How Homel Residents Defend Their Rights In UN

The UN Committee considered the claims of 13 Homel residents, 9 new communications were accepted for consideration.

Head of the Homel Center for Strategic Litigation Leanid Sudalenka prepared a digest of individual communications that were considered during the year 2017 in the UN Human Rights Committee, as well as communications prepared by the organization last year and taken for consideration.

In total, in the course of 2017, the UN Human Rights Committee considered the claims of 13 Homel residents, under 9 new communications, the contact with the government of Belarus was started, Homelspring.org writes.

Zinaida Shumilina and others (11 people in total) vs Belarus (case #2142/2012)

At the 120th session of the UN Human Rights Committee in Geneva in July 2017, the UN HRC recognized that the Belarusian authorities violated the rights of twelve Homel activists of the United Civil Party (UCP) to hold peaceful assemblies and express opinions. International experts noted that “the actual ban on holding peaceful assemblies in any public place of Homel, except for one in a remote area, unduly restricts the right to freedom of assembly and freedom of expression.” They also criticized and called the “exorbitant burden” the obligation to make agreements for the services of the police, doctors and public utilities.

Dzmitry Karashkou vs Belarus (case #2168/2012)

At the 121st session of the UN Human Rights Committee in Geneva in November 2017, the UN HRC acknowledged that the Belarusian authorities violated the rights of Homel activist of the REP trade union Dzmitry Karashkou during his participation in peaceful assemblies, known as “People's Gatherings”. The decision also found a violation of his right to express his opinion and stated that the government could not provide an effective remedy to the victim of violations.

In the UN Human Rights Committee's decision, it is noted that “by limiting the rights of a specific citizen, the state is obliged to demonstrate, for the achievement of what purpose it imposed these restrictions, every time.” The international experts came to the conclusion about the violation of the right to peaceful assembly and expression of opinion, in this case. They also established the fact of the non-provision of effective remedies to the victim.

Leanid Sudalenka vs Belarus (case #2929/2017)

On August 25, 2015, the human rights activist returned by train from Vilnius to Minsk. In Maladechna, he was dragged from the train with physical force and sent to an in-depth search, suspecting of extremism. Having passed all domestic remedies, Sudalenka appealed to the UN Human Rights Committee (UNCHR) on the violation of the right to freedom of movement and non-interference in private life. The complaint was registered on January 19, 2017 and sent to the government of Belarus for a comment.

Kanstantsin Zhukouski vs Belarus (case #2955/2017)

During 2016, freelance journalist from Homel Kanstantsin Zhukouski was subjected to major administrative fines (totaling about $ 2 000 during the year) six times for work without accreditation for the Belsat TV channel. Having gone through all domestic remedies, he filed a complaint with the UN HRC about the violation of his right to receive and disseminate information. On February 15, 2017 the complaint was registered and sent to the Government of Belarus for a comment.

Mikalai Ulasevich vs Belarus (case #2960/2017)

In 2016, resident of Astravets, Ashmiany district Mikalai Ulasevich was nominated as a candidate for “deputies” of the “parliament” from the United Civil Party (UCP). After registration, the candidate was denied broadcasting the pre-election program on TV and in its publication in the regional newspaper. The ex-candidate filed a complaint with the court, but it was also declined it due to nonjurisdiction of pre-election disputes to the court. On March 5, 2017, his complaint for denial of justice, violation of the right to freedom of expression and the right to be elected in free elections was registered. Currently, the communication with the Government of Belarus over this complaint is in progress.

Siarhei Kasabutski and others (4 people in total) vs Belarus (case #2968/2017)

On May 28, 2016 Siarhei Kasabutski, together with other citizens, with an aim to turn the public attention to the reduction of the wages of hired workers in Belarus, appealed to the Homel city executive committee with a request to hold peaceful meetings in the city, which they were denied. On February 27, 2017, after a refusal in a peaceful assembly, a group of citizens filed a complaint with the UN Committee on the violation of the right to express opinions and peaceful assemblies. On March 15, the complaint was registered and sent to the government of Belarus for a comment.

Uladzimir Katsora vs Belarus (case #3002/2017)

On April 27, 2017 Uladzimir Katsora appealed to the UN Committee on the fact of administrative arrest for 12 days for his participation in protests against the scandalous decree on “social parasites.” The complaint was made about the violation of the right to express opinions and peaceful assembly. On July 6, 2017, the first so-called parasite complaint was registered in the UN Human Rights Committee and sent to the government of Belarus for a comment.

Volha Nikalaichyk vs Belarus (case #3056/2017)

On February 7, 2017, on the fact of large fines for pickets (the total amount of fines during 2016 is about $ 1500) Volha Nikalaichyk appealed to the UN Committee on Human Rights with a complaint about violation of the right to express opinions and peaceful assemblies. On November 29, 2017 her complaint was registered and sent to the government of Belarus for a comment.

Zinaida Shumilina, Vasil Paliakou, Uladzimir Niapomniashchykh vs Belarus (case # 3057/2017)

In the international instance, the activists appealed against the government's ban on holding a series of pickets in Homel on January 17, 2015, demanding the resignation of Lukashenka, who was to blame for the financial and currency crisis in Belarus. The complaint was registered on December 2, 2017 and sent to the government of Belarus for a comment.

Viktar Kazlou, Leanid Sudalenka, Anatol Paplauny vs Belarus (case #3059/207)

In the international instance, activists will appeal against the government's ban on holding a street procession in Homel on September 27, 2015, during which it was planned to protest against early voting on the eve of the “presidential election” of 2015. The complaint was registered on December 12, 2017 and sent to the government of Belarus for a comment.

Kanstantsin Zhukouski vs Belarus (case #3067/2017)

During 2016, freelance journalist from Homel Kanstantsin Zhukouski was subjected to major administrative fines (totaling about $ 2 000 during the year) six times, for work without accreditation for the Belsat TV channel. Having gone through all domestic remedies, he filed a complaint with the UN HRC about the violation of his right to receive and disseminate information. On December 12, 2017 the complaint was registered and sent to the Government of Belarus for a comment.