Prosecutor’s Office Protests against Court Decision on Shydlouski’s Case

Miensk Savietski borough prosecutor’s office submitted a cassation protest to the board of civic cases of Miensk city court. In this protests it is stated that the court decision could by no means be considered as grounded and objective as the court didn’t take into consideration all circumstances and fact. The protest will be considered collegially, by three judges.

Representative of Aliaxiei Shydlouski Valiantsin Stefanovich said that they would submit one more complaint against the court decision for consideration together with the prosecutor’s protest.

It’s worth mentioning that on 17 October Savietski borough court of Minsk turned down a suit against state-owned newspaper “Sovetskaya Belorussia” and its editor-in-chief Paviel Iakubovich. Aliaxiei Shydlouski sued “Sovetskaya Belorussia” for spreading untrue information defaming him.
On 8 May 2002 the newspaper informed its readers that Aliaxiei Shydlouski had left his wife with a kid, when he was twenty. The newspaper said, he was convicted to imprisonment for alimony evasion. However, Shydlouski has never been married and has never had children. He was convicted for political graffiti. The article "Face with a Touch of Mind", published in “Sovetskaya Belorussia” by it editor Paviel Iakubovich, had a biased nature and was devoted to the report on human rights situation in Belarus, made by the US State Department. Iakubovich obviously aimed at discrediting not only Aliaxiei Shydlouski, but other prisoners of consciousness in the eyes of the broad public.
In his suit Shydlouski asked the court to recognize that the information, spread by “Sovetskaya Belorussia”, was not true, and insulted his honor, dignity and reputation. Shydlouski also asked to exact 6 million rubles from both defendants as a compensation of moral harm done to him.

Judge M. Fiodarava heard the case. Shydlouski's mother Raisa and girlfriend Iryna Toustsik testified in the hearing. Iryna said, she had been dating Aliaxiei since 1999, they planned to get married, but the newspaper article did a lot of harm to their relations.
The judge concluded that although the spread information contradicted the facts, it was not defaming Shydlouski and did not make any moral harm.
According to p. 14 of the Supreme Court ruling # 15, made on 23/12/1999, such information does not need refutation.

Information Department of PA HRC “Viasna”