The Constitutional Court of the country represented by the head of the secretariat Alexander Karavai refused to make the legal position of the court relating to the limitation and the protection of private property rights. This Court requested the human rights activist Leonid Svetik.
The formal reason for evasion of constitutional judicial body the decision of questions put to him was the lack of a human rights activist power of attorney to represent the interests of citizens in the court in which the local authorities had expropriated private property (buildings and land) for public use.
In his address, the human rights activist informed the Constitutional Court that he was constantly complaining citizens who local authorities have been withdrawn for public use land located on them residential and outbuildings. Such cases are not isolated. Only in 2014-2015 with similar complaints to Leonid addressed more than 20 residents of the northern capital.
"For me it is obvious that the government and the courts violated the constitutional rights of citizens in the field of ownership of private property. In particular, it violates Article 13, 29, 44, 48, 60 of the current Constitution of the country – the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus", – says Leonid Svetik.
The articles referred to the human rights activist, confirmed the existence of both public and private property. According to the Constitution, the State assumes responsibility for the safety of the rights of ownership and disposal of its own citizens.
Moreover, the Belarusian Constitution clearly states that the expropriation of property is permitted only for reasons of social necessary, subject to certain conditions of law and order her weaning. And the alienation of private property can only be ordered by a competent, independent and impartial court within the statutory period, and must be accompanied by the removal of the very full and timely compensation for the cost of the expropriated property.
But in practice, according to the Vitebsk human rights activist, it works differently. Often eminent domain is accompanied by a violation of constitutional principles.
A typical incident that proves the existence of such violations, according to Leonid Svetsik is the latest case of mass weaning their subsequent demolition of more than 70 villas residents of Vitebsk. These cottages are located in the area of possible flooding waters of the reservoir, which will arise at the end of the construction of the Vitebsk hydroelectric. The owners of summer cottages do not agree with the fact of how weaning suburban areas and residential buildings as well as to the amount of compensation for their withdrawal for state needs.
Human rights activist, raise concerns indifference of the Constitutional Court to the problems faced by citizens in the seizure of their private property authorities. After all, respect for the rights of citizens to own and dispose of property is one of the fundamental principles of the state system, which ensures the stability and social peace in society.
"Absent from the rapid response to the violation of the constitutional rights of citizens in the area of property rights, the Constitutional Court is not conducive to a civilized resolution of problems detract from its credibility and undermines confidence in themselves and their decisions," – says human rights activist.
Vitebsk Spring
