DOCSLIB.ORG

BELARUS the 1996 Constitution of Belarus, Which Was Adopted By

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BELARUS the 1996 Constitution of Belarus, Which Was Adopted By BELARUS The 1996 Constitution of Belarus, which was adopted by unconstitutional means, remains in force. The President has excessive power and continues to rule the country by presidential decree. The independence of the judiciary is seriously threatened by the poor conditions of service and the influence of the President on the appointment and dismissal of judges. Individual lawyers face improper influence and harassment. President Lukashenko won the presidential elections on 9 September 2001, thereby securing another five year term, in a process clearly flawed. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Belarus declared its independence on 25 August 1991, and later joined the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). In March 1994, the Supreme Soviet adopted a new Constitution that provided for a democratic form of government and a directly elected president as head of Government and State. On 10 July 1994 Alexander Lukashenko was elected as the first president of Belarus for a term of five years. The members of the 13th Supreme Soviet (parliament) were elected in 1995. The 1994 Constitution was amended on 24 November 1996 in a referendum, that was marked by substantial irregularities in procedure. The referendum had been called by the President after the Supreme Soviet refused to pass the extensive constitutional changes suggested by President Lukashenko. This referendum was held despite a ruling by the Constitutional Court on 4 November 1996 that the Constitution could not be amended in this way. President Lukashenko annulled the ruling by decree and the then-Prime Minister, Mikhail Chigir, resigned in protest. The current political system is therefore based on a Constitution that was adopted by unconstitutional means. As a result of the 1996 referendum the President of Belarus has greatly expanded powers and Mr. Lukashenko's term as President was extended for 2 years as from July 1999. The last presidential elections were held on 9 September 2001. The country's official Central Electoral Commission announced that Alexander Lukashenko had won 75,6 per cent of the vote, whereas his main opponent Vladimir Goncharik, who was the candidate of a broad coalition of opposition parties, only won 15,4 per cent of the vote. There were numerous allegations of manipulation and vote-rigging and hundreds protested in Minsk against this landslide victory. The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) and the Parliamentary Troika composed of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (OSCE/PA), the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, and the European Parliament sent a joint International Limited Election Observation Mission (ILEOM) to the presidential elections. In its Preliminary Conclusions the ILEOM stated that "(t)here were fundamental flaws in the electoral process, some of which are specific to the political situation in Belarus...". Among the flaws enumerated were a legislative framework that fails to ensure the independence of election administration bodies, the integrity of the voting results tabulation process, lack of free and fair campaign conditions, and excessive restrictions imposed upon campaigning and observers. In addition, the process was marked by intimidation directed against opposition activists, domestic observation organisations, opposition and independent media, and a smear campaign against international observers. The ILEOM concluded that "(t)he 2001 presidential election process failed to meet the OSCE commitments for democratic elections...". 1 Chapter 3 of the new Constitution of Belarus gives the President extensive powers. The powers listed in Article 84 include, inter alia, to determine the structure of the Government of the Republic of Belarus; to appoint and dismiss the deputy Prime ministers and ministers; to take decisions on the resignation of the Government; to appoint and dismiss judges at all levels (see below); to appoint the leading officials of bodies of state administration; to abolish acts of the Government; to exercise supervision directly or through specially formed bodies of observance of laws by local organs of administration or self-government; and to suspend decisions of local councils of deputies. In addition, Article 85 of the Constitution gives the President the authority to issue mandatory decrees and orders in certain instances as determined by the Constitution. Article 101 of the Constitution stipulates that the Parliament may adopt a law delegating legislative powers in a wide range of areas to the President. It also provides that in instances of necessity, the President may temporary pass decrees which have the power of law. These decrees are then submitted within three days to the Parliament and become valid if they are not rejected by a majority of two thirds of votes of both chambers in their full composition. President Lukashenko has interpreted this provision broadly and has ruled by decree ever since he became President. On 18 February 2000 President Lukashenko dismissed the Prime Minister, Syargey Ling, and nominated Uladzimir Yaarmoshyn. The House of Representatives approved the nomination on 14 March 2000. Since the policies of the Government are mainly dictated by the President the change of the Prime Minister was not expected to bring about any significant changes. The Constitution of Belarus provides for the separation of powers in Article 6. However, in practice, the system of checks and balances among the executive, legislative and judicial powers has been distorted, and now all branches are under the President's effective control. The opposition called for alternative presidential