...that's how he treated the journalist.132

At the meeting, the parents reportedly demanded that Yury E. Kanzas show them the letter they had purportedly written complaining about Mukhina's teaching, which he failed to do. Mukhina subsequently brought a civil suit against the school's directors for slander and in defense of her professional honor and dignity. On April 23, 1998, Judge Zlobich rejected her claim, and on May 28 the Minsk City Court upheld his decision. As of this writing, Mukhina continues to teach at school number 37 and reportedly intends to appeal the city court's decision to the Supreme Court.

[I]t turned out that [the rector] was ill and the deputy rector was in some kind of conference. We went to the deputy rector of student administration, Nikolai Kolinkovich. He said to us that yes, we expelled them, because they disgraced the Belarusian people and the honor of our university. I said that there hadn't yet been the court hearing and that the court could acquit them. He replied "They won't be acquitted. They'll be sentenced to jail. They are criminals, and there is no place here for criminals." Then we asked how did they know that they had done something. "You don't know that they are guilty, the investigation is still ongoing." He said to us that the dean went to the police, the investigator showed him all the documents [related to the case], showed him the accusation sheet, showed him the evidence....A lawyer wouldn't be allowed to see any of that! It's a so-called "secret of the investigation."...The investigator grossly violated the law, he revealed confidential information; moreover that they have now been expelled from university, [it's] none other than pressure on the investigation, and pressure on the court. They have already named them criminals....133 Disbarments [L]egal assistance on the territory of Belarus can only be given by lawyers [who are members of] Belarusian bar associations, no other lawyers can undertake legal practice on the territory of the Republic of Belarus. During this [address] he quoted a famous presidential decree, and after that [cited] our renewed law on the bar in the Belarusian republic...in which private lawyers were abolished in the republic. All lawyers were driven into the bar associations...which are strictly subordinate to the Ministry of Justice. The Ministry of Justice will now determine the membership [of the associations] because the ministry is now carrying out the issuing of licences and the taking of qualifying exams....Entrance into the profession will be determined by the Ministry of Justice. The Ministry of Justice has the right to discipline lawyers, all the way up to the removal of their licence to practice law. There are no fines, no warnings whatsoever. They can immediately strip you of your licence for any misdemeanor, [and] defining the degree of a misdemeanor - flagrant or otherwise - is extremely subjective.136 Linked with my professional activities on a range of issues [such as] cases of a clearly political character: e.g. the case of poet Slavomir Adamovich, the case of Pavel Sheremet and the group of ORT journalists, the case of [Tamara] Vinnikova, the ex-chair of the National Bank of Belarus, and a range of other cases, I started to be openly persecuted....137 [A]s soon as I left the Minsk city bar association, I took steps toward joining one of the Russian Federation bar associations and was accepted. I passed a qualifying examination and the Presidium of the Inter-territorial Collegia of Lawyers [of the Kollegia Advokatov Rossiskoy Federatsii (The Bar Association of Lawyers of the Russian Federation)] in Moscow passed a decision accepting me. This association is in the ranks of the guild of Russian lawyers and I became a member of the international association of the lawyers' union, attained the status of a Russian lawyer and became a member of the international union of lawyers. This means that according to the law, according to international agreements, which Belarus has ratified, I have the right to undertake legal practice [in Belarus], but as a Russian lawyer.

I see no legal basis for obstructing [my giving] professional legal assistance here in Belarus, but considering the authorities' attitude toward me, I understand that anyway they will not allow me to take part in a range of cases and that they will hinder me.138

Pogonyailo's fears proved to be well-founded. On April 15, 1998, Belarus authorities barred him from representing Youth Front leader, Pavel Syverinets.139 On June 2, 1998, following a recommendation by the Qualification Commission, the Ministry of Justice stripped Pogonyailo of his licence to practice law on the grounds that byrepresenting Pavel Syverinets, he violated presidential Decree No. 12. Under the decree only members of the officially sanctioned lawyers' bar associations may practice law.

I undertook such [political] cases free of charge, and this was quite well known...it's my right to charge for my work or not. Members of the city lawyers' bar association are not allowed to work free of charge - it's forbidden. This was one of the ways to deprive these people of the services of a lawyer and thus they dismissed me to prevent me from working anymore. That's the main reason. It was also done to eradicate independent lawyers from the Republic of Belarus.142 The Minister of Justice issued a ruling, refusing to issue me a licence because on March 15, 1997, I took part in a demonstration and rally marking the third anniversary of the adoption of the 1994 constitution, which I personally signed as commissioned by the Supreme Soviet.144 [I]t was simply not possible to walk on the sidewalk, even if we had wanted to, because there were around 4 to 5,000 people and to accommodate them on two narrow sidewalks on the Yakub Kolas square was simply impossible, therefore we walked on the sidewalk and on the road.146

This technically represents a violation of Article 9, however given the circumstances it may have been unavoidable. Moreover, the size of the fine levied against Grib suggests a political motive. On March 20, under Decree No. 5, the Partisan District Court fined Grib 20,000,000 Belarusian rubles [then approximately U.S.$800], which, he told Human Rights Watch, was at the time the largest fine levied against a Belarusian citizen.147

The court held Grib responsible for organizing and actively participating in an unauthorized march that violated public order and disrupted traffic. Grib contests the allegation that he was the demonstration organizer, claiming that he signed the original application to hold the demonstration that was denied and did not organize the demonstration that actually took place.

