Government unwilling to compensate Homel resident’s moral damage for illegal conviction
Three appeals have been filed against the decision
of Homel Chyhunachny District Court demanding 50 million rubles in moral
damages for local resident Yauhen Dzedushkin.
On October 23, the Court ruled in the case of the former psychiatrist urging the government to pay him 50 million rubles as a compensation for moral damage resulting from unlawful conviction and sentence.
On October 31, the Prosecutor’s Office of Homel Chyhunachny District challenged the court's decision, as it believed that the amount was clearly excessive. As written in the protest, "the fact of causing moral damage to the plaintiff is not in dispute. But the amount of compensation for moral damage should be determined by the court according to the nature of the physical and moral suffering inflicted to the victim. In determining the amount of damages the requirements of reasonableness and fairness should be considered. The amount of financial compensation for moral damages shall be reduced to 30 million rubles."
In turn, the Ministry of Finance states that "one should take into account the fact that the compensation will be provided by the state budget, which does not have this kind of expenditures." The Ministry of Finance also asked to reduce the amount of moral damage compensation, but failed not mention the amount.
On November 12, Yauhen Dzedushkin filed a protest against the court's decision, arguing that the compensation levied by the court does not correspond to moral suffering he endured, and thus is unfair. Therefore, the plaintiff requests to review the amount of compensation towards a substantial increase: up to 500 million rubles.
Yauhen Dzedushkin has not yet received 20 million rubles in damages, despite the fact that the order for the recovery of this amount was sent by the Homel Regional Court to the Court of Minsk Maskouski District (at the location of the Treasury of the Republic of Belarus) back on October 11. However, since then the former accused did not receive any information on the issue of the money. As a result, he found out that from the court’s letter was sent by mistake to Mazyr. Thus, the recovery of compensation was delayed due to bureaucratic errors.