29 March 2024, Friday, 2:18
Support
the website
Sim Sim,
Charter 97!
Categories

Andrzej Poczobut: What has Mikhalchanka got that Kiselyov haven't got?

Andrzej Poczobut: What has Mikhalchanka got that Kiselyov haven't got?

Lifting visa sanctions against a Belarusian propagandist Alyaksei Mikhalchanka triggers questions about coherence of the EU policy.

It’s an opinion of a Belarusian journalist, a former political prisoner Andrezej Poczobut. In an interview to charter97.org he told that though that ruling of the court is purely legal in nature, however it demonstrates internal contradictions in the EU, as long as reasonableness of immediate political reaction to events in authoritarian countries is concerned.

- The Court of the European Union in Luxemburg decided that Mikhalchanka is not an influential journalist, making a conclusion that his TV programmes do not influence the Belarusian reality. I do not know whether he is going to be happy about such conclusions, as the situation seems to be different to him.

- What consequences of such a decision by the Court of the European Union could be in the context of the events in the region?

- This issue concerns the reaction policy of the EU to the events in the world by imposing visa sanctions. Now there is a “notorious” Dmitry Kiselyov, who has been put on the European black list as well, and he is doing the same things Mikhalchanka had been doing then: it’s propaganda, enmity, and so on. It seems to me that after this precedent the gates are now thrown open for Kiselyov to insist on lifting the sanctions against him as well. As according to the court’s opinion, Mikhalchanka had been punished undeservedly, why Kiselyov has to suffer? It seems to me the most interesting consequence of this court ruling. Imposing visa sanctions was a political reaction of the European Union to the events in Belarus, and now they respond to the events in Ukraine in the same way. And it turns out that such a political reaction is not just, from the point of view of the court. It is a question to the EU as a whole about coherence of its policy.

- Does the renewed dialogue between the West and Lukashenka influence such decisions of democratic institutions in any way?

- It’s Europe, and the Court of the European Union doesn't take orders from anyone, no negotiations can influence them. There is absolutely no connection between these two things, I think there is some internal pedantry of the European Union and European law. I am not inclined to dramatize and look for some political explanation. And we should congratulate Mikhalchanka. It is not an everyday occasion when a functionary of an authoritarian state uses democratic procedures for its own benefit so effectively. And he criticizes these democratic procedures harshly, in fact, he is fighting against them inside Belarus. And it is the most interesting thing. And it’s not so important whether he is going to go abroad or not… And as an individual, and as a journalist, I do not care about that at all, it's all the same to me.

- Do you think that lifting visa sanctions against Mikhalchanka is just?

- It’s a question to lawyers who represented the European Union at this trial. I do not have doubts that the court is ruled by the law, but courts in Europe are of a competitive type, and it means that the both sides are trying to convince of their positions. That is why one should ask questions to lawyers representing the EU about that.

Fundamentally, I do not consider visa sanctions such a powerful instrument of pressure. I saw one or two programmes of Mikhalchanka, and I can agree with the European Court in one thing: it is really not an influential figure. I learnt about his existence only after visa sanctions had been slapped on him.

Write your comment

Follow Charter97.org social media accounts