elections on 16 May 1999, in conformity with the abolished 1994 Constitution. A Central Electoral Commission (ECE) was formed to organise the elections. In the period leading to the alternative elections, several opposition leaders were harassed and arrested and some disappeared. The ECE ruled the election results invalid due to irregularities that were, inter alia, caused by the hostility of the authorities. As a further result of the 1996 referendum, the Supreme Soviet was dissolved and replaced by a new bicameral legislature. This new parliament was not directly elected. The 110- member lower house was formed out of the membership of the existing Supreme Soviet. The 64-member upper house was created by a combination of presidential appointments for one third of its members and elections for the remaining seats. The Council of the Republic is the upper chamber and the House of Representatives the lower chamber. Several deputies of the Supreme Soviet belonging to opposition parties have refused to accept this new parliament. In October 2000, the first Parliamentary elections since the 1996 referendum were held. The elections were boycotted by some opposition parties. The first round of voting for the House of Representatives was held on 15 October 2000. Four days later the elections were declared valid in 97 constituencies and invalid in 13 constituencies, where the elections were to be repeated. In the second round of voting on 29 October 2000 run-off elections in 56 of the 97 2 constituencies were held and declared valid. The turnout for the first round of voting was officially given as 61.08 per cent. The opposition alleged that the turnout had been artificially inflated by altered voter lists. According to the opposition, the turnout was around 45 per cent. For the 110 seats, 562 candidates stood in the elections and only some 50 were members of the opposition. Political opponents had reportedly been barred by technicalities or spoke about repeated harassment by the authorities. The former Prime Minister, Mikhail Chigir, withdrew his candidacy in the second round of voting,alleging that the turnout rates in his constituency in the first round had been manipulated. The ODIHR Technical Assessment Mission stated that the 15 October 2000 parliamentary elections process in Belarus failed to meet international standards for democratic elections. On 18 March 2001, the repeat elections in the 13 constituencies where the turnout in the second round in October 2000 had fallen below the 25 per cent needed, were held. In 11 constituencies, the vote was only successful in a second round of voting on 1 April 2001. Despite strong popular opposition, on 8 December 1999 President Lukashenko and the Russian President Boris Yeltsin signed a Treaty on the Creation of a Union State. The treaty commits the two countries to become a confederate state and establishes joint governing bodies. On 25 April 2000 the Council of Ministers of the Union of Russia and Belarus, meeting for the first time, discussed the creation of a common currency and the legal basis for further unification. In April 2001 both houses of the National Assembly ratified an agreement to introduce the Russian rouble as the common currency as of 1 January 2005 and a new common currency from 1 January 2008. HUMAN RIGHTS BACKGROUND During the period covered by this report, the Government failed to meet its human rights obligations in respect of a number of basic human rights. Excessive restrictions on the freedom of association, expression, the press, and peaceful assembly continued, and conditions in prisons and detention facilities remained poor, amounting in some instances to cruel, degrading or inhuman treatment. There were also allegations of ill-treatment by the police and numerous human rights abuses by members of the security forces. Fair trial standards
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Individual V. State: Practice on Complaints with the United Nations Treaty Bodies with Regards to the Republic of Belarus
    Individual v. State: Practice on complaints with the United Nations treaty bodies with regards to the Republic of Belarus Volume I Collection of articles and documents The present collection of articles and documents is published within the framework of “International Law in Advocacy” program by Human Rights House Network with support from the Human Rights House in Vilnius and Civil Rights Defenders (Sweden) 2012 UDC 341.231.14 +342.7 (476) BBK 67.412.1 +67.400.7 (4Bel) I60 Edited by Sergei Golubok Candidate of Law, Attorney of the St. Petersburg Bar Association, member of the editorial board of the scientific journal “International justice” I60 “Individual v. State: Practice on complaints with the United Nations treaty bodies with regards to the Republic of Belarus”. – Vilnius, 2012. – 206 pages. ISBN 978-609-95300-1-7. The present collection of articles “Individual v. State: Practice on complaints with the United Nations treaty bodies with regards to the Republic of Belarus” is the first part of the two-volume book, that is the fourth publication in the series about international law and national legal system of the republic of Belarus, implemented by experts and alumni of the Human Rights Houses Network‘s program “International Law in Advocacy” since 2007. The first volume of this publication contains original writings about the contents and practical aspects of international human rights law concepts directly related to the Institute of individual communications, and about the role of an individual in the imple- mentation of international legal obligations of the state. The second volume, expected to be published in 2013, will include original analyti- cal works on the admissibility of individual considerations and the Republic of Belarus’ compliance with the decisions (views) by treaty bodies.
