Ihar Sluchak to appeal against decision on his arrest to Supreme Court
Ihar Sluchak from Homel has filed an appeal to the chair of the Supreme Court, Valyantsin Sukala.
The public activist will appeal against a decision of the Savetski district court of Homel to arrest him for 3 days for alleged disorderly conduct. The court ruling was announced on August 31, Viasna human rights centre reports.
Ihar Sluchak finds this decision unfair. “I did not commit the offence they accuse me of. My fault was not proved in court. The court made its decision only on evidence by witness Syarhei Zamai and inner conviction of the judge,” the activist says.
He asks to cancel this decision of the court and close the administrative case. The activist reminds that he had appealed against the verdict of the district court to the region court, but unsuccessfully.
Ihar Sluchak pointed the police report and court decision gave different obstacles of committing the offence, as well as the place, time and other details.
Sluchak wrote in the appeal: “The judge came to a conclusion that witness’s evidence was consistent, logic and did not contradict other evidence… But the witness could not explain in court where the offence had been committed.” The activist notes that policemen gave confused evidence at the trial.
Ihar Sluchak says the court did not take into account some facts that could characterize witness Syarhei Zamai, namely that he had been on police file as a juvenile delinquent and his alcohol addiction.
According to him, the case contains only evidence by him and the witness, but the court believed the witness. Evidence by policemen cannot prove the guilt of the activist, because they only proved the fact that witness Syarhei Zamai had complained to them orally.
“Disappointed with Homel judges, I began to do their work – investigate the facts over the case. I sent a request to Syarhei Zamai’s work and received an answer that at the time of alleged committing of the offence he had been at work in the locomotive shop five kilometers from the scene. We can see that there’s no legal fact of committing an offence,” the activist is convinced.
He adds that the chair of the region court did not turn attention to the words of locomotive shop supervisors, who claim the witness had been in another place when the offence had taken place.
Ihar Sluchak urges Valyantsin Sukala to look into his appeal impartially.