DOCSLIB.ORG

Eap CSF Monitoring Mission: Belarus - Political and Societal Developments After the Presidential Elections

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Eap CSF Monitoring Mission: Belarus - Political and Societal Developments After the Presidential Elections EaP CSF Monitoring Mission: Belarus - political and societal developments after the presidential elections #Belarus September 2020 Methodological Note The EaP CSF Monitoring Mission to Belarus was formed based on the suggestions of the EaP CSF Belarusian National Platform (BNP) with the support of the EaP CSF Steering Committee and the participation of experts representing EaP CSF members. Its task was to monitor all stages of the 2020 presidential election, from the calling of the election by the House of Representatives of the National Assembly on May 8 to the announcement of the final election results by the Central Election Commission (CEC) on August 14, paying particular attention to the adherence of the authorities to political and human rights standards, and the civil society and media environment. It also took note of further political and societal developments in the post-election period when drafting its final report. For the full Mission methodology, please see Annex I. Authors The Mission was composed of six experts from EaP CSF member organisations: Hennadiy Maksak (Mission Leader – Ukrainian Prism, Ukraine), Zofia Lutkiewicz (Political Accountability Foundation, Poland), Nicolae Panfil (Promo-LEX, Moldova), and three experts from the Belarusian National Platform of the EaP CSF. All six experts contributed to the drafting of the final Mission Report. The Mission Report was edited by Natalia Yerashevich (Director), Vera Rihackova (Advocacy Manager), and Billie Bell (Administrative & Advocacy Assistant), from the EaP CSF Secretariat. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 1 Legal framework ............................................................................................................................... 1 Media freedom .................................................................................................................................. 2 Civil society environment ................................................................................................................ 3 International solidarity and support ............................................................................................... 3 RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 4 GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................... 4 To the Belarusian authorities: ..................................................................................................... 4 To the EU institutions: ................................................................................................................. 4 To the EU member states and EaP partner countries: .............................................................. 6 CONDUCT OF THE NEW PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION .................................................... 7 To the Belarusian authorities: ..................................................................................................... 7 To the OSCE/ODIHR: .................................................................................................................. 8 COMPREHENSIVE ELECTORAL REFORM ........................................................................ 8 To the Belarusian authorities: ..................................................................................................... 8 To the EU institutions, EU member states and the OSCE/ODIHR: ........................................ 9 MEDIA FREEDOM ..................................................................................................................... 10 To the Belarusian authorities: ................................................................................................... 10 To the EU institutions, EU member states and EaP partner countries: ................................ 10 CIVIL SOCIETY ENVIRONMENT .......................................................................................... 11 To the Belarusian authorities: .................................................................................................... 11 To the EU institutions, EU member states and EaP partner countries: ................................ 12 To the OSCE/ODIHR: ................................................................................................................ 13 To international civil society: .................................................................................................... 13 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL DONORS ........................................... 13 Emergency support: ................................................................................................................... 13 Programming priorities: ............................................................................................................ 14 Methods of work:........................................................................................................................ 16 MAIN REPORT ................................................................................................................................... 17 1. Key findings ............................................................................................................................. 17 1.1 Results of the August 9 presidential election ...................................................................... 17 1.2. Legal framework .................................................................................................................. 17 1.3. International and domestic observation ............................................................................ 18 1.4. Media freedom ..................................................................................................................... 19 1.5. Civil society environment ................................................................................................... 20 1.6. Post-election developments ............................................................................................... 20 1.7. Options for international solidarity and support .............................................................. 21 2. Background ............................................................................................................................. 21 2.1. Legal framework and political context ............................................................................... 