Homel Regional Court justifies non-inclusion of oppositionists in electoral commission

2010 2010-10-01T20:37:52+0300 1970-01-01T03:00:00+0300 en http://spring96.org/files/images/sources/sud_skonchany.jpg The Human Rights Center “Viasna” The Human Rights Center “Viasna”
The Human Rights Center “Viasna”

The regional organizations of the Fair World, the United Civil Party and the Belarusian Popular Front tried to appeal against the non-inclusion of their representatives in the Homel Region Electoral Commission. On 1 October the Homel Regional Court issued a verdict confirming the legality of the formation of the commission.

The court even stated that superdemocracy was demonstrated by the Presidium of the Homel Regional Executive Committee and the Homel Regional Council of Deputies, as representatives of political parties and public associations constitute 2/3 of the commission, not just 1/3 as it is demanded by the law.

The oppositionists, on their part, insist that the candidacies weren’t discussed during the formation of the commission. Moreover, it wasn’t explained why representatives of the pro-governmental Communist Party of Belarus were included in the commission, while members of the UCP and the rest were not. The plaintiffs put to doubt the transparency and democracy of the formation of the commission.

The court verdict was easy to predict, as the city authorities had warned everybody through the state media that they didn’t need to explain anything to anyone. For instance, in the latest issue of the Homel newspaper Savetski Rayon it was written: ‘In order to prevent various rumors about the formation of the electoral commissions Ina Abramtsava (the head of the organizational and personnel department of the Homel City Executive Committee) emphasized that according to the existing legislation of the country the state agencies that formed the commissions didn’t have any quotas for the obligatory inclusion of any candidates, political parties or public associations, and didn’t need to report to anybody about the reasons for their decision’.

Human Rights Defenders for Free Elections