    [Show full text]
  • Time Project Event Unite the Nations 3 May 2011
    Time Project Event 2011 May 3rd 2011 TIME PROJECT EVENT UNITE THE NATIONS 3 MAY 2011 Short instruction: 1) How many questions do I have to answer? There are 250 questions. Every Country has 25 questions. Every school HAS to answer 225 questions, which means you do not ANSWER THE 25 questions FROM YOUR OWN COUNTRY. For example: Russia: There are 25 questions about Russia. More than one school from Rusia contributed questions which means there may be some Russian questions some Russian students may not recognize (they came from the other school ). Schools from Russia do not answer the 25 questions about Russia regardless of who contributed the questions. You never answer the questions about YOUR OWN COUNTRY. 2) How do I find the answers? - Encyclopaedias, the Internet, the Library or other sources at school or in the community - Get in touch with other time participants to find answers to questions which are difficult for you. 3) Where and when do I send the answers? Questions have to answered on line at the ZOHO Challenge Site. https://challenge.zoho.com/unite_the_nations_2011 Test starts 00:00 GMT May 3rd 2011 - Deadline: 00:00 GMT/UTC 4 May 2011! Other questions?? Get in touch with Event Co-ordinator ! [email protected] phone: +01.519.452.8310 cellphone +01.519.200.5092 fax: +01.519.452. 8319 And now…the game! Time Project Event 2011 May 3rd 2011 ARTS Argentina 1) Who wrote the book "Martin Fierro"? a) Jose Hernandez b) Peschisolido miguel angel c) David vineyards d) Jorge Luis Borges 2) What is the typical dance of Argentina? a) quartet b) tango c) cumbia d) capoeira 3) Who was Carlos Gardel? a) a singer of cumbia b) a soccer player c) a singer of tango d) a former president 4) Who was Lola Mora? a) a model b) a sculptor c) an athlete d) a journalist 5) Which Argentine made and released the world's first animated feature film.
    [Show full text]
  • 2. Historical, Cultural and Ethnic Roots1
    2. HISTORICAL, CULTURAL AND ETHNIC ROOTS1 General features of ethnic identity evolution history, to develop autonomous state structures, in the eastern part of Europe their lives have mostly been determined by out- side forces with diverse geopolitical interests. Differences may be observed between Eastern The uncertain political situation of past cen- and Western Europe in terms of the ethnogenesis turies gave rise – along the linguistic, cultural of the peoples and the development of their eth- and political fault lines – to several ethnic groups nic identity. In the eastern half of the continent, with uncertain identities, disputed allegiances rather than be tied to the confines of a particular and divergent political interests. Even now, there state, community identity and belonging have exist among the various groups overlaps, differ- tended to emerge from the collective memory of ences and conflicts which arose in earlier periods. a community of linguistic and cultural elements The characteristic features of the groups have not or, on occasion, from the collective memory of a been placed in a clearly definable framework. state that existed in an earlier period (Romsics, In the eastern half of Europe, the various I. 1998). The evolution of the eastern Slavic and ethnic groups are at different stages of devel- Baltic peoples constitutes a particular aspect of opment in terms of their ethnic identity. The this course. We can, therefore, gain insights into Belarusian people, who speak an eastern Slavic the historical foundations of the ethnic identity language, occupy a special place among these of the inhabitants of today’s Belarus – an identity groups.
    [Show full text]
  • The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area
    The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area Background Paper 2010 ODIHR This paper was prepared by the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR). Every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this paper is accurate and impartial. This paper updates The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area: Background Paper 2009. It is intended to provide a concise update to highlight changes in the status of the death penalty in OSCE participating States since the previous publication and to promote constructive discussion of this issue. It covers the period from 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010. All comments or suggestions should be addressed to ODIHR’s Human Rights Department. Published by the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) Aleje Ujazdowskie 19 00-557 Warsaw Poland www.osce.org/odihr © OSCE/ODIHR 2010 ISBN 978-92-9234-784-0 All rights reserved. The contents of this publication may be freely used and copied for educational and other non-commercial purposes, provided that any such repro- duction is accompanied by an acknowledgement of ODIHR as the source. Designed by Nona Reuter The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area Background Paper 2010 Table of Contents OVERVIEW vii THE STATUS OF THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE OSCE AREA 1 Abolitionist States 3 Partly Abolitionist States 4 De Facto Abolitionist States 4 Retentionist States 7 ANNEXES Annex 1: OSCE Commitments and Resolutions on the Death Penalty 18 Annex 2: Other International Standards and Provisions on the Death Penalty 22 Annex 3: Relevant Recommendations Made at the OSCE Human Dimension Meeting in 2009 35 Annex 4: Questionnaire on the Death Penalty 36 Annex 5: Status of Ratifications of Relevant Treaties 39 v Overview The worldwide trend towards the full abolition of the death penalty continued dur- ing the reporting period for this background paper, from 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Zalesskaya V. Belarus, Comm. 1604/2007
    United Nations CCPR/C/101/D/1604/2007 International Covenant on Distr.: Restricted* Civil and Political Rights 28 April 2011 Original: English Human Rights Committee One hundredth and first session 14 March to 1 April 2011 Views Communication No. 1604/2007 Submitted by: Elena Zalesskaya (not represented by counsel) Alleged victims: The author State party: Belarus Date of communication: 8 February 2007 (initial submission) Document references: Special Rapporteur’s rule 97 decision, transmitted to the State party on 5 October 2007 (not issued in document form) Date of adoption of Views: 28 March 2011 * Made public by decision of the Human Rights Committee. GE. CCPR/C/101/D/1604/2007 Subject matter: Prosecution of the author for distributing newspapers and leaflets in the street Procedural issues: Degree of substantiation of claims Substantive issues: Freedom of expression, right to impart information, peaceful assembly, prohibition of discrimination Articles of the Covenant: Article 19, paragraphs 2 and 3; article 21; article 26. Articles of the Optional Protocol: 2 On 28 March 2011, the Human Rights Committee adopted the annexed text as the Committee’s Views under article 5, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol in respect of communication No. 1604/2007. [Annex] 2 CCPR/C/101/D/1604/2007 Annex Views of the Human Rights Committee under article 5, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights (one hundredth and first session) concerning Communication No. 1604/2007** Submitted by: Elena Zalesskaya (not represented by counsel) Alleged victims: The author State party: Belarus Date of communication: 8 February 2007 (initial submission) The Human Rights Committee, established under article 28 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Meeting on 28 March 2011 Having concluded its consideration of communication No.
    [Show full text]
  • Review–Chronicle
    REVIEWCHRONICLE of the human rights violations in Belarus in 2005 Human Rights Center Viasna ReviewChronicle » of the Human Rights Violations in Belarus in 2005 VIASNA « Human Rights Center Minsk 2006 1 REVIEWCHRONICLE of the human rights violations in Belarus in 2005 » VIASNA « Human Rights Center 2 Human Rights Center Viasna, 2006 REVIEWCHRONICLE of the human rights violations in Belarus in 2005 INTRODUCTION: main trends and generalizations The year of 2005 was marked by a considerable aggravation of the general situation in the field of human rights in Belarus. It was not only political rights » that were violated but social, economic and cultural rights as well. These viola- tions are constant and conditioned by the authoritys voluntary policy, with Lu- kashenka at its head. At the same time, human rights violations are not merely VIASNA a side-effect of the authoritarian state control; they are deliberately used as a « means of eradicating political opponents and creating an atmosphere of intimi- dation in the society. The negative dynamics is characterized by the growth of the number of victims of human rights violations and discrimination. Under these circums- tances, with a high level of latent violations and concealed facts, with great obstacles to human rights activity and overall fear in the society, the growth points to drastic stiffening of the regimes methods. Apart from the growing number of registered violations, one should men- Human Rights Center tion the increase of their new forms, caused in most cases by the development of the state oppressive machine, the expansion of legal restrictions and ad- ministrative control over social life and individuals.