21 2.2. Media freedom .................................................................................................................... 23 2.3. Civil society environment ................................................................................................... 24 2.4. International response to human rights violations .......................................................... 25 3. Adherence to political and human rights standards during the pre-election period (May 8, 2020 - July 14, 2020) ..................................................................................26 3.1. Official decisions which run counter to political and human rights standards ..............26 3.2. Media freedom ....................................................................................................................29 3.3. Civil society environment .................................................................................................. 30 3.4. Observation and monitoring .............................................................................................. 32 4. Adherence to political and human rights standards during the election campaign (July 15, 2020 - August 8, 2020) ....................................................................... 32 4.1. Official decisions which run counter to political and human rights standards .............. 32 4.2. Media freedom .................................................................................................................... 34 4.3. Civil society environment ................................................................................................... 35 4.4. International observation ................................................................................................... 36 5. Adherence to political and human rights standards during the early voting period (August 4-8, 2020) and election day (August 9, 2020).................................... 36 5.1. Official decisions which run counter to political and human rights standards .............. 36 5.2. Media freedom .................................................................................................................... 39 5.3. Civil society environment ................................................................................................... 39 5.4. International observation ................................................................................................... 41 6. Adherence to political and human rights standards during the post-election period ............................................................................................................................................ 41 6.1. Official decisions which run counter to political and human rights standards .............. 41 6.2. Media freedom .................................................................................................................... 43 6.3. Domestic civic response to the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Romanian Political Science Review Vol. XXI, No. 1 2021
    Romanian Political Science Review vol. XXI, no. 1 2021 The end of the Cold War, and the extinction of communism both as an ideology and a practice of government, not only have made possible an unparalleled experiment in building a democratic order in Central and Eastern Europe, but have opened up a most extraordinary intellectual opportunity: to understand, compare and eventually appraise what had previously been neither understandable nor comparable. Studia Politica. Romanian Political Science Review was established in the realization that the problems and concerns of both new and old democracies are beginning to converge. The journal fosters the work of the first generations of Romanian political scientists permeated by a sense of critical engagement with European and American intellectual and political traditions that inspired and explained the modern notions of democracy, pluralism, political liberty, individual freedom, and civil rights. Believing that ideas do matter, the Editors share a common commitment as intellectuals and scholars to try to shed light on the major political problems facing Romania, a country that has recently undergone unprecedented political and social changes. They think of Studia Politica. Romanian Political Science Review as a challenge and a mandate to be involved in scholarly issues of fundamental importance, related not only to the democratization of Romanian polity and politics, to the “great transformation” that is taking place in Central and Eastern Europe, but also to the make-over of the assumptions and prospects of their discipline. They hope to be joined in by those scholars in other countries who feel that the demise of communism calls for a new political science able to reassess the very foundations of democratic ideals and procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • The Death Penalty in Belarus
    Part 1. Histor ical Overview The Death Penalty in Belarus Vilnius 2016 1 The Death Penalty in Belarus The documentary book, “The Death Penalty in Belarus”, was prepared in the framework of the campaign, “Human Rights Defenders against the Death Penalty in Belarus”. The book contains information on the death penalty in Belarus from 1998 to 2016, as it was in 1998 when the mother of Ivan Famin, a man who was executed for someone else’s crimes, appealed to the Human Rights Center “Viasna”. Among the exclusive materials presented in this publication there is the historical review, “A History of The Death Penalty in Belarus”, prepared by Dzianis Martsinovich, and a large interview with a former head of remand prison No. 1 in Minsk, Aleh Alkayeu, under whose leadership about 150 executions were performed. This book is designed not only for human rights activists, but also for students and teachers of jurisprudence, and wide public. 2 Part 1. Histor ical Overview Life and Death The Death penalty. These words evoke different feelings and ideas in different people, including fair punishment, cruelty and callousness of the state, the cold steel of the headsman’s axe, civilized barbarism, pistol shots, horror and despair, revolutionary expediency, the guillotine with a basket where the severed heads roll, and many other things. Man has invented thousands of ways to kill his fellows, and his bizarre fantasy with the methods of execution is boundless. People even seem to show more humanness and rationalism in killing animals. After all, animals often kill one another. A well-known Belarusian artist Lionik Tarasevich grows hundreds of thoroughbred hens and roosters on his farm in the village of Validy in the Białystok district.
