Brief review of the process of Belarusian anarchists

Содержание

<h2>Brief review of the process of Belarusian anarchists</h2>

<div class="meta">
			03.06.2011						 Tags: <a href="/en/tags/219">criminal persecution</a>			
			
					</div>

<div class="image_container" style="width: 190px;" >
			<a href="/content/freekid/24243.jpg" rel="lightbox" title=""><img src="/content/freekid/24243.jpg" alt="" style="width: 180px;" /></a>
					</div>
Source: http://spring96.org/en/news/43788
				
		<div class="text">
		The preliminary investigation into the criminal case
was accompanied with serious process violations of the convicts' rights,
including: arbitrary detention, violations of the terms and procedures of
detention established by the Criminal-Process Code of the Republic of Belarus (CPC),
violation of the right to defense, and violation of the presumption of
innocence. The detention of I.Alinevich in Moscow and his transportation to the
KGB pre-trial prison in Minsk were accompanied with violations of legal
procedures including the procedure of extradition of Belarusian citizens to
Belarus from the Russian Federation. 
 
During the trial, I.Alinevich, M.Dziadok and A.Frantskevich stated that
unlawful methods were used towards them during the preliminary investigation,
including psychological pressurization and torture. Several witnesses, who
refused from the testimonies given during the preliminary investigation, also
stated about the use of torture towards them. 
 
The principle of the equality of sides in the presentation of evidence was
ignored during the trial, which had a negative impact on the objectivity and
impartiality of the court proceedings. 
 
In such circumstances the Human Rights Center Viasna states that: gross
violations of the convicts' rights give reasons to think that the trial wasn't
objective and impartial, and the issued verdicts are groundless and unlawful;

violations of rights of the convicts make it impossible to consider them as
lawfully convicted; 
 
the verdicts that were issued in such circumstances must be abolished and
reviewed. 
 
The preliminary investigation into this case was accompanied with grave process
violations including: 
 
Arbitrary detentions and violations of legal procedures. 
 
The investigation committed gross violations of process rights of the
accused since the initiation of the case. On 3 September 2010 about 50 people
were detained all over the country. The main reason for the detention was not
existence of sufficient grounds, determined by the CPC, but their membership in
civil movements, mainly of ecological and anarchist nature. The detentions were
conducted with violations of the terms that are determined by the CPC. The
unlawful procedure of &ldquo;re-detention&rdquo; was used towards some of the detainees:
they weren't released after three days of detention &ndash; a new detention report
was composed against each detainee instead of it. In particular, M.Dziadok was
detained 7 times (and spent a total of 21 days in detention), and the majority
of the detainees were detained 3 times (and spent 9 days in detention).

The accused Ihar Alinevich was forcibly kidnapped in Moscow by representatives
of unidentified secret services and taken to the pre-trial prison of the KGB in
Minsk. His detention was conducted with violation of the established
procedures, including the procedure of extradition of Belarusian citizens from
the Russian Federation. 
 
This practice witnesses that unlawful and arbitrary detentions were used
towards the accused. It is a gross violation of the International Covenant of Civil
and Political Rights, ratified by the Republic of Belarus. 
 
 
Right to defense 
 
As a result of the practice of &ldquo;re-detention&rdquo; during which each new
detention was conducted by another organ of preliminary investigation, the
accused were often deprived of the possibility to exercise their right to legal
defense. The counsels were unable to receive any information about the location
of their clients for several days. Neither were they able to find which
investigation organ was responsible for the investigation at a concrete period
of time.

For instance, A.Frantskevich's counsel didn't receive any information about his
client and meet with him for three days. I.Alinevich was also deprived of the
right to legal defense during his detention by representatives of unidentified
secret services in Moscow and transportation to Belarus. As a result, he had no
opportunity to appeal his detention. 
 
Meanwhile, the CPC guarantees the right to access to legal defense within 24
hours since the moment of detention. These circumstances witness that the
defendants' right to legal defense was grossly violated, despite the guarantees
provided by Article 62 of the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus and the
ICCPR. 
 
Psychological pressurization, tortures, cruel and inhuman treatment 
 
During the court hearings, I.Alinevich, M.Dziadok and A.Frantskevich stated
about psychological pressurization and tortures, demands to confess their guilt
and give false testimonies against other people. Such actions of the
investigation were also confirmed by the witnesses Ihar Bahachyk, Aliaksandr
Buhayou, Kseniya Kauko, Anton Novikau, Siarhei Sliusar, Aliaksei Zhynherouski
and Dzianis Bystryk (whose testimony wasn't read in the court). 
 
In particular, M.Dziadok stated that the investigation had threatened him with
psychical lynching, trouble in the prison cell and in the prison where he would
serve his term. He also called the surname of one of the police officers &ndash;
lieutenant colonel Yaroshyn. Aliaksandr Frantskevich stated that the investigation
had forced him to confess his guilt and give false testimony against others,
threatening with a large prison term otherwise. Ihar Alinevich told how he had
been kidnapped from Moscow: he had been transported in handcuffs for one day
and a cap had been pulled on his eyes during a part of the travel.

