The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area Kovalev filed a supervisory complaint with the Supreme Court, stating his disagreement with the Court’s sentence. This complaint was received by the Belarusian authorities who, according to their response to ODIHR’s questionnaire, considered the arguments made therein. Reasons for rejecting the complaint were not stipulated in the response, which simply stated that the arguments put forward by Kovalev were not corroborated by evidence. The Belarusian response also stated that the prisoner and his lawyer were notified of the decision, though a date was not provided. According to Viasna, a Minsk-based human rights NGO, the execution took place before the supervisory complaint was reviewed.59 Kovalev also submitted a petition to the UN Human Rights Committee, after which the Committee requested that Belarus stay the executions while it reviewed and issued a decision on the case.60 The Committee criticized the executions, stating that Belarus violated its international obligations by imposing death sentences on individuals whose right to fair trial may have been violated.61 A report published by ODIHR in November 2011, pursuant to trial monitoring conducted in Minsk between March and July of that year, raised a number of concerns with regards to Belarus’s compliance with fair trial standards and OSCE commitments. The trials covered in ODIHR’s report were of individuals who were charged with crimes in the aftermath of the events in central Minsk following the elections on 19 December 2010 and did not include capital cases.62 Amnesty, pardon or commutation No clemencies or commutations were granted during the reporting period. No death sentences were overturned on appeal.63 The President rejected a request for clemency by Igor Myalik. On 25 February 2011 the President rejected requests for clemency 59  “Europe condemns executions of Kovalev and Konovalov”, www.telegraf.by, 18 March 2012, <http://telegraf.by/ en/2012/03/evropa-osudila-rasstrel-kovaleva-i-konovalova>. 60  “Belarus: abolish death penalty”, Human Rights Watch, 19 March 2012, <http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/03/19/ belarus-abolish-death-penalty>. 61  “World report 2012: Belarus”, Human Rights Watch, <http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2012/world-report2012-belarus>; The European Union also condemned the executions. The EU foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, criticized the executions, stating that the accused individuals were not accorded their due process rights, including the right to defend themselves. Ashton urged Belarus to impose a moratorium, emphasizing the European Union’s opposition to the death penalty, which it considers a form of cruel and inhuman punishment. See: “Statement by the Spokesperson of High Representative Catherine Ashton on the execution of Uladzislaw Kavalyow in Belarus”, www.eeas.europa.eu, 17 March 2012, <http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/belarus/press_corner/statements_belarus/spanish_statement_on_belarus_/statements/17_03_2012_en.htm>. 62  “OSCE/ODIHR report on trial monitoring in Belarus(March-July 2011)”, 10 November 2011, <http://www.osce. org/odihr/84873>. 63  Belarus Response, op. cit., note 28. 13