The Anti-terrorism Decree Terrorism is understood as the use of violence or threats of violence with the aim of violating public security, destabilizing social order, intimidating the population, affecting decision- making by state bodies, or hampering political or other public activities.

Malleable terms, such as "threats" of violence with the aim of "destabilizing the social order" or "affecting decision-making by state bodies" or "hampering political or other public activities" appear tailored to elevate street gatherings or protests into grave criminal acts, depending on the authorities' subjective perception of "threat." The examples of "manifestations of terrorism" given elsewhere in Article 1 appear to bear this out:

[V]iolence or threat of violence with regard to an official, a policeman, a volunteer civilian policeman, a serviceman, or other person, in connection with his/her performance of official activity or fulfillment of public duty.

International definitions of terrorism, for example, would not embrace resisting arrest or talking back to the police, or even violent or threatening efforts to obstruct an officer performing in the line of duty.150 Given the frequent scuffles at political demonstrations, often initiated by the police themselves, the potential for political abuse of such a law is great. Article 8 of the decree, which permits an investigative officer and the prosecutor to authorize detention ofterrorism suspects for up to thirty days without charge or access to a lawyer is also cause for concern. Article 9 (4) of the ICCPR stipulates that [a]nyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings before a court, in order that that court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of his detention and order his release if the detention is not lawful." The term "without delay" has been interpreted as entailing a matter of days, not a month. Article 220 of the Belarusian criminal procedure code also entitles an accused to challenge the legality of detention.151 An extended period of detention without judicial supervision in terrorism cases, such as thirty days, increases the likelihood of coerced testimony and physical or psychological abuse, which is already a problem in ordinary criminal cases involving political protesters, as described earlier. Derogation from the protection of ICCPR Article 9 is permitted "in time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation and the existence of which is officially proclaimed,"152 but no such emergency has been proclaimed in Belarus, nor would the sporadic incidents that led to the adoption of the decree warrant such a step.

