2011 25/10
Жодзінскі гарадзкі суд

Zhodzina town court

Indeed, on 10.25.2011, 7 days after the decision of Zhodzina court of 17.10.2011, a private decision of Zhodzina court was “found” in the case file on violation of law by the local executive committee … When was this definition rendered and who announced it? It’s not entirely clear. But the fact of rendering and publication of this decision at the end of the hearing on October 17 has been “fixed” in the presented protocol – (!?).

This fact demonstrates eloquently the deep inextricable connection of court nomenclature with executive committee nomenclature. They can not condemn their kind since they themselves accept and sign documents retrospectively. And officials don’t even care if an ordinary citizen, human rights activist will get to know about it (!). They will respond to identical “ideological leadership” for their actions (inaction) which sometimes are lawless and criminal. And neither conscience, nor judicial ethics or professionalism has nothing to do with it. It’s just the way judges in the current Belarusian courts work now…

As you know, on 17 October Zhodzina court presided over by Judge Tatsiana Tratsiuk made and announced the decision that the complaint of human rights defenders Aliaksey Lapitsky and Sviatlana Lapitskaya from 15.09.201 about misconduct of officials of Zhodzina executive committee was not satisfied.

Due to distribution on by.prava-by.info the publication about the process and the last court session was made with a detailed description of the circumstances, attitudes, and proceedings participants.

Human right activists noted that the court actually ignored the received and in fact proven facts concerning 1) groundless refusal of a peaceful mass action in Zhodzina, 2) late answers (18.08.2011 and 09.07.2011) from the executive committee and 3) unmotivated response of 8.18. 2011, 4) lack of legal grounds and motives of the actual deprivation of citizens’ constitutional rights (Article 35) to peaceful assembly, freedom of expression and free flow of information (art.33)…

Together with the lawlessness and biased judgments which obviously ignores the requirements of constitutional norms (Art. 23, Art. 35, Art. 33) and international standards of law (Art. 19 and Art. 21 of ICCPR) as the legal imperatives, Zhodzina court completely ignored the other violation facts which were proved by witnesses and physical evidence in court.

However, after that, before October 25 during the preparation of protocol of the hearing, the documents of the case have undergone some notable changes (!?).

No. It certainly did not get other decision. It did not get the requested from the executive committee document samples (samples of contracts, current price lists with grading and differentiation of types, shapes and sizes of the claimed events …), but there appeared a strange, “Separate decision” (Private decision) of Zhodzina court that none of the participants of the process so far (during the court sessions) heard (or it hasn’t been voiced), seen, or ever get it on hands (because it didn’t even exist).

In this “separate decision” (see attachment) judge Tatsiana Tratsiuk recognized in court violations of Law “On mass events in Belarus” conducted by Zhodzina executive committee but only in part of the untimely notification of applicants on executive committee’s prohibition of the peaceful assembly in the form of picketing planned on August 22, 2011.

Thus, this private decision of Zhodzina court, about which the parties of the proceedings, namely, the applicants couldn’t have even found out (if they haven’t studied the case files and to make relevant comments) – does not include the proven delays and unmotivated manner of answers, manipulative dates and deadlines, and in this context, gross and systematic violations of applicable law, including the Law of the Republic of Belarus “On citizens’ appeals”.

In addition, testimony of witnesses were ignored: the head of the ideological department of A.Haretskaya and militia officer S. Shcharbitsky, who confirmed the facts of the refusal to talk to the representative of the applicants Aliaksiey Lapitsky on August 19 in the building of the executive committee and give him an explanation about the reasons of prohibition of the peace assembly of citizens (picketing) in Zhodzina and instead of carrying out their duties put an administrative pressure upon the visitor, intimidation and provocation of a conflict situation with a call of militia to his office…

Аляксей Лапіцкі, Жодзіна

Аляксей Лапіцкі, Жодзіна

Human rights activist, Aliaksiey Lapitsky:

“It is not surprising that such decisions are carried out by nowadays courts (if they are), so hesitantly and sneakily, as if «under the table”. Against the background of arbitrary decisions, which in fact legitimized prohibition of peaceful assembly in the country under any artifitial, subjective and not based on legal grounds (in our case with Zhodzina it is clearly proven in court), these decisions seem to be little consolation to the victims of the administrative diktat”.

- Because they are half-hearted and inconsistent. They did not restore the violated rights. And looks like the officials, thanks to the predictable decisions of the courts continue to limit or infringe the inherent Constitutional rights and civil liberties. A similar rare “shy decisions” of judges just tells them how to act properly and carefully…

Quoting legal distribution,
Prepared by Ales Volny,
Belarusian legal Portal,
by.prava-by.info

2 thoughts on “Zhodzina court’s “shy decision” on local executive committee’s violation of the Law … “On mass events in the Republic of Belarus””

Leave a Reply

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


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>