Homel resident appeals the prohibition of a picket in support of Ales Bialiatski

2013 2013-11-05T23:29:13+0300 2013-11-05T23:29:13+0300 en http://spring96.org/files/images/sources/sudy-1.jpg The Human Rights Center “Viasna” The Human Rights Center “Viasna”
The Human Rights Center “Viasna”

A resident of Homel Eduard Neliubovich filed to the Tsentralny District Court an appeal against the actions of the Homel City Executive Committee who prohibited him to hold a rally in support of political prisoner Ales Bialiatski. The activist wanted to hold the mass event on 10 November in order to inform the public about the nomination of Ales Bialiatski for Nobel Peace Prize in 2013. The executive committee didn't authorize the picket.

Bear in mind that on 15 August Homel City Executive Committee adopted a new ruling on mass events, according to which two sites were determined for holding pickets and rallies - in a residential area and near
an industrial area. Applicants must enclose paid contracts contract with the police, ambulance and communal utilities to their applications in order to receive a permit.

Mr. Neliubovich considers the ban on the picket as inappropriate.

The executive committee did not explain why the city with the population of half a million should have only two areas for pickets, and why organizers of mass events must enclose agreements for paid services to their applications. This limits the rights of citizens to freedom of peaceful assembly, and as a result, to freedom of expression. The prohibition of my picket cannot be considered as a measure necessary in a democratic society in the interests of protecting public order or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others," points the applicant.

He believes that his rights under Articles 23, 33 and 35 of the Constitution and Articles 19 and 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights have been violated.

Eduard Neliubovich asks the court to
find paragraphs 1 and 3 of the ruling of the Homel City Executive Committee "On Mass Events" unlawful and restricting the rights and interests of citizens. He asks the court to oblige the executive committee to liquidate this violation and cancel paragraphs 1 and 3 of the ruling "On Mass Events".

The applicant also asked the court to find the ruling on "On Mass Events" unconstitutional and to recognize the court ban on the picketing
as illegal.