    [Show full text]
  • En En Amendments 1
    European Parliament 2019-2024 Committee on Foreign Affairs 2020/2081(INI) 2.9.2020 AMENDMENTS 1 - 388 Draft report Petras Auštrevičius (PE652.398v01-00) Proposal for a Recommendation to the Council, the Commission and the Vice- President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on relations with Belarus (2020/2081(INI)) AM\1212303EN.docx PE657.166v01-00 EN United in diversityEN AM_Com_NonLegReport PE657.166v01-00 2/171 AM\1212303EN.docx EN Amendment 1 Viola Von Cramon-Taubadel on behalf of the Greens/EFA Group Motion for a resolution Citation 2 Motion for a resolution Amendment — having regard to the Council — having regard to the Council conclusions on Belarus of 15 February conclusions on Belarus of 15 February 2016, 2016 and the main outcomes of the video conference of Foreign Affairs Ministers of 14 August 2020, Or. en Amendment 2 Viola Von Cramon-Taubadel on behalf of the Greens/EFA Group Motion for a resolution Citation 2 a (new) Motion for a resolution Amendment — having regard to the Conclusions by the President of the European Council following the video conference of the members of the European Council on 19 August 2020, Or. en Amendment 3 Attila Ara-Kovács Motion for a resolution Citation 4 Motion for a resolution Amendment — having regard to the Joint — having regard to the Joint Declarations of the Eastern Partnership Declarations of the Eastern Partnership Summits of 2009 in Prague, 2011 in Summits of 2009 in Prague, 2011 in Warsaw, 2013 in Vilnius, 2015 in Riga and Warsaw, 2013 in Vilnius, 2015 in Riga, 2017 in Brussels, 2017 in Brussels and Eastern Partnership leaders' video conference in 2020, AM\1212303EN.docx 3/171 PE657.166v01-00 EN Or.
    [Show full text]
  • Daring to Stand up for Human Rights in a Pandemic
    DARING TO STAND UP FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN A PANDEMIC Artwork by Jaskiran K Marway @J.Kiran90 INDEX: ACT 30/2765/2020 AUGUST 2020 LANGUAGE: ENGLISH amnesty.org 1 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 1. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DEFENDING HUMAN RIGHTS DURING A PANDEMIC 5 2. ATTACKS DURING THE COVID-19 CRISIS 7 2.1 COVID-19, A PRETEXT TO FURTHER ATTACK DEFENDERS AND REDUCE CIVIC SPACE 8 2.2 THE DANGERS OF SPEAKING OUT ON THE RESPONSE TO THE PANDEMIC 10 2.3 DEFENDERS EXCLUDED FROM RELEASE DESPITE COVID-19 – AN ADDED PUNISHMENT 14 2.4 DEFENDERS AT RISK LEFT EXPOSED AND UNPROTECTED 16 2.5 SPECIFIC RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THE IDENTITY OF DEFENDERS 17 3. RECOMMENDATIONS 20 4. FURTHER DOCUMENTATION 22 INDEX: ACT 30/2765/2020 AUGUST 2020 LANGUAGE: ENGLISH amnesty.org 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The COVID-19 pandemic and states’ response to it have presented an array of new challenges and threats for those who defend human rights. In April 2020, Amnesty International urged states to ensure that human rights defenders are included in their responses to address the pandemic, as they are key actors to guarantee that any measures implemented respect human rights and do not leave anyone behind. The organization also called on all states not to use pandemic-related restrictions as a pretext to further shrink civic space and crackdown on dissent and those who defend human rights, or to suppress relevant information deemed uncomfortable to the government.1 Despite these warnings, and notwithstanding the commitments from the international community over two decades ago to protect and recognise the right to defend human rights,2 Amnesty International has documented with alarm the continued threats and attacks against human rights defenders in the context of the pandemic.
