2011 13/09

Tatsiana Kasynkina, the investigator, who is in charge of Ales Bialiatsky’s case, improved the system of mass formal replies. According to the words of several activists from Vitebsk to the publication “For Human Rights” the “Refusal to satisfy petition” now looks different way. This decree is sent to everyone who requested the release of Ales Bialiatsky under his personal guarantee.

Earlier, also partly standard rejection-letters kept a certain hint of personal attitude. In several places there was the name of the person mentioned who was given an answer to his or her appeal to the SCC Office of Financial Investigations. Now, all the letters from senior lieutenant Kasynkina are of no pin to choose between them. From these refusals designed according to a new model it is unclear to whom they are addressed and in response to whose request.

Perhaps investigator Kasynkina got tired to make individual refusals to applicants by inserting every time a new name in a standard template of the formal reply she invented. Therefore, the template was slightly corrected. As a result, there was no need to edit it, so the “Refusal to satisfy petition” can be printed en masse – for example by photocopier. Of course, this invention significantly improved the performance of her paperwork. But the quality of that work has deteriorated. New mistakes were added to the previous ones in decrees signed by Kasynkina.

According to human rights activists, the letter received by citizens in response to their applications for release of Ales Bialiatsky, show a number of violations of legislation by Kasynkina. First, contrary to the requirements of Criminal Procedure Code the investigator does not explain in her replies the reasons why the preventive measure against Mr Bialiatsky can not be changed.

Second, the investigator does not hold to the decree of the Code, according to which in case of refusal of an application, the decision on this shall be sent to the person, who has filed the application. Instead of providing the applicant with the required information, Kasynkina sends identical letters to unknown recipients about unknown appeals.

Thirdly, the senior militia lieutenant also violates the norms of the existing “Law on Appeals of Citizens”. This law obliges officials to explain citizens the procedure falsifying decisions on their applications. There is no hint in these letters about the possibility of appealing against decisions made by Kasynkina.

And finally, a new form of response, which was invented by Kasynkina, goes against the “Directions on records management in government agencies and organizations of Republic of Belarus” by Ministry of Justice. This statement, which requires when addressing the document to an individual to indicate the name and initials (name) of the recipient and his mailing address in the letter, is an act of legislation obligatory for all officials of public bodies and organizations.

Thus, the investigator Kasynkina has already made too many violations of law. Human rights activists advise those who are not satisfied with the responses received from the senior lieutenant about inability to release Ales Bialiatsky on bail, to file complaints to the prosecutor. But it is not clear how the agency staff will make sure that people who apply to them, and the one who has received a decree without indicating the name from Kasynkina is one and the same person. Perhaps, output numbers that are on each letter could help them to identify a decree. But will the prosecutors be able to make out the handwriting – that is the question.

Quoting “За правы чалавека”,
Prepared by Ales LETA,
Belarusian Legal Portal,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *