Valery LEVANEUSKI - personal site  
 
 
July 20th, 2001. Posted in News from Belarus

« Main page

Levaneuski has withdrawn the statement for registration of his initiative group (photo)

Levaneuski has withdrawn the statement for registration of his initiative groupWe result the text of Valery Levaneuski statement in the Central commission of Belarus on elections and carrying out of referenda “About a response of the statement for registration of initiative group of citizens on promotion by the candidate in Presidents of Belarus”

In the Central commission of Belarus on elections and carrying out of referenda.

 

From: Levaneuski Valery Stanislavovich

THE STATEMENT

 

About a response of the statement for registration of initiative group of citizens on promotion by the candidate in Presidents of Belarus.

Because for the reasons independent of me, by me cannot be given declarations on incomes of my relatives and relatives of my wife, leaders with me the joint economy, living in Belarus and the Russian Federation provided by the Decree of the President of Belarus from June, 26th, 2001 (are obtained on demand) N 20 “About obligatory declaring of incomes and property of the candidate in Presidents of Belarus, his near relations, the spouse (spouse) and (her) his parents and some other measures directed on carrying out of open, free and fair elections” and the Decision of the Central commission of Belsrus at elections and carrying out of republican referenda «About an explanation of execution of some positions of the given Decree of the President» and because not performance of requirements of data of crazy, anticonstitutional certificates, regarding obligatory declaring of incomes of relatives of my wife, and my relatives living in the Russian Federation, attracts refusal in registration me the candidate for Presidents of Belarus.

I ask:

To cancel to (withdraw) the statement for registration of initiative group of citizens on promotion by the candidate in Presidents of Belarus of Levaneuski Valery Stanislavovich.

I pay attention of the Central commission of Belarus on elections and carrying out of referenda that the given Decree is accepted after registration of my initiative group, by my potential competitor A.Lukashenka. I.e. conditions at which the candidate for Presidents can be registered are essentially changed. Requirements of the given decree essentially break the rights of other citizens, including, not being under jurisdiction of Belarus.

The list of the documents necessary for registration of candidates in Presidents of Belarus and submitted to the Central Committee is established p. 4 items 68 of the Selective code.

The working president of Belarus A.G.Lukashenka of 26.06.2001 publishes the Decree № 20 which, in particular, on relatives of the candidate in Presidents (his parents, children, the adoptive fathers adopted, native brothers and sisters, the grandfather, the grandma, grandsons, the spouse ((her) his parents) is assigned a duty to present to the Central Committee of the declaration on incomes and property.

No failure the specified declarations, and also granting of data mismatching the validity attracts refusal in registration of the candidate in Presidents or cancellation of the decision on his registration.

The data containing in named declarations, will be published in mass-media for general acquaintance.

I have the numerous relatives falling under entered Decree № 20 list and have addressed to them with the request to prepare declarations on their incomes and property on purpose beforehand to collect documents for giving in the Central Committee.

However, some my relatives have refused to present the specified declarations, having specified thus, that they in Presidents do not gather and do not wish to do superfluous work and furthermore they against data about their incomes and property were published in mass-media. Others owing to the objective reasons cannot give the declaration. One of relatives has declared, that it is a shame to it to declare the beggarly pension which was established by A.Lukashenka’s mode for work on Komsomol buildings and in harmful conditions.

The current legislation does not allocate the person who is put forward by the candidate in Presidents of Belarus by the right to demand of granting of declarations on incomes and property of relatives, specified in item 1.1 of the Decree №20 both in territory of Belarus, and behind its limits. Therefore I to be actually deprived possibility by to the registered candidate for Presidents of Belarus. The decree is published after registration of my initiative group. If I foreknew, that promotion me in candidates for Presidents will depend on will of relatives not living with me, from that they will agree to submit declarations or not I before formation of initiative group and a filing of application about its registration would co-ordinate the given question with all numerous relatives.

I believe, that actions of the President of Belarus A.G.Lukashenka are illegal and roughly break my rights.

So, the Decree is published in already begun campaign for presidential elections of Belarus, the person who declared the participation in this company. The given decision of the operating Head of the state, it is impossible to estimate differently, as direct abusing the powers and excess of the power for the purpose of reception of side benefits during elections. A.Lukashenka, probably, even before Decree acceptance has co-ordinated this question with all relatives.

Even at Hitler and Stalin children were not responsible for action of the parents and relatives of the spouse (spouse). Now such norm is entered by the Decree. My relatives have nothing to hide, parents worked from 12 years, all their riches are callosities and occupational diseases, they live today from pension to pension. As to the person respecting their calmness and age it is inconvenient to me to disturb them once again, it is immoral. It is not necessary to forget, that any account  error, even in an equivalent of 1 dollar can serve as the big troubles for the old men-parents receiving 20-30 dollars of pension in month.

