The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area–Background Paper 2019 families in a timely manner goes against national legislation.204 The UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus added that the additional pain and suffering of relatives continues after the execution when they face “insults and degrading comments” due to the social stigma attached to the death penalty.205 With this in mind, the Human Rights Committee recommended that until Belarus abolish the death penalty, they should amend Article 175 of the Criminal Law Enforcement Code to avoid violation of Article 7.206 Article 175 of the Criminal Law Enforcement Code states that the management of the institution where the execution took place has to notify the court that imposed the death sentence.207 It is this court that is then supposed to inform one of the close relatives. Notably, there are no specific regulations as to when this notification should occur and no mention of notifying wider society of executions.208 According to a public statement made by Amnesty International regarding the alleged execution of Viktar Liotau and Aliaksei Mikhalenia, when they asked Belarusian authorities to confirm the execution of these two men, they were told, “we know as much as you do.”209 As of 31 March 2019, ODIHR has seen no public confirmation from the Belarusian authorities about the execution of these two men, although it has been widely reported, also in the most recent report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus.210 This reflects the complete secrecy – at all levels, from death row inmates themselves to family members and the wider public, to state officials and international actors. On 6 July 2018, the Human Rights Council adopted resolution 38/14 on the situation of human rights in Belarus, thereby extending the mandate of the Special Rapporteur for one year. In this resolution, it is clearly stated that there is deep concern about the lack of relevant information about the use of the death penalty and adds that the Special Rapporteur should continue to monitor developments, especially because “transparency is a requirement of fair and effective criminal 204  Committee against Torture, Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Belarus, op. cit., note 184, para. 54. 205  Anaïs Marin, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus, op. cit., note 47, para. 22. 206  Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Belarus, op. cit., note 175, para 28 b. 207  Article 175 (5) of the Criminal Law Enforcement Code, in Russian: <http://etalonline.by/document/?regnum=hk0000365&q_id=799631>. 208  FIDH - HRC “Viasna”, “Death Penalty in Belarus: Murder on (Un)lawful Grounds”, op. cit., note 156, p. 66. 209  “Belarus: Amnesty International condemns execution of two more prisoners”, Amnesty International Public Statement, 5 December 2018, <https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/EUR4995212018ENGLISH.pdf>. 210  Anaïs Marin, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus, op. cit., note 47, para. 19 and 20. 41