    [Show full text]
  • The EU and Belarus – a Relationship with Reservations Dr
    BELARUS AND THE EU: FROM ISOLATION TOWARDS COOPERATION EDITED BY DR. HANS-GEORG WIECK AND STEPHAN MALERIUS VILNIUS 2011 UDK 327(476+4) Be-131 BELARUS AND THE EU: FROM ISOLATION TOWARDS COOPERATION Authors: Dr. Hans-Georg Wieck, Dr. Vitali Silitski, Dr. Kai-Olaf Lang, Dr. Martin Koopmann, Andrei Yahorau, Dr. Svetlana Matskevich, Valeri Fadeev, Dr. Andrei Kazakevich, Dr. Mikhail Pastukhou, Leonid Kalitenya, Alexander Chubrik Editors: Dr. Hans-Georg Wieck, Stephan Malerius This is a joint publication of the Centre for European Studies and the Konrad- Adenauer-Stiftung. This publication has received funding from the European Parliament. Sole responsibility for facts or opinions expressed in this publication rests with the authors. The Centre for European Studies, the Konrad-Adenauer- Stiftung and the European Parliament assume no responsibility either for the information contained in the publication or its subsequent use. ISBN 978-609-95320-1-1 © 2011, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung e.V., Sankt Augustin / Berlin © Front cover photo: Jan Brykczynski CONTENTS 5 | Consultancy PROJECT: BELARUS AND THE EU Dr. Hans-Georg Wieck 13 | BELARUS IN AN INTERnational CONTEXT Dr. Vitali Silitski 22 | THE EU and BELARUS – A Relationship WITH RESERvations Dr. Kai-Olaf Lang, Dr. Martin Koopmann 34 | CIVIL SOCIETY: AN analysis OF THE situation AND diRECTIONS FOR REFORM Andrei Yahorau 53 | Education IN BELARUS: REFORM AND COOPERation WITH THE EU Dr. Svetlana Matskevich 70 | State bodies, CONSTITUTIONAL REALITY AND FORMS OF RULE Valeri Fadeev 79 | JudiciaRY AND law
    [Show full text]
  • Addressing the Challenges That Human Rights Defenders Face in the Context of Business Activities in an Age of a Shrinking Civil Society Space
    Wednesday 18 November 10:00 to 11:20 Room XX (Building E) Addressing the challenges that Human Rights Defenders face in the context of business activities in an age of a shrinking civil society space There is a growing clampdown worldwide against human rights defenders who challenge specific economic paradigms, the presence of corporations and harmful business conduct. Too often, Governments detain human rights defenders, prevent them from raising funds, restrict their movements, place them under surveillance and, in some cases, authorize their torture and murder. Meanwhile, many companies either stand by as Governments employ tough law and order responses against defenders, or they aggressively target defenders who challenge their activities through legal or other means. Against this bleak backdrop, a number of progressive companies recognize the need and value in communicating effectively with communities affected by their projects. Without a social license to operate, companies face many problems that can affect their operations, increase a project’s costs and success and it can harm the firm’s overall reputation. The freedom human rights defenders enjoy plays an essential role in ensuring the legitimacy of a company’s operations. An open, secure civic space enables defenders to build inclusive, stable societies characterised by the rule of law that contribute to a favourable investment climate and operating conditions for companies. This session will explore how to overcome the risks that defenders, who challenge business conduct, face in a world in which civil society at large fights for its place. It will showcase the experiences of prominent defenders and companies operating in complex environments.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of China's Rise on Eu Foreign Policy Cohesion
    THE IMPACT OF CHINA’S RISE ON EU FOREIGN POLICY COHESION By Dominik Hertlik Submitted to Central European University Department of International Relations In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in International Relations Supervisor: Dr. Daniel Izsak CEU eTD Collection Budapest, Hungary Word count: 14.299 2020 Abstract China’s rise and the consequences resulting from it have an effect on countries around the world. Its increasingly close cooperation with countries in Central and Eastern Europe (as well as Greece) has led to numerous EU member states (EUMS) pursuing foreign policies that are oftentimes more aligned with the interests of the Chinese leadership than the overall EU’s interests and values. The Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) of the EU is susceptible to such interference as its decisions are based on unanimity. Building up on this, this thesis argues that even though previous literature suggests that normative socialisation processes within CFSP policymaking and the consequent primacy of consensus seeking during negotiations have made the use of vetoes virtually insignificant, due to the increasing political and economic influence of China on some EUMS the importance of vetoes is rising again. Benefits of maintaining amicable relations to China might appear so attractive to some EUMS that in the light of China’s rise they are once again more prone to vetoing certain EU-level decisions critical of Beijing. The benefits held out in prospect vary and can be mostly economic, but also of political or ideological use. Costs of vetoing (besides from the reputational loss) seem to be virtually non-existent.
