meet with his lawyer within 24 hours, nor was he
promptly informed of the charges against him, and
that “he could not exercise other procedural
guarantees as a suspect”.
“peritonitis” on 1 October 2003, stating that the
operation was in fact for “appendicitis”, and that he
was discharged as early as 6 October 2003.
8.3 On 26 May 2004, the Minsk Central District’s
Court changed the author’s penitentiary regime and
he was transferred to a Gazgalyi colony-village.
Since 7 June 2004, he has worked as a guard in a
private agricultural firm and lives outside the
colony-village. He has received visits from foreign
diplomats, journalists, and the Chairperson of the
United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention. On two occasions, he has been allowed to
travel to Minsk, for a week. His family is free to visit
him without limitation.
7.2 In detention, the author allegedly developed
acute peritonitis and had to be operated on “at the
end of September 2003”, due to inadequate medical
attention. He had suffered from ulcers for a long
time and claims that he is allowed to receive only 30
kg of parcels per trimester, while the prison diet is
inadequate for his ailment.
7.3 He reiterates that he had requested Mr. G.P. to
represent him in court, but on two occasions the
Supreme Court allegedly dismissed the latter’s
requests to this effect. Mr. G.P. is a member of the
Moscow Lawyers’ Guild, and under the CIS 2
Convention 3 of 23 January 1993, Russian lawyers
can practise in Belarus.
8.4 On 25 April 2005, the State party reaffirms
that during his free time, the author is able to
conduct scientific research. The administration’s
decision not to request his anticipated release was
lawful and taken pursuant to the provisions of the
Criminal Execution Code (CEC). On 21 September
2004, the author was granted a 7-day leave, but he
returned only on 4 January 2005. During his absence,
he omitted duly to inform the prison authorities or
the police of the reasons for his absence, in violation
of both the provisions of CEC and the colony’s
internal rules. During this period, he passed different
examinations and received treatment in several
medical institutions in Minsk, but from 27
September to 27 October 2004, and from 23
November to 3 January 2005, he was treated at a day
hospital, whereas from 12 to 16 November 2004, he
stayed at home.
7.4 The author notes that the State party does not
refute his allegations about the unlawful composition
of the court and about the impossibility for him to
file an appeal in cassation against the judgement of
the Supreme Court.
7.5 As to the possibility of his conducting
scientific research, the author claims that because of
his detention, his contacts with foreign researchers
are limited, and he is unable to use special
equipment or to gain access to the latest scientific
developments. Such articles as he wrote were mainly
based on his memory. His computer has no Internet
access and is used only for word processing, and he
had no mobile phone access.
8.5 The State party contends that during his
treatment in Minsk, the author consulted different
specialists and passed a number of examinations,
following which he was prescribed appropriate
medication. The author was able to visit the local
(ordinary) medical institution in charge of the
penitentiary colony.
Additional submissions by the State party
8.1 On 16 December 2004, the State party
submits that under article 22 of the Law on
Collective Organizations (1994), organizations (such
as NGOs) are allowed to represent rights and lawful
interests of their own members. The author was not a
member of the Belarusian Helsinki Committee, and
in addition, he had requested Mr. G.P. to participate
in the trial not as his representative, but as a NGO
representative.
8.6 By note verbale of 18 August 2005, the State
party explained that on 5 August 2005, the Dyatlov
regional court decided to release the author early and
conditionally.
8.2 From 5 July 2001 to 1 June 2004, the author
was held at the Minsk Correctional Colony No. 1.
According to his medical records, during this period,
he visited the medical service on twelve occasions,
including for eight routine examinations in the
dispensary, passed a number of specialized
examinations, and was also hospitalized. He was
given treatment commensurate with his health, and
he received additional medicines from abroad. The
State party denies that he was operated on for
Additional comments by author
9.1 On 20 February 2005, the author reaffirmed
that the detention centre where he was held between
13 July and 4 August 1999 was not even equipped
with beds, so that detainees slept on the floor, with
no visits with relatives or lawyers allowed.
9.2 As to the visits received, the author concedes
that journalists, researchers, and other visitors were
allowed to see him, but that this was possible only
upon a specific authorization from the Ministry of
Internal Affairs’ Department on Execution of
Penalties. He claims that several such requests for
visits were denied.
2
Community of Independent States.
CIS Convention on Legal Assistance and Relations on
Civil, Family, and Criminal Cases.
3
88
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents