Miklós Haraszti: Belarus Shows “Lipstick Measures On Face Of Violations”

The “elections” of September 11 are as non-free as all the previous campaigns.

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus Miklós Haraszti has expressed his attitude to the parliamentary elections held in Belarus in the statement published at the website of the United Nations office in Geneva.

“Despite the admission of a token oppositionist there was no real difference between last Sunday’s parliamentary elections and all the previous ones carried out in Belarus,” – the human rights center “Viasna” quotes the UN Special Rapporteur spring96.org.

Miklós Haraszti underlines that the smooth-looking conduct of parliamentary elections in Belarus on 11 September 2016 should not eclipse the underlying systemic violations. He thinks that the elections proved a clear lack of political will to promote and protect human rights in Belarus.

“I commend the absence of violence so far, and the somewhat extended opportunities allowed for candidates to hold their meetings.

However, citizens’ right to a free and fair election continued to be abused in the grip of entrenched repressive laws and institutions, just as in previous parliamentary or presidential elections.

I am aware of reports of intimidation, fraud, manipulations and opacity. Especially egregious is the growth in fictitiously claimed turnout during the non-transparent early voting, a four-day process based on coercion of army conscripts, students, and state clerks,” – writes the UN Special Rapporteur.

According to Miklós Haraszti, “Even the election of the opposition candidate exhibited the fully guided character of the electoral process”.

The UN expert says that the “election” of the UCP representative made her a victim of a cynical ploy, as it was done by “post-factum adjustments of the results” using a threefold magnification of the turnout.

According to Miklós Haraszti, Hanna Kanapatskaya’s “deputy mandate” remains a maneuver which is supposed to show that “the system of government-decided results has not changed”.

“The move also aimed at sowing discord among the opposition parties.

It is regrettable that Belarus did not take into account real changes towards equal media access, verifiable turnout, honest vote count, and a pluralistic parliament,” - Miklós Haraszti summarizes his position.