Polish MP met Natalia Pinchuk

2014 2014-02-07T17:27:39+0300 2014-02-07T17:27:39+0300 en http://spring96.org/files/images/sources/pinchuk-list_bialiackaga.jpg
Natallia Pinchuk reading a letter from Ales Bialiatski

Natallia Pinchuk reading a letter from Ales Bialiatski

Adam Lipinski met the spouse of political prisoner Ales Bialatski in Minsk.

The reports come from Polish media.

On Tuesday Lipinski met Natalia Pinchuk, the wife of the head of the human rights center Viasna, political prisoner Ales Bialatski, and passed her copies of the documents, nominating her husband for the Nobel Peace Prize. The appeal for Bialatski’s nomination was send to the Nobel Prize Committee a week ago. It was signed by 151 Polish parliament members of the ruling Civic Platform (PO) and oppositional Law and Justice (PiS) parties. Adam Lipinski collected the signatures of PiS MPs, while Robert Tyszkewicz – of PO parliament members.

“Our activities will now be aimed at the Committee’s decision to be positive. First of all we want to publicize the activities of opposition in Belarus and the political prisoners in this country, including Ales Bialatski. If the Nobel Prize Committee pay attention to that, the decision could be positive”, - Lipinski believes.

Natalia Pinchuk confirmed the information for the charter97.org web-site.

“I received the address itself and the copies of the signature sheets”, - she said.

The wife of the political prisoner also expressed gratitude for the initiative and Polish MP’s attention to the situation in Belarus.

We would remind that Ales Bialatski has been on the list of the candidates throughout his imprisonment term. This is the third time that the famous Belarusian human rights activist gets nominated for a Nobel Prize.

On 24 November court found Viasna’s head guilty of the concealment of income on especially large scale and sentenced to 4.5 year in high security penal colony and confiscation of assets. The reason for Bialatski criminal persecution was that he head bank accounts in Lithuania and Poland. The court did not take into account that the money was used for human rights activities.