At the very beginning, he wasn't interrogated at the pre-trial prison of the
KGB. Instead, he was forced to confess his guilt and subject to psychological
pressurization by means of improvised telephone calls to his grandmother in the
night time. Aliaksei Zhynherouski (a witness, who used to be an accused for
quite a long time) was threatened with a long prison term and problems in the
family and at the place of study. He was interrogated at the KGB without having
any counsel, and was threatened that he wouldn't be let out. 
 
The investigators shouted on witness Kseniya Kauko during an interrogation that
lasted for one day,&nbsp; trying to make her
give a false testimony against M.Dziadok. Witness Ihar Bahatchyk also stated
about pressurization on the part of the KGB and the Main Bureau of
counteraction to organized crime. He was forced to give a false testimony
against M.Dziadok, was threatened with problems at the places of work of study,
and trouble at the places of work of his parents (who were summonsed to
interrogations as well). He was also threatened with sexual harassment in the
prison in Akrestsin Street. 
 
While interrogating convict Aliaksandr Buhayou in Revaliutsyinaya Street,
investigator Litvinski hit him with a truncheon in face and patella. Threats
were also used towards witness Siarhei Sliusar. Witness Anton Novik also told
about process violations and pressurization on the part of the investigation.
All aforementioned people spent some time in detention. 
 
The accused M.Dziadok and A.Frantskevich had serious health problems.
Nevertheless, they were kept in custody for a long time, and received untimely
and insufficient medical aid. 
 
These facts raise doubts in the reliability of the testimonies given by the
convicts and the witnesses during the preliminary investigation, whose
materials became the basis for the accusative court verdicts.

Violation of the principle of equality of sides on presentation of evidence
at the trial 
 
The principle of the equality of sides in presentation of evidence wasn't
observed to a full extent during the court proceedings. Substantial motions of
the defense, including motions for the interrogation of witnesses, were often
dismissed by the court, which had a negative impact on the objectivity of the
trial and witnessed its accusative bias. 
 
According to human rights defenders, a part of the charges which served as the
basis for the accusative verdicts, don't contain corpus delicti. It concerns
the episode, incriminated to I.Alinevich, M.Dziadok and A.Frantskevich, that
concerned the protest rally held on 19 September 2009 near the General Staff of
the armed forces of the Republic of Belarus. During the rally, a smoke pot was
thrown to the territory of the General Staff. This unauthorized rally was
essentially peaceful and was aimed at expression of protest against the joint
Russian-Belarusian military training that were held in Belarus at that time.
Though throwing of the smoke pot to the territory of the General Staff contained
corpus delicti of an offense, it didn't present any danger to life and health
of citizens, didn't lead to disorganization of the work of this institution and
didn't inflict any material damage. According to our opinion, these actions of
the convicts do not constitute corpus delicti of any offense punishable by the
Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus (CC). 
 
 
Reference: 
 
On 24 May 2010 the Zavadski District Court of Minsk considered the criminal
case of I.Alinevich (charged on 5 episodes under Article 339, part of the CC,
&ldquo;hooliganism, committed by a group of individuals, and Article 218, parts 2 and
3 of the CC, &ldquo;damage of property in a generally dangerous way and in an
especially large scale&rdquo;), M.Dziadok (charged on 3 episodes, under Article 339,
part 2 and 218, part 2), A.Frantskevich (charged on 4 episodes under Article
339, part 2, Article 218, part 2, Article 349, part 2, &ldquo;unauthorized access to
computer information&rdquo;, Article 351, &ldquo;computer sabotage, accompanied with
unauthorized access to a computer system&rdquo; and Article 354, &ldquo;creation, use or
distribution of harmful software&rdquo;), Ya.Silivonchyk (charged on 1 episode in
Salihorsk under under Article 339, part 2 and Article 218, part 2) and M.Vetkin
(charged on 2 episodes under Article 339, part 2 and Article 218, part 3).

On 27 May 2011, according to the announced verdict: 
 
Ihar Alinevich was sentenced to 8 years in a medium-security colony with
confiscation of his car; 
 
Mikalai Dziadok &ndash; to 3 years in in a medium-security colony; 
 
Yauhen Silivonchyk &ndash; 1.5 years of personal restraint;

Maksim Vetkin &ndash; to 4 years of personal restraint. 
 
Charges under Article 218, part 2 of the Criminal Code were dropped in a number
of accusative episodes. The charges of assault on the delinquents' isolation
center on 6 September 2010 were removed as well.		</div>

Powered by Free Software, including Ruby programming language, PostgreSQL database. Samizdat engine is free software; you can distribute/modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 3 or later.