Statement on the recognition of 14 people as political prisoners

Joint statement by the Belarusian human rights community

August 22, 2024

We, the representatives of the Belarusian Human Rights Community, note that criminal liability for "incitement of hatred" under Article 130 of the Criminal Code has been selectively and discriminatorily applied by investigators and courts only to protect the authorities. Moreover, it seems unreasonable to label government officials, police officers, military personnel, etc. as separate social groups under protection in this context.

We insist that it is unacceptable to apply a law aimed to protect government officials, law enforcement officers, and judges from threats in connection with the lawful performance of their duties to punish those citizens who have spoken out in connection with the clear violation of the Constitution and law by state institutions, the involvement of government officials, prosecutors and judges in torture and in creating a climate of impunity for torture and other human rights violations, often showing signs of crimes against humanity.

According to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in the determination of any criminal charge against him, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. All or part of the public may be excluded from a trial for reasons of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, or when the interest of the private lives of the parties so requires, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice. In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, the proceedings should be open to the general public, including representatives of the media, and should not, for example, be limited to a certain category of persons. Even in cases where the public is denied access to the hearing, the court decision, including the main conclusions, evidence, and legal arguments, should be made public. The court did not fulfill these requirements in the case of the persons mentioned, which could determine the attitude of human rights defenders to the hearing results.

We also recall our position, expressed in the Declaration of the Human Rights Community, that the violation of para. 3 of Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights would be to invoke treason laws and similar laws relating to national security, official secrets, anti-subversion, to withhold or conceal from the public information of legitimate public interest that does not threaten national security, and to prosecute journalists, researchers, environmentalists, human rights defenders or others for disseminating such information.

We are aware of the conviction of:

• Stanislau Shapel under Article 356 of the Criminal Code in a closed trial on the provoked and far-fetched charge of treason; he was sentenced to imprisonment;
• Dzmitry Pazniakou under Article 356 of the Criminal Code in a closed session on the charge of treason to imprisonment;
• Anton Sharupa under Article 130 of the Criminal Code for inciting "other social hatred" for critical statements on the Internet;
• Vital Sauko under Article 130 of the Criminal Code for inciting "other social hatred" for critical statements on the Internet;
• Barys Hrynkevich under Articles 342, 361-1, 130, 368, 369 of the Criminal Code on charges of organizing and preparing actions that grossly violate public order, or actively participating in them, insulting a government official and A. Lukashenka, creating an extremist formation or participating in it, inciting other social hatred;
• Andrei Mireichyk under Articles 361, 369, 368, 361-1, 130, 179 of the Criminal Code on charges of calling for actions aimed at harming the national security of the Republic of Belarus, insulting a government official and A. Lukashenka, creating an extremist formation or participating in it, inciting other social hatred, collecting and disseminating information about private life in publications on the Internet; he was sentenced to imprisonment;
• Andrei Hryhoryeu, Viktoryia Vouchak, Hanna Savachkina in a closed court session under Articles 295, 361-1, 356, 333-1, 361-3 of the Criminal Code on charges of illegal actions with firearms, ammunition and explosives, creation of an extremist formation or participation in it, high treason, terrorist act, illegal transfer of weapons across the border, preparation of a citizen of the Republic of Belarus on the territory of a foreign state in military actions without the authorization of the state; he was sentenced to imprisonment;
• Tatsiana Rusak in a closed trial under Article 356 of the Criminal Code on charges of high treason to imprisonment;
• Uladzislau Navazhantsau under Articles 369, 368, 130 of the Criminal Code for insulting a government official and A. Lukashenka, inciting hatred for statements made on the Internet, to imprisonment;
• Dzianis Sakalou under Article 289 of the Criminal Code on charges of an act of terrorism - involvement in the attack on a Russian military aircraft at the Mačuliščy air base.

The authorities unreasonably use detention in the absence of sufficient grounds, which restricts personal freedom: as the UN Human Rights Committee notes, "remand in custody on criminal charges must be reasonable and necessary in all the circumstances." “Detention in custody of persons awaiting trial shall be the exception rather than the rule. […] release from such custody may be subject to guarantees of appearance, including appearance for trial, appearance at any other stage of the judicial proceedings and (should occasion arise) appearance for execution of the judgment. This suggestion concerns persons awaiting trial on criminal charges, that is, after the indictment, but a similar requirement, covering the period before the indictment, follows from the prohibition of arbitrary arrest... It should not be the general practice to subject defendants to pretrial detention. Detention should be based on a case-by-case decision that it is justified and necessary, taking into account all the circumstances, for purposes such as preventing escape, interfering with the process of collecting evidence or recidivism of the crime... The relevant factors should be spelled out in the law and should not contain vague and broad standards such as "public danger"... Pre-trial detention should be applied not on the basis of a possible sentence, but on the basis of determining the need for this measure of restraint."

It is also known about the detention of:

• Vilen Turhunau under Articles 361, 130, 367 of the Criminal Code on charges of calling for actions aimed at harming the national security of the Republic of Belarus, slandering A. Lukashenka, inciting hatred;
• Dzmitry Asiyuk, whose case is being considered by the court in a closed session under Articles 289, 309, 295, 207 of the Criminal Code on charges of committing an act of terrorism, intentionally disrupting communications, illegal actions with ammunition and explosives.

Having studied these criminal prosecution cases, we concluded that all of them are politically motivated.

According to the Guidelines on the Definition of Political Prisoners, a person deprived of liberty is to be regarded as a political prisoner, if at least one of the following criteria is observed:

• the detention has been imposed in violation of the right to a fair trial, other rights and freedoms guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
• the person has been detained in a discriminatory manner as compared to other persons.

We, representatives of the Belarusian human rights community, declare that further imprisonment of Stanislau Shapel, Dzmitry Pazniakou, Anton Sharupa, Vital Sauko, Barys Hrynkevich, Andrei Mireichyk, Andrei Hryhoryeu, Viktoryia Vouchak, Hanna Savachkina, Tatsiana Rusak, Uladzislau Navazhantsau, Dzianis Sakalou, Vilen Turhunau, Dzmitry Asiyuk is politically motivated, and they themselves are political prisoners.

We demand from the Belarusian authorities:

• review the sentences and preventive measures imposed on these political prisoners, while ensuring the right to a fair trial and eliminating the factors that affected the categorizing of actions, the type and severity of punishment;
• release the mentioned political prisoners by taking other measures to ensure their appearance in court;
• immediately release all political prisoners, review politically motivated sentences and end political repression against citizens.

Human Rights Center Viasna;

Legal Initiative;

Belarusian Association of Journalists;

Office for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.