Only the third attempt to apply to a court of Polotsk, the judge considered the written request of a citizen to allow him to take pictures during the trial, but to satisfy the request was denied. It happened on March 20 at the court's consideration of the claim to the store manager for former employees to compensate the shortage identified in the audit.
On the performance of 16 years, any citizen has the right to go to court and present in any open court. According to Belarusian law, a citizen who came to the trial, may ask the judge to allow taking pictures during the trial. But to realize this right was not so easy.
Polochanin Victor, who came to the court to hear the trial proceedings, filed a first application for permission to photograph in the office of the court for half an hour before the hearing. Beginning of the trial, Judge Irina Dorodko did not react to this statement.
During the break, the court hearing, the court clerk said that the statement was sent to the chairman of the court, and the answer is 15 days. This course of events Victor did not satisfy. Here, in the break, it was written a second application - specifically the judge Dorodko with the same request: allow photography.
The judge, who came after the break, looking at the statement, asked Victor: "And who are you?" - What Victor replied, "The statement is written -" a citizen of Belarus, which is not a party to the litigation. '" What the judge said, "Take this piece of paper ..." - please citizen was not considered.
After the lunch break, Victor filed in the office of the court a third application. It was addressed to the judge Dorodko and contained the same request - with reference to the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Belarus on December 20, 2013 № 11 "On ensuring public." In this ruling states that persons who are not parties to the trial, and journalists turn to the court to (statement) for permission to photograph and video.
Continuing the hearing, the judge stated that "received duly executed application of the citizen", but a request for photographing are not satisfied. An application for taking pictures and shooting video fed and participants in the trial, former employees of the store being sued director, but their petitions were not satisfied by the court. The representative objected to the store manager of the photography.
Free trade union lawyer, admitted at this meeting in a lawsuit to protect workers, Nikolai Sharah supported an application for taking pictures and shooting video, saying: "I think the public has a right to know how to pass the hearings, and how protected the rights of workers, as asserted their interests in court. "
That's the way in Polotsk court provided publicity about the activities of the courts for the dissemination of reliable information.
Despite the ban on photographing the court during the session, before the trial and in his breaks the ban was not, and Victor managed to make some legitimate images in the courtroom. None of those present did not mind.
Alexander Morozov
