Andrei Sannikov: Lukashenka must quit for eavesdropping on my phone talks alone

The presidential candidate has filed a complaint to the Prosecutor General’s office.

The text of the petition of Andrei Sannikov, a political prisoner, sentenced to 5 years’ imprisonment in a medium-security correctional labour colony for a protest rally against rigged election results, has been given to charter97.org website by the wife of the presidential candidate Iryna Khalip.

The presidential candidate protests against illegal eavesdropping on his phone conversations in the period preceding and following the election campaign. According to Andrei Sannikov, “in any state where the reign of law exists, such actions of one of the candidates against his opponent lead to his removal from the election race, and in case with an acting president, to impeachment or vacation of the position. One can just recall Watergate and President Nixon’s resignation.”

Here is the full text of the statement:

“From the materials of the criminal case opened after the peaceful rally on December 19, 2010 I found out that on authorization of the deputies of prosecutor general, N.I. Kuklis and M. A. Lashyn my phone conversations were eavesdropped and phonograms transcribed at least since July 28, 2010. It provided the basis for illegal verdict of guilty. I believe that law-enforcing agencies did not have any legal grounds for that as of July 28, 2010, which is confirmed by absence of transcripts of conversations in the period of July 28-December 20 among the materials of the case.

I find this a gross violation of my constitutional rights.

Eavesdropping took place in the period when I was an officially registered candidate for presidency. Moreover, my phones on the place of my registration and actual domicile were wiretapped, as well as the phones of my family members, my wife being among them, and phones of my team members.

As it has become obvious from the materials of the case, investigation and court, that massive eavesdropping, circulation control and so on had been taking place, in order to exert pressure on me, and to obtain information about my campaign. Thus, the state agencies which are subject to the pro-regime candidate and were working for his campaign had been constantly receiving full information about my actions and plans.

In any state where the reign of law exists, such actions of one of the candidates against his rival lead to his removal from the election race, and in case with an acting president, to impeachment or vacation of the position. One can just recall Watergate and President Nixon’s resignation.

During the election campaign 2010 state authorities under control, and possibly by a direct order of one of the candidates were engaged in illegal activities. It is a gross violation of the Constitution and the principle of equal opportunity proclaimed by the Law on Election.

In the view of the above, I ask to check the legality of telephone interception, give legal evaluation of the actions of the relevant authorities, and also workers of the prosecutor’s office, and to inform me about the grounds for such actions,” Andrei Sannikov stated.