2014 04/12

Only in the beginning of December human rights defenders Alaksiej Lapicki and Sviatlana Lapickaja found in their post box an envelope with a reply of housing utilities sector of Minsk regional executive committee on appeal about the fact of Zhodzina housing utilities sector of refused to conduct service agreement on cleaning the grounds after an event being held there demanded by the executive committee.  

The appeal to housing utilities sector of Minsk regional executive committee was sent by e-mail on October 10th, 2014. The copy was sent on October 17th and by these means it was delivered to the up-to-date electronic address of the institution. However there was no timely reply when the appellants addressed the court one more time after the judge Tacciana Trapaszka requested the pretrial review of the claim.

The reply which was received almost two weeks late contains no review of the fact that the administration of Zhodzina housing utilities sector refused to conduct service agreement. There is only a notice that Zhodzina housing utilities sector timely replied to the applicants regarding conducting the agreement.  

However they informed that enterprises of housing utility sector in Minsk regional have practice of cleaning of grounds after public events on a paid basis that means that State enterprise “Minsk regional housing utility sector” also has the same practice. Anyway, price lists which are not provided by law are drown up in each case individually and there is no statistics about this kind of work (!?). That means that there is no registered in special order documentation?! Or this documentation exists, but Minsk regional housing utility sector has no opportunity or no wish to look up at it, study it and provide it at request?

It may be concluded that the administration of State enterprise “Minsk regional housing utility sector” of Minsk regional executive committee doesn’t see a violation of article 5 of Decision №1020 of Zhodzina executive committee by housing utility sector of Zhodzina when they refused to conduct extra profitable agreement on cleaning the grounds after meeting of human rights defenders declared on the August 4th  in support of Mikalai Statkievicz and other political prisoners in Belarus and also military aggression of Russia in the Ukraine.

Minsk administration of Zhodzina housing and utility sector refuses to notice and take into account the fact that legislation in power doesn’t provide price lists and corresponding paid services on cleaning of the grounds after realization by citizens of their constitutional rights on expression their own opinions by peaceful assembly according to article 35 of Constitution of the Republic of Belarus.

An additional point is that housing utilities sector of Minsk regional executive committee acknowledge that they have no documentation to prove facts unestablished by law of these institutions receiving money for cleaning of grounds services and suggest appealing to court in case of disagreement with such answer.

Alaksiej Lapicki:

-       It seems strange in such conditions that no court, judge or judicial trial has punished for such illegal actions (inactions) neither officers of the police, housing utility sector or medical professionals who don’t conduct demanded service agreements, nor those responsible employees of executive committees who made these state institutions to conduct paid agreements with citizens in violation of laws and regulations, and then deprive citizens of their inherent constitutional right on expression of their opinion and peaceful assembly on the basis of non-fulfillment of such demands impossible to be fulfilled.


Attachments:

1) The envelope.

2) The reply of State enterprise “Minsk regional housing utility sector” of Minsk regional executive committee received by post on Dcember 1 st, 2014.

Ales LETA,
Belarusian Legal Portal,
www.prava-by.info

In photos:
1) Aliaksiej Lapicki, human rights defender from Human rights center Viasna”, Zhodzina;
2) Reply from housing utilities sector of Minsk regional executive committee;
3) The envelope in which the untimely reply was delivered.

Photos by A.Lapicki

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>