***
106 The white-red-white horizontally striped flag is the pre-Soviet national flag of Belarus. As part of the Soviet Union, Belarus was represented by a red-green flag. Following the break-up of the Soviet Union, the Twelfth Supreme Soviet in September 1991 reinstated the white-red-white flag as the national flag of the country, however, in 1995, President Lukashenka replaced it with the Soviet-era red-green flag.
107 Belarus has been a state party to the ICCPR since 1973.
108 Although Shidlovsky's beating was confirmed to Human Rights Watch researchers in an interview with his wife, Ina Pimenava, on December 6, 1997 - an allegation that Shidlovsky himself repeated in court - presiding Judge Lavrev dismissed the allegation, citing Shidlovsky's failure to lodge a formal complaint at the time the beating was alleged to have taken place. Human Rights Watch regards as negligent Judge Lavrev's failure to consult prison treatment ward records to seek corroboration of this allegation.
109 This is a standard practice in criminal trials in C.I.S. countries.
110 For example, Zhendik stated that he did not see anyone writing on the library wall, whereas Ilyushin claimed he saw Shidlovsky in the act of writing. Judge Lavrev ignored defense attempts to explore this contradiction.
111 Labkovich admitted in court that he had written some slogans, such as Svaboda [Freedom] and Zhivye Belarus [Long Live Belarus]; Shidlovsky denied writing any slogans at all, but said he pointed out government administration buildings to the others.
112 Article 26 of the ICCPR forbids discrimination on the grounds of, among other things, "political or other opinion."
113 Television coverage by the Russian NTV network on April 2 depicted a group, including Syverinets, singing, but showed no evidence of violence at the fair. One eyewitness, who declined to be identified, told Human Rights Watch that Syverinets attempted to sing using a microphone but that it had been switched off.
114 Belarus signed and ratified the Convention in 1990. Under international law, a child is a person who has not reached the age of majority according to domestic legislation. In Belarus the age of majority is eighteen.
115 Human Rights Watch interview with Dmitri Vaskovich, Minsk, April 6, 1998.
116 Ibid.
117 Article 37 (d) states: Every child deprived of his or her liberty shall have the right to prompt access to legal and other appropriate assistance as well as the right to challenge the legality of the deprivation of his or her liberty before a court or other competent, independent and impartial authority and to a prompt decision on any such action.
118 See Appendix A for a list of Youth Front members detained at demonstrations.
119 Human Rights Watch interview with Viktor Gonchar, April 7, 1998.
120 An excerpt of a letter on the commissions findings, written by Andrei Klimov, reads: "In the first half of 1998, the President of the Republic of Belarus, A. G. Lukashenka will be dismissed from his post and the state power structure that he created will be declared illegal. Taking into account that President Lukashenka's implementation of powers, according to the constitution adopted in the November 1996 referendum, represents a direct seizure of state power, all officials are obliged to refrain from fulfilling decrees and orders of the president and laws of the National Assembly." Letter reprinted in Naviny (The News) newspaper, Minsk, February 18, 1998.
121 Human Rights Watch interview with Viktor Gonchar, April 7, 1998.
122 Human Rights Watch interview with Tatiana Klimova, Minsk, February 19, 1998.
123 Klimov's lawyer, Vera Stremkovskaya, a well-known defense lawyer, claims that, with regard to the charge of building without a licence, Klimov did in fact obtain a licence, but two months after the commencement of that particular construction project.
124 Human Rights Watch interview with Viktor Gonchar, Minsk, April 7, 1998.
125 Human Rights Watch interview with Liubov Lunyova, Minsk, April 7, 1998.
126 Ibid.
127 Ibid.
128 Ibid.
129 Human Rights Watch interview with Myacheslav Grib, Minsk, April 6, 1998.
130 Ibid.
131 Human Rights Watch interview with Leonarda Mukhina, Minsk, April 7, 1998.
132 Ibid.
133 Human Rights Watch interview with Liubov Lunyova, Minsk, April 7, 1998.
134 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Nikolai Kolinkovich, June 26, 1998.
135 Human Rights Watch and Memorial interview with Ina Pimenava, Minsk, December 6, 1997.
136 Human Rights Watch interview with Garry Pogonyailo, Minsk, April 6, 1998.
137 Ibid.
138 Ibid.
139 RFE/RL Newsline vol 2, no. 73 Part II, April 16, 1998.
140 Human Rights Watch interview with Nadezhda Dudareva, Minsk, April 7, 1998. Dudareva was first charged with violating article 172 (1) of the criminal code in relation to this incident. The charge was later reduced to that of violating lawyer's ethics.
141 On December 18, 1997, Dudareva was charged with contempt of court following comments she made to Judge Nikolai Samoseiko during the November 15, 1997 trial of five BPF members: Aleksandr Bondarev, Grigory Kiyko, Anatol' Sorokin, Aleksandr Kovel', and Vladimir Liysko. The five were arrested following a March 23, 1997 demonstration at which demonstrators and police clashed. 142 Ibid.
143 For an account of Grib's dismissal from academia, see above.
144 Human Rights Watch interview with Myacheslav Grib, Minsk, April 6, 1998.
145 Interfax news agency, Moscow, cited in WNC, March 20, 1997.
146 Human Rights Watch interview, Minsk, April 6, 1998.
147 An appeal court later reduced the fine to 6,000,000 Belarusian rubles [approximately U.S.$240].
148 These incidents included: on April 1, submachine gun fire on the Russian embassy (Interfax News agency, Moscow, cited in WNC, April 2, 1997); on April 4, a minor explosion at a private residence in Minsk by bomb that was foiled in Lithuania (Itar-Tass news agency, Moscow, cited in WNC, September 5, 1997); on April 28, an explosion at a gas compressor station in Minsk region (Interfax news agency, Moscow, cited in WNC April 28, 1997); on April 30, an explosion on the Torzhok-Minsk-Ivantsevichi gas pipeline (Interfax news agency, cited in WNC, April 30, 1997); on September 10, an explosion in the Sovetsky and Minsk District People's Court building (Minsk Radio, Minsk, cited in WNC, April 30, 1997); and on October 1 the murder by radio-controlled explosion of Yevgeny Mikolutsky, head of the Mogilev State Control Committee, in the stairwell of his apartment block (Interfax news agency, Moscow, cited in WNC, October 7, 1997. Mikolutsky's wife also suffered serious injuries in the attack.) The so-called Belarusian Liberation Army claimed responsibility for the gas pipeline and compressor station attacks and the shooting at the embassy; a group calling itself "New Order" claimed responsibility for the private residence explosion. Although no group has claimed responsibility for the murder of Mikolutsky, Lukashenka has publicly accused Vasilly Leonov, the former Agriculture Minister, and collective farm manager Vasilly Starovoitov of being behind the attack (both were arrested in November 1997 on corruption and embezzlement charges).
149 Russian NTV television, Moscow, cited in WNC, May 3, 1997.
150 Terrorism is generally defined in the context of hijacking or attacks against aircraft, ships, or diplomats, or hostage-taking where the purpose is to compel a third party to perform or abstain from an act. See, e.g. the 1970 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, the 1971 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against Safety of Civil Aviation, the 1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons, Including Diplomatic Agents, or the 1979 International Convention Against the Taking of Hostages.
151 This right is delineated under Article 220 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code - The procedure to appeal an arrest or extension of the period of detention to court - and Article 220 (2) - The judicial verification of the legality and basis for arrest or extension of the period of detention.
152 ICCPR Article 4(1) and (2).

This Web page was created using a Trial Version of HTML Transit 3.0.