    [Show full text]
  • Migration in the Republic of Belarus: Challenges, Trends and Perspectives
    IOM OIM MIGRATION IN THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS: CHALLENGES, TRENDS AND PERSPECTIVES Final Document of the National Round Table Minsk, 2016 Table of Contents This document was developed based on the proposals formulated by the working groups Acknowledgements 5 of the round table «Migration in the Republic of Belarus: challenges, trends and perspectives» that took place in Minsk on 26 May 2016 The document is signed in two copies in the Russian language Foreword 6 Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Mission of the International Organization Republic of Belarus: for Migration in the Republic of Belarus Round Table Description 8 N Melchenko Z Hajiyev Group Work Description Conclusions and Recommendations 12 _____________________________ _____________________________ Deputy Minister Chief of Mission 3 Acknowledgements Mission of the International Organization for istry of Foreign Affairs and to the United Nations Migration (IOM) in the Republic of Belarus and High Commissioner for Refugees in the Repub- the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic lic of Belarus for their financial contributions of Belarus, acting as co-organizers of this round and technical support in the organization of this table, convey their gratitude to the participants, event experts and spokespersons of the round table, represented by state, non-state and internation- Besides, the organizers express their gratitude al organizations, as well as to foreign embas- to such international donors as the European sies and private companies that took part in the Union, US
    [Show full text]
  • English Version of This Report Is the Only Official Document
    Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights REPUBLIC OF BELARUS PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 23 September 2012 OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission Final Report Warsaw 14 December 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................1 II. INTRODUCTION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS....................................................3 III. POLITICAL BACKGROUND.........................................................................................3 IV. LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND ELECTORAL SYSTEM..............................................4 V. ELECTION ADMINISTRATION ...................................................................................5 A. CENTRAL ELECTION COMMISSION.....................................................................................6 B. DISTRICT AND PRECINCT ELECTION COMMISSIONS..........................................................7 VI. VOTER REGISTRATION ...............................................................................................7 VII. CANDIDATE REGISTRATION .....................................................................................8 VIII. ELECTION CAMPAIGN ...............................................................................................10 A. CAMPAIGN ENVIRONMENT................................................................................................10 B. CAMPAIGN FINANCE..........................................................................................................12
    [Show full text]
  • Corruption Perceptions Index 2020
    CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX 2020 Transparency International is a global movement with one vision: a world in which government, business, civil society and the daily lives of people are free of corruption. With more than 100 chapters worldwide and an international secretariat in Berlin, we are leading the fight against corruption to turn this vision into reality. #cpi2020 www.transparency.org/cpi Every effort has been made to verify the accuracy of the information contained in this report. All information was believed to be correct as of January 2021. Nevertheless, Transparency International cannot accept responsibility for the consequences of its use for other purposes or in other contexts. ISBN: 978-3-96076-157-0 2021 Transparency International. Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0 DE. Quotation permitted. Please contact Transparency International – [email protected] – regarding derivatives requests. CORRUPTION PERCEPTIONS INDEX 2020 2-3 12-13 20-21 Map and results Americas Sub-Saharan Africa Peru Malawi 4-5 Honduras Zambia Executive summary Recommendations 14-15 22-23 Asia Pacific Western Europe and TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE European Union 6-7 Vanuatu Myanmar Malta Global highlights Poland 8-10 16-17 Eastern Europe & 24 COVID-19 and Central Asia Methodology corruption Serbia Health expenditure Belarus Democratic backsliding 25 Endnotes 11 18-19 Middle East & North Regional highlights Africa Lebanon Morocco TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL 180 COUNTRIES. 180 SCORES. HOW DOES YOUR COUNTRY MEASURE UP?
