"Your actions are correctly qualified in accordance with Part 1 of Art. 23.34 of the Code of Administrative Offenses ... There are no grounds for repealing or changing the regulations, "the chairman of the regional court Nikolai Hamichenok said after reviewing the supervisory complaint of human rights activist Leonid Svetik, who was punished by 15 days of administrative arrest for taking part in events that took place in Viciebsk 25 and 26 March.
The appeal of the judge Tatyana Zhuravkova of the Oktyabrsky District Court of Viciebsk as a second appeal of the human rights activist was to appeal against the decision taken against him. Earlier, while serving an administrative arrest in a temporary detention facility, he managed to send a complaint to the regional court through a lawyer, but the judge of the regional court Irina Smolyakova also found no grounds for changing the said decision.
In his supervisory complaint, Leonid Svetik expressed disagreement with the decisions made regarding his case, since, in his opinion, his actions lacked the composition of the offense provided for in Article 23.34 of the Code of Administrative Offenses.
He noted that he was actually on the square during the rallies there on March 25 and 26, but in no way expressed his "public and political interests", but was present there for the performance of his public duties as a human rights defender, watching the actions of protesters and government officials Has carried out legitimate activities aimed at achieving the statutory goals of the Republican Human Rights Public Association "Belarusian Helsinki Committee", of which he is a member.
This argument of the human rights activist seemed unconvincing to the chairman of the regional court Hamichenok. "The goal of these events was your public expression of the socio-political position," he wrote in response to a complaint to Leonid Svetik, without explaining the basis for such a conclusion. "Being in the place of holding a mass event and acting in concert with other citizens, you expressed your sociopolitical interests."
The rest of the arguments of the human rights activist were left without any attention by Mr. Hamichenok. So, he did not give any assessment to the fact that the court did not question the main and important witnesses Dudkin and Sinkevich – the police officers, who made reports against Leonid Svetik.
The head of the Viciebsk regional court completely ignored him and charged with lying to Judge Zhuravkova, who wrote down in the information part of the decree that Svetik is dependent on two minor children, which is not true, since he has one minor child (17 years) and one (9 years) is a minor, which is another legal status in the administrative process.
"The legislator has foreseen that the presence of a minor child who is dependent on him is a circumstance mitigating the responsibility for imposing administrative penalties ... However, based on the false basis that I have only two minor children dependent on me, Judge Zhuravkova delivers the maximum punishment without finding circumstances that mitigate a responsibility. Moreover, I think that Judge Zhuravkova in her decision grossly violated the rights of my young child – Arseniy Svetik, depriving him of 15 days of parental care, thereby putting the child in a potentially dangerous situation," – this part of the human rights lawyer Mr. Hamichenok decided "to not notice".
Justifying the justice of the penalty of Leonid Svetik, the chairman of the Viciebsk regional court referred to the Law on Mass Events, according to which street actions are carried out with the permission of the local executive and administrative body. "In connection with the legislative consolidation of the procedure for holding mass events, a permit is required, which confirms the inconsistency of your actions both with the legislation of the Republic of Belarus and with the international one," the chief judge of the region told Viciebsk human rights activist.
What kind of "international law" is meant, the distinguished chairman of the regional court did not bother to explain. Maybe he wanted to say about the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights? However, article 21 of the Covenant, which deals with the right to peaceful assembly, does not speak of any permits from the authorities. And the general conclusion of the Venice Commission and the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights concerning the Law on Mass Events of the Republic of Belarus generally contains a recommendation to bring this law into line with international standards to abolish the system for requesting permission from the state authorities for holding meetings.
Kastus Dzvinski
