viasna on patreon

"Sticker case" falls apart due to absence of evidence

2013 2013-03-07T17:29:00+0300 1970-01-01T03:00:00+0300 en https://spring96.org./files/images/sources/sluck-amialkovich.jpg The Human Rights Center “Viasna” The Human Rights Center “Viasna”
The Human Rights Center “Viasna”
Vital Amialkovich

Vital Amialkovich

On 28 February the administrative commission at Slutsk District Executive Committee dropped the administrative case against Vital Amialkovich because of the impossibility to prove his guilt.

The activist was charged with posting stickers on a pole near a shop. The commission declared him guilty of violation of the rules of housing and amenities, adopted by Slutsk District Executive Committee, two times, and sentenced him to a fine of one million rubles. Being dissatisfied with such a ruling, Vasil Amialkovich appealed it at Slutsk District Court.

The incident took place back in the night of 14 July, when Mr. Amialkovich was detained by a policeman who allegedly saw him posting stickers. The policeman didn't introduce himself and for the next few months the activist couldn't find out his surname and position. Only during the second sitting of the commission he learned that it was the head of Slutsk District Police Department, Aliaksei Strom.

Slutsk District Court returned the case for revision by the administrative commission for two reasons: a mismatch in the dates indicated in the case materials and the absence of witnesses at the trial.

Nevertheless, none of the stated witnesses appeared at the third sitting of the commission either. Vital Amialkovich presented to the commission an answer from Slutsk District Prosecutor's Office according to which the rules of housing and amenities didn't enter into legal force because of the failure of Slutsk District Executive Committee to publish them in the "Slutski Krai" newspaper.

Due to such circumstances, the administrative commission at Slutsk District Executive Committee had to drop the administrative proceedings against Mr. Amialkovich due to the impossibility to prove his guilt. He was presented an appropriate ruling on 5 March. Thus, it took the activist seven months to prove his innocence.

Latest news

Partnership

Membership