Valery LEVANEUSKI - personal site  
 
 
September 29th, 2006. Posted in News from Belarus

« Main page

Whether A.Lukashenka’s rights, as victim on case will be observed?

The answer to this question will give the Supreme Court of Belarus. Former political prisoner Valery Levaneuski continues to appeal against a sentence, 7.09.2004 former judge of court of Lenin area of Grodno taken out to it. Valery is recognized by guilty of the public insult of the President of Belarus, connected to charge in fulfillment of grave crime and on the basis p. 2 items 368 of Criminal Code of Belarus to it are appointed punishment in the form of two years of imprisonment with punishment serving in a corrective colony of the general mode.

Under the law to appeal against a sentence in the Supreme Court the unlimited number of times is possible. As Valery notes, law infringements on his criminal case are so many that will suffice on 10 different complaints as supervision. It would be possible and unite all claims in one supervising complaint, but specificity of our supervising instances is that, that when is much written in the complaint the majority of arguments condemned simply is not considered. Therefore Valery has decided to divide the claims on a sentence into some complaints and to submit them for answer reception on them in essence. Thus, he hopes to receive answers to the complaints since exclusively formal replies from various judicial instances till now come.

Simultaneously Valery Levaneuski is intended to address with complaints in the commission of the United Nations on human rights on the questions connected with the given case.

In the given complaint to a sentence as supervision Valery brings an attention to the question on infringements of the rights of A.Lukashenka which the inspector and in a consequence court have refused recognize officially as the victim on business which it legally and actually is. Valery Levaneuski demanded observance of the rights of the victim provided by item 50 of criminally – remedial code of Belarus, but to it in it, in law infringement, refused without an explanation of the reasons. Though the reasons are obvious, the victim is necessary for interrogating, subpoenaing, for the victim the criminal liability, etc. is provided have not dared to cause “most” … But the law is the law. It should extend on all and institute criminal proceedings it is supposed only in full conformity with the law, instead of depending on the status of the victim.

Because the victim on case about the insult this basic character in criminal trial and its absence in case, non-observance of its rights automatically attracts cancellation of a sentence and phase-out on business, Valery Levaneuski has raised the question about cancellation of a sentence from 7.09.2004 about the insult of the President of Belarus.

The appendix: 1. The rights of the victim (item 50 criminally remedial code)

2. The complaint to a sentence of court as supervision

To the chairman of the Supreme court of Belarus

Sukalo V.O

Lenin street, 28, 220030, Minsk

 

Levaneuski Valery Stanislavovich,

 

On a sentence of court of Lenin area of of Grodno from September, 7th, 2004 and on definition of judicial board on criminal cases of the Grodno regional court from October, 19th, 2004

THE COMPLAINT

As supervision

By sentence of court of Lenin area of Grodno from September, 7th, 2004 Levaneuski V.S. It is recognized by guilty of the public insult of the President of Belarus, connected to charge in fulfillment of grave crime and on the basis p. 2 items 368 of Criminal Code of Belarus to it are appointed punishment in the form of two years of imprisonment with punishment serving in a corrective colony of the general mode.

By Definition of judicial board on criminal cases of the Grodno regional court from October, 19th, 2004 a sentence concerning Levaneuski V.S. It is left without change, and cassation complaints – without satisfaction.

The chairman of the Grodno regional court has not found the bases for protest of judicial decisions.

With the decisions which have taken place on the present criminal case i do not agree, I consider their illegal and unreasonable, subject to cancellation on following bases.

The court of the first instance was established, that by Levaneuski Valery Stanislavovich, in common in