Republic

A TEST FOR ‘EUROPEAN VALUES’ Some European Union politicians have recently resumed talks about sanctions against Belarus. It is surprising as they consider sanctions as a testimony of their adherence to European values although their approach in no way follows these values. Those in the European Union like to underline that relations between the European Union and its partners rely on common values – human rights, democracy and the supremacy of the law. This is why Brussels’ partners have the right to expect that the European Union’s policy towards these partners will adhere to these values. Sanctions look rather strange in the political arsenal of the European Union. Following the detention of representatives of the opposition, who took part in riots in Minsk on the presidential election day, several European politicians are trying to face the Belarusian authorities with an ultimatum: either you immediately free the detainees and stop investigations into what happened or we use sanctions against you. The choice of punitive measures is limited only by the fantasy of the initiators. They vary from denying entry to shortlisted people to stopping all kinds of economic cooperation between Europe and Belarus. President of the European Parliament Jerzy Buzek has outdone everyone else by suggesting prohibiting Belarus from partaking in the Olympics and world championships (impossible due to the Olympic Charter). Now they only have to connect the sanctions with those European values. Several events were witnessed by all the global mass media in Minsk in the evening of 19 December: an unauthorized rally, mass demonstration along the traffic way, declaration of “a national recovery government”, an attempt to storm the Seat of Government, which entailed broken doors and windows, rejection to obey legitimate demands of law enforcement officers and attempts to resist them. Some of the participants of these events have been detained by the police and the KGB. Legal proceedings against those suspected of having organized the illegal actions have been launched. Do these actions contradict the principle of the supremacy of the law that Europeans love so much? Does Europe’s demand to release the suspects without investigation and trial meet the principle? It would be a purely political decision on the part of the Belarusian authorities, not a legal one. Independent foreign observer Franz Masser, a retired police chief of a federal land of Germany, who was in Minsk then, said: “The opposition’s action was not a peaceful demonstration, but a criminal act. What I saw on television – broken windows of the parliament building, assaults on police officers – can be expressly defined as a crime. I hope that my Belarusian colleagues will conduct an impartial investigation and punish the guilty according to the legislation”. Let’s talk about the legal aspect of the sanctions that European politicians suggest. The denial of entry for Belarusian officials to the European Union is the most popular measure. The lists vary from top officials to members of election committees, reporters of state-run mass media and riot police officers. According to mass media reports, one of the leaders of the Belarusian opposition Alexander Milinkevich has already brought a black list he had compiled to Brussels. So European politicians suggest restricting one of the fundamental human rights that has been stipulated by international conventions – the right to freedom of travel. What legal grounds are there? Some lists compiled by the Belarusian opposition. What reasons? For alleged rigging of the election and for violating rights of those, who took part in the civil unrest. A question arises what competent body has de jure confirmed that the election has been rigged or that the rights of those, who took part in the civil unrest in Minsk, have been violated? No body. Hence the visa restrictions that some European politicians suggest will be a purely political decision, not a legal one, that will violate a fundamental right of many Belarusian citizens. And the attempt to include state-run media journalists in this list? Is this a punishment for making their opinion during the election campaign public? Does this in any way correspond to the EU’s commitment to freedom of speech and opinion? Or does the EU believe that this right can be exercised only by journalists of European and Belarusian opposition media? By the way, once we’ve started talking about journalistic standards, can someone explain why leading European media covering the post-election events in Minsk completely ignore the principle of impartiality towards the parties of the conflict, of which they usually accuse the Belarusian state-run media? Has anyone lately seen at least one impartial publication, which would present the views of the two sides, which would quote, without distortion, the position of the official Minsk? No. The notorious standards of journalistic ethics are meant strictly for export, for the uncivilized Belarusians and their ilk. European politicians are now threatening to use sanctions against officials in Russia (in connection with the “Magnitsky case” and Khodorkovsky’s new verdict), and Kyiv (in connection with criminal charges pressed against Yulia Timoshenko and her political allies). It is not difficult to figure all this out: the main characters of these cases have a serious lobby in the European Union, which is willing to use political rather than legal mechanisms to protect their fosterlings. Although the European Court of Human Rights is meant to correct legal errors made at the national level in such cases. After all, the legislation of European countries such as Belgium or Spain allows bringing to court the cases involving human rights violations anywhere in the world. It was a Spanish judge who in due time issued a European arrest warrant for General Pinochet. If the initiators of the sanctions have evidence that would prove that representatives of the Belarusian authorities are guilty on at least one charge among many that mass media have been talking about for over 15 years now, why then no suit has been filed with European courts yet? Because there is no evidence. There are only allegations, which play part of a larger political game. If so, you should not bring up European values here. They have nothing to do with it. It should be noted that many European policymakers clearly understand it. The Financial Times Deutschland says that the EU states are split up in their views on sanctions against Belarus. “Most EU members prefer to wait for the official opinions of legal experts before approving sanctions against Minsk. There is practically no chance that the EU states will agree on this issue before the meeting of the foreign ministers of the EU nations scheduled for 31 January,” the German newspaper says. Well, the sanctions against Belarus will become an excellent test for the consistency of the EU policy and its adherence to the declared European values. by Alesei MATSEVILO, BelTA

БЕЛТА