2012 10/10

Leanid Sudalenka, Homel

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation confirmed that the decisions of the UN Committee on Human Rights, taken by the complaints of Russians are binding and do not exempt Russia from the reliable and responsible implementation of these decisions in the framework of voluntarily assumed obligations under international law.

An excellent judgment from the point of view of Belarusian human rights defenders was delivered by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, chaired by Valery Zorkin.

Considering one of the decisions of the UN Committee on Human Rights, which was adopted on the complaint of the Russian Andrei Khoroshenko (Khoroshenko vs. Russia), the supreme judicial body of the Russian Federation stressed that becoming a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its Optional Protocol, Russian Federation recognized the competence of the Committee on Human Rights to receive and investigate complaints of its citizens.

“The practice, which has developed in the Committee on Human Rights shows that in case of a violation, the Committee suggests that the State provides a person, recognized as a victim of violations, mentioned in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, an effective remedy (to pay appropriate compensation, to hold a re-trial, to release a victim person from custody immediately, etc.)” – states the Constitutional Court.

“Despite the fact that neither the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights nor the Optional Protocol does not directly require States to comply with the Committee’s views on human rights, it does not exempt the Russian Federation of a reliable and responsible execution of decisions. In other way, it would not only call into question the performance of Russian Federation the voluntarily assumed international obligations, but also evidence of non-compliance of the obligations to recognize and guarantee the rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen, as well as it would make the right of every to apply to the Human Rights Committee pointless,”- that was a legal position of The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.

Expressing a cautious optimism, human rights activist and Chairman of the Homiel branch of the national public organization “Legal Initiative” Leanid Sudalenka calls the decision of the Constitutional Court a good harbinger.

“Since 1992, the UN Committee on Human Rights has adopted about four dozen decisions on complaints of Belarusian citizens who were simply ignored by the officials, who were meant to stand in defense of the rights and freedoms of Belarusian citizens. Belarusian “officials of the law” refer to the opinion of the UN as follows: “International experts’ opinions that are advisory in essence,” – said the human rights activist, who counted more than a dozen complaints addressed to the UN of his own.

“Our country is desperately in need of investment, and it announced about entering the WTO. On the other hand, none of the serious investors will not go to a country in which prisons there are political prisoners and human rights and freedoms “are advisory” in essence. Our closest ally has said its word on the rights and freedoms of a person, let’s wait for what our lawyers would tell us” – summed L.Sudalenka.

The attachment:

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (rus.)

Quoting gomelspring.org and legal mailing,
Prepared by Ales LETA,
Belarusian legal portal,
by.prava-by.info

Tags: ,

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>