All it reminds me recent history with parliamentary elections in 2000.

I will remind, that then to me have originally given up in registration by the candidate, since I have not specified in the declaration on incomes a wooden structure (probably a toilet) on a country site of the parents, not having cost. The Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the selective commission, but already on the basis, that I should not specify a country site in the declaration since it does not belong to me. In both cases the data specified in the declaration have considered doubtful. I cannot understand till now, whether to the voter important know: whether there is on a summer residence of my parents a wooden toilet or not, I refer to this wooden structure or not? As all being on a summer residence, together with wooden structures and shovels, can be estimated no more than in 10-15 US dollars.

I can understand when the declaration is required from those persons with whom the general economy or when there are suspicions about infinite riches of relatives is conducted.

Thus, the Decree does not provide a duty of the President going on repeated election, promulgation of the information on the off-budget funds of the Administrative office of the President created and supervised by it, that, in my opinion to opinion, is obligatory. The property and money resources of these funds are not a part of the state budget, are deduced from under the control of Parliament, Ministerial council, Committee of the state control and subordinated exclusively to the President.

According to p. 2 items 101 of the Constitution are not supposed delegation by the House of Representatives and Council of Republic of National meeting of powers to the President on the edition of the decrees providing, in particular, change of an order of presidential elections. From this follows, that so-called time decrees of the President (p. 3 items 101 of the Constitution) cannot regulate legal relationship, the Constitutions specified regarding 2 item 101. In infringement p. 3 items 101 of the Constitution the President in a preamble of the Decree has not proved special necessity of its edition, and the reference to necessity of maintenance of legality and publicity only duplicates corresponding articles of the Constitution (item 2 item, 7, 65) and the Selective code (item 13).

Besides, the given Decree is presented A.G.Lukashenka to the House of Representatives last day of its works literally 5 minutes prior to official closing of session and, thus, the parliament has been deprived possibility to consider it according to Regulations.

Decree positions limit my constitutional law on freedom to be selected (Constitution item 38) as realization of the specified right is put in dependence on desire of other persons to promote or prevent promotion me the candidate for Presidents of Belarus.

The decree breaks also item 58 of the Constitution guaranteeing, that nobody can be forced to legal relationship to the discharge of duties, not provided by the Constitution of Belarus and its laws. The subjects, obliged to represent to the declaration on incomes and property, are strictly defined by the current legislation. Their number does not include relatives of these subjects in so wide range as it is established by the Decree.

Publication of data about incomes and property of the citizens, who are not put forward by candidates on a post of the President, is illegal intervention in their private life, that roughly breaks item 28 of the Constitution of Belarus.

Decree instructions directly contradict p. 2 items 64 of the Constitution of Belarus in which it is underlined, that any direct or indirect restriction of suffrages of citizens (that are specified in given article) are inadmissible and is punished according to the law.

Thus, I believe, that A.G.Lukashenka’s actions fall under signs p.2 item.191of Criminal Code.

All days long on TV and in a press already there is A.Lukashenka’s pre-election campaign. His physiognomy is not leave from the screen of TV and the state newspaper pages. The thought is persistently inspired to the voter, that except A.Lukashenka anybody cannot be that all thieves accept it. And why A.Lukashenka is not the thief, is not explained. In conversation with not established citizens the opinion that at petition in favour of A.Lukashenka people dependent on it (administrative and machinery of state are used) is expressed and compensation from calculation of 500 rubles for one signature in favor of A.Lukashenka is paid.

In connection with the above-stated, I ask to consider questions in addition:

- About refusal in registration of initiative group of A.Lukashenka

- About refusal in registration by the candidate A.Lukashenka’s

- To spend complex check, whether really A.Lukashenka uses office position in the personal mercenary purposes, whether supposes payoff of voters and petition financing under the working president from state or other budgets.

On July, 20th, 2001. V.S.Levaneuski

In photos the head of initiative group of Valery Levaneuski Vyacheslav Belko hands in the statement for a response of the statement for registration of initiative group:

 the head of initiative group of Valery Levaneuski Vyacheslav Belko hands in the statement for a response of the statement for registration of initiative group

 

the head of initiative group of Valery Levaneuski Vyacheslav Belko hands in the statement for a response of the statement for registration of initiative group

« | »


Note: Translated by means of machine translation. The original text in Russian is on a site www.levonevsky.org or www.levonevski.net
TopList