Unjustified restriction of the right to peaceful assembly and inhumane detention for protesting unfair elections

Facts

The author and other citizens gathered in Minsk to voice their protest over what they believed was an unfair election. The protest involved a peaceful assembly, in which the author participated, but also violent groups of protesters who started smashing the windows of the House of Government.  The author  was located at a distance from the violent groups. The police used disproportionate force to disperse the crowds, beating them with batons. The author, alongside hundreds of protesters, were apprehended and taken to the police station. He was sentenced to 15 days of administrative detention. Thereafter, he was arrested and charged with participation in mass disorders. The author alleged that the police coerced him, without the presence of his lawyer, to sign a confession admitting to damaging state property, that he was held with 21 other inmates in unsanitary conditions, that he was only allowed out of his cell to walk once a day, that he was only allowed to shower once every 10 days and that his complaints about his state of health were ignored. The author alleges a violation of his rights under articles 2, 7, 9 (2,3), 10, 14 (1, 2, 3 ((d), (e), (g)) and (5), 19, and 21 of the Covenant.  He claims that he was subjected to psychological pressure at the pre-trial detention and investigation stages, with the aim of obtaining from him a confession, in violation of article 7 of the Covenant. Moreover, the conditions of his detention violated his rights under article 10 of the Covenant.

Admissibility

As regards the claims of psychological pressure and that the courts were biased, the author has failed to sufficiently substantiate these for the purposes of admissibility. However, the author has sufficiently substantiated the remaining claims, under articles 9 (2, 3), 10, 14 (2, 3 (d)), 19, 21 of the Covenant, for the purposes of admissibility.

Merits

First, the author was not promptly informed about the reasons for his arrest. Additionally, the author’s remand in custody was sanctioned by an official not authorized by law to exercise judicial power. These violate article 9 (2-3) of the Covenant. Second, the author’s conditions of detention violated his right to be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person, in violation of article 10 (1) of the Covenant. Third, the right of the author to be presumed innocent has been violated, as the media and officials publicly referred to him as being guilty of participating in mass disorders, a violation of article 14 (2) of the Covenant. Fourth, in the absence of adequate explanations by the State party on the specific reasons for refusing the author’s wish to be present at the cassation hearing, the Committee finds that there was a violation of article 14 (3) (d) of the Covenant. Fifth, the State party disproportionately interfered in the exercise of the author’s right of peaceful assembly under article 21 of the Covenant. Authorities must be able to show that any restrictions meet the requirement of legality, and are also both necessary for and proportionate to achievet one of the permissible grounds for restriction of the right to peaceful assembly. Finally, freedom of opinion and freedom of expression are indispensable conditions for the full development of a person. Neither the State party nor the courts have provided  sufficient explanation concerning why the restrictions  and the sanction imposed on the author in the exercise of his right to freedom of expression were justified pursuant to the conditions of necessity and proportionality set out in article 19 (3) of the Covenant.

Recommendations

The State party is obligated, inter alia, to provide adequate compensation to the author, including reimbursement of any legal costs incurred, as well as appropriate measures of satisfaction.

Implementation

Deadline: 6 January 2023

By Maricon Torres Lorenzo