    [Show full text]
  • Urgent Appeal – the Observatory
    1 URGENT APPEAL – THE OBSERVATORY BLR 007 / 0811 / OBS 104 Arbitrary arrest / Incomunicado detention Belarus August 4, 2011 The Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, a joint programme of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), requests your intervention in the following situation in Belarus . Description of the situation: The Observatory has been informed by reliable sources of the arbitrary arrest of Mr. Ales Bialatski , President of the Human Rights Centre (HRC) "Viasna" and Vice-President of FIDH. According to the information received, on August 4, 2011, at around 2 p.m., a group of people in plain clothes surrounded the office of the HRC "Viasna" in Minsk. Members of the HRC "Viasna" went out of the office and locked the door. They heard one of the plain-clothes individual report saying through his phone that " Bialtski [was] not [t]here ". Subsequently, at about 4.30 pm, Mr. Bialatski was arrested in the street in the city centre of Minsk by the police representative of the Department of Financial Investigations. As of issuing this Urgent Appeal, the whereabouts of Mr. Bialatski are unknown, and he is reportedly forbidden to use his mobile phone. The Observatory expresses its deepest concern about the arrest and unknown location of Mr. Bialatski, and calls for his immediate and unconditional release. Actions requested: The Observatory urges the authorities of Belarus to: i. Guarantee in all circumstances the physical and psychological integrity of Mr. Ales Bialatski as well as of all human rights defenders in Belarus; ii.
    [Show full text]
  • General Assembly Distr.: General 17 July 2020
    United Nations A/75/173 General Assembly Distr.: General 17 July 2020 Original: English Seventy-fifth session Item 72 (c) of the provisional agenda* Promotion and protection of human rights: human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives Situation of human rights in Belarus Note by the Secretary-General The Secretary-General has the honour to transmit to the General Assembly the report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus, Anaïs Marin, in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 41/22. * A/75/150. 20-09661 (E) 050820 *2009661* A/75/173 Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus, Anaïs Marin Summary In the present report, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus, Anaïs Marin, focuses on the administration of justice, in particular juvenile justice, and the judicial harassment of human rights defenders, journalists and other members of civil society in Belarus. 2/21 20-09661 A/75/173 I. Introduction A. Executive summary 1. The Human Rights Council established the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus in its resolution 20/13, on the basis of a report by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (A/HRC/20/8). The Council requested the mandate holder to report to it and the General Assembly annually. The Council has since renewed the mandate seven times, for one year at a time, in resolutions 23/15, 26/25, 29/17, 32/26, 35/27, 38/14 and 41/22.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Monitoring of Human Rights Center “Viasna” Concerning Tortures and Facts of Other Kinds of Inhumane Treatment Towards Citizens of Belarus
    REVIEW-CHRONICLE OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN BELARUS IN 2004 2 REVIEW-CHRONICLE OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN BELARUS IN 2004 PREAMBLE: CONCLUSIONS AND GENERALIZATIONS In 2004 the political situation in Belarus was distinguished by further worsening of the situation of human rights and the relations between the state and individuals. Regular and deliberate human rights violations became a necessary condition for the strengthening of the unlimited dictatorial power – infringements of human rights served as the funda¬ment for authoritarianism and were a favorable environment for the development of totalitarianism. One of the main factors that influenced the public and political situation in Belarus in 2004 was the Parliamentary election and the nationwide referendum concerning the possibility to prolong Aliaksandr Luka¬shenka’s presidential powers. The need for the liquidation of the cons¬ti¬tutional restriction of the number of possible presidential terms defined the state policy and influenced it in all circles of public life. This factor ma¬nifested in the sphere of human rights with the aggravation of the rep¬ressions against political opponents and prosecution of opposition-mindedness, enforcement of new discriminative legal acts, further limitation of the freedom of the press, violation of the liberty of peaceful assemblies and associations and other obstacles for the enjoyment of personal liberties by citizens of Belarus. Citizens of Belarus were deprived of the right to take part in the state government with the assistance of elected representatives. The election to the Chamber of Representatives wasn’t free and democratic. It was conducted according to the scenario that was prepared by the authorities in complete conformity with the “wishes” A.
    [Show full text]
  • Belarus Page 1 of 29
    Belarus Page 1 of 29 Belarus Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2003 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor February 25, 2004 According to its amended Constitution, the country is a republic with a directly elected President. President Alexander Lukashenko intensified his attack on democratic institutions. First elected in 1994, Lukashenko amended the 1994 Constitution in 1996 through a seriously flawed referendum and extended his term in office in 2001 through an election process that the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) described as neither free nor fair. In March and November, local elections were held that were neither free nor fair. The judiciary is not independent. The Committee for State Security (KGB) and the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD), both of which report directly to the President, share law enforcement and internal security responsibilities. The Presidential Guard--created initially to protect senior officials--continued to act against the political enemies of the Lukashenko Government with no judicial or legislative oversight. Apart from the President, civilian authorities did not maintain effective control of the security forces. Members of the security forces committed numerous serious human rights abuses. The economy was centrally planned with industry accounting for approximately half of economic output. The country had a population of just under 10 million, although this number was decreasing. The majority of workers were employed in the state industrial and state agricultural sectors. In the state sector, wages were lower than the national average and wage arrears were chronic though often of short duration and limited scope.
    [Show full text]
  • Belarus Before Voting: the Referendum (Past, Presence and Perspectives)
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Policy Documentation Center CENTER FOR POLITICAL EDUCATION Miensk, Republic of Belarus -mail: [email protected] Gutta c a v at lapidem Belarus before Voting: The Referendum (Past, Presence and Perspectives) Introduction: This analysis was prepared from August 25-September 25, 2004 by Andrei Liakhovich, the head of the Minsk-based Center for Political Education (CPE), focusing on the referendum on a possible third term in office for President Alexander Lukashenka, which is scheduled – together with the parliamentary elections – on October 17, 2004. Since September 2003, the Pontis Foundation of Slovakia has been implementing a project in Belarus assisting think-tank and analytical groups mainly through exchange programs.1 As part of this project, Pontis is distributing two analyses before the parliamentary elections (and the referendum) to help increase the flow of analytical information. The views in the analysis are by the CPE. The Pontis Foundation does not necessarily share them. Summary: The democratic opposition could stop President Lukashenka’s bid for a third term only if it were to implement the “Yugoslav variant” in Belarus. However, there are no pre-conditions for such an approach. Most Belarusian voters believe that the elections will be falsified. Despite the fact that there is general disappointment regarding the democrats, the ideas of democracy and European Belarus are still popular among citizens.2 The problem is the lack of (personal) alternatives to Lukashenka, and the fact that Belarusian voters (including the traditional supporters of the democrats) are resigned to the up-coming falsification.
    [Show full text]
  • General Assembly Distr.: General 22 September 2017
    United Nations A/72/493 General Assembly Distr.: General 22 September 2017 Original: English Seventy-second session Agenda item 72 (c) Promotion and protection of human rights: human rights situations and reports of special rapporteurs and representatives Situation of human rights in Belarus* Note by the Secretary-General The Secretary-General has the honour to transmit to the General Assembly the report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus, Miklós Haraszti, submitted in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 32/26. * The present report was submitted after the deadline to take into account information received by the Special Rapporteur during his trip to Minsk in July 2017. 17-16691 (E) 031017 *1716691* A/72/493 Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus Summary The present report is submitted by the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 32/26. The report examines the relationship between the unique features of governance of Belarus and its situation of human rights. It concludes that one of the main structural reasons for both the entrenched systemic abuse of human rights and the cyclical waves of mass repression in the country is that all powers are assumed by the executive branch, chiefly the President and the presidential administration. Although the Constitution provides for the separation of powers and respect for human rights, the reality is a monolithic power structure with laws and governance aimed at maintaining the concentration of powers and an absence of effective human rights guarantees.
    [Show full text]