    [Show full text]
  • The State of Human Rights and Political Freedoms in Belarus: Was the Crisis Inevitable?
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.47669/PSPRP-4-2020 The State of Human Rights and Political Freedoms in Belarus: Was the Crisis Inevitable? Nina Kolarzik and Aram Terzyan Center for East European and Russian Studies Post-Soviet Politics Research Papers 4/2020 Nina Kolarzik and Aram Terzyan Abstract The rule of Alexander Lukashenko in Belarus has created one of the most resilient authoritarian regimes in post-communist Europe. Meanwhile, the turmoil triggered by the 2020 presidential election has put in the spotlight the mounting challenges facing Lukashenko’s authoritarian rule. This paper investigates the state of human rights and political freedoms in Belarus, focusing on the main rationale behind the turmoil surrounding the 2020 presidential election. It concludes that the political crisis following the elections is the unsurprising consequence of Lukashenko’s diminishing ability to maintain power or concentrate political control by preserving elite unity, controlling elections, and/or using force against opponents. Keywords: Belarus, human rights, authoritarian rule, elections, civil society. Introduction Situated in the European Union - Russia shared neighborhood, Belarus has been characterized by ‘Soviet nostalgia’ rather than European aspirations. Politically, Belarus shows more similarities with the republics of post-Soviet Central Asia than with its neighbors in Europe. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union Belarus has gone from being a new and fragile democracy to a pariah state, largely regarded as “the last dictatorship in Europe” (Rudling 2008). Nevertheless, the anti-government protests following the 2020 presidential election show that despite the administrative, police and propaganda measures the Belarusian opposition and civil society managed to produce a real challenge to the existing status quo.
    [Show full text]
  • Belarus Fact Sheet
    BELARUS FACT SHEET Belarus February 2021 Mandate in the country: UNHCR has International legal framework: Belarus Advocacy: UNHCR advocates for been working in Belarus since 1995 is a party to the 1951 Convention relating Belarus’ accession to the UN helping people of concern and supporting to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Statelessness Conventions in the the Government in strengthening its Protocol since 2001. framework of #IBelong Campaign to asylum system and policies. End Statelessness by 2024. POPULATION OF CONCERN HIGHLIGHTS Asylum-seekers 111 9,235 Refugees* 2,823 Persons of concern were in Belarus as of mid-2020. Stateless people 6,296 589 people applied for asylum in 2020, which is lower than *includes holders of refugee status and complementary protection in previous two years. TOP THREE COUNTRES OF ORIGIN 28,160 USD was spent in 2020 to help people of concern who Refugees** Asylum-seekers have lost their job due to the spread of COVID-19. Ukraine 2394 Ukraine 56 Statelessness Afghanistan 220 Syrian Arab Rep. 6 Belarus is expected to accede to the UN Syria 64 Kazakhstan 5 Statelessness Conventions in 2021 upon completion of all national procedures, as pledged in 2019. Data source: UNHCR 2020 Mid-Year Statistical Report and UNHCR data finder COVID-19 PREVENTION AND RESPONSE ■ Advocacy: UNHCR produced 6,000 leaflets with basic information on COVID-19 and distributed them across all regions of Belarus among people of concern and partner organizations. Inclusion of persons of concern: UNHCR provided special assistance to people of concern who have been affected by COVID-19, including medical personnel.
    [Show full text]