Aliaksei Kazliuk: PACE rapporteur didn’t made use of Lawtrend’s offer

belt.by

During Andrea Rigoni’s visit to Minsk the idea of uniting his efforts with the UN Special Rapporteur Miklos Haraszti didn’t please PACE’s Special Rapporteur much. Why so?

On February 18 Legal Transformation Center “Lawtrend” appealed to Andrea Rigoni, rapporteur of the PACE's Committee on Political Affairs and Democracy and to Miklós Haraszti, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus, with a request to start communication and coordination in assessing the situation with the human rights in Belarus.

In the talk with the correspondent of the “EuroBelarus” Information Service Elena Tonkacheva, the head of “Lawtrend”, explained that “unfortunately, up to this moment we can find no how-ever significant public document elaborated by MR. Rigoni that would demonstrate his clear and open stance of assessing democracy and human rights situation in Belarus”.

Elena Tonkacheva expressed her belief that during his visit to Belarus Andrea Rigoni should have included human rights, major freedoms, and democracy issues to the agenda of the meetings with state officials.

“We find it necessary for Mr. Rigoni to be guided by the conclusions, recommendations, which Mr. Haraszti has already made; necessary for these documents to become a basis for Rigoni’s stance during the meetings with the representatives of state bodies in Belarus”, - Elena Tonkacheva noted.

And recently, between 24^th and 27^th of February, Andrei Rigoni visited Belarus. One of the meetings with the PACE Rapporteur was attended by Aliaksei Kazliuk, the lawyer of the Legal Transformation Center “Lawtrend”, who shared his impressions from communication with the Italian guest with the “EuroBelarus” Information Service:

- Of course, such meetings should be welcomed, as this is an attempt to hear the opinion of the civil society representatives and human rights defendants. On the other hand, it is impossible to get complete information about the situation with human rights during the time regulated for this communication. And here we might recall Miklós Haraszti, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus, who holds meetings with Belarusan human rights defendants often enough, and these meetings are quite long; during these meetings these or that issues can be raised, i.e. the information is gathered professionally. Accordingly, the reports that the UN Special Rapporteur prepares are based on this information, since he has no other information because Belarusan authorities refuse to cooperate with him and even refuse to recognize the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus.

On the other hand, we have Andrea Rigoni, who is allowed to enter Belarus even though it wasn’t easy. But it is impossible to get the information about the situation in the country in an hour. And as the Legal Transformation Center “Lawtrend” assumes it would be a good synergy for UN And PACE Special Rapporteurs to exchange information. Because as we know, Miklós Haraszti has quite complete information from Belarusan human rights defendants, whereas Andrea Rigoni can meet high-ranking officials. And basing on the result of the information exchange we can draw objective assessments of the situation with human rights in Belarus. If we have two opposite assessments, the facts that the representatives of different structures will be using will be different, too. And it is very important for us that the assessments are harmonized.

- What was Andrea Rigoni’s reaction to the suggestion of the Legal Transformation Center “Lawtrend” re uniting efforts with the UN Special Rapporteur?

- He was aware of it, but as far as I understood he decided not to use it and not to start communication with the UN Special Rapporteur. Although from the course of the meeting I didn’t quite understand what was the reason for such approach: non-interest or fear that the Belarusan authorities will negatively perceive it.

- When will the assessment of the PACE’s rapporteur become known?

- The document based on the results of the Andrea Rigoni’s visit to Minsk should appear in March. At the same time, PACE Rapporteur noted his report will be prepared on the basis of some changes that are worth writing about. But as no one expects any changes before the president election this is a far-long perspective. At the same time, Belarusan authorities are interested in a dialog with PACE on such issues as the establishment of an ombudsman position, abolition of death penalty, domestic violence, and a number of other reasons. There is progress in discussing thee issues, and some of them can be discussed endlessly without any results. For example, the dialog about the abolition of death penalty has been led for more than 10 years without any progress. Although the only indicator is whether we introduce moratorium on death penalty or it remains. But it is quite convenient to lead such dialog as one can always say that “we are considering the possibility of abolishing death penalty” or “we are discussing the popular verdict”. Naturally, this dialog will be more interesting for the Belarusan parliament if it is a special guest in the PACE. Belarus was deprived of this status in 1997. If it is returned back it will be a clear signal to Belarusan authorities. However, if this status is returned without solving certain problems that led to Belarus’ deprivation of this status, it will be a negative signal for us.

- How much does the assessment of the PACE Rapporteur influence the further relations between the Council of Europe and Belarus?

- In the latest report made after the president election 2010 very harsh assessments of the situation were given. The report directly stated that Belarus has made a serious step back in observing human rights. The Rapporteur recommended supporting restrictions in relation to Belarus, including personal ones, introduced by the EU. Accordingly, before the next PACE report is drawn the earlier chosen position against our country is preserved. And now a lot depends on the assessments made by the Rapporteur; his appointment also speaks a lot. Andrea Rigoni was appointed at this post for the second time, replacing the Estonian deputy Andras Herkel. It should be marked that Herkel’s reports were harsh, whereas Rigoni’s were lenient; they were like good cop/bad cop. Rigoni’s report in 2009 started with positive assessments of Belarusan authorities’ actions. Back then Rigoni suggested to return the status of a special guest in advance, supposing that democratic reforms in the country are irreversible. However, now, I believe, he has to admit how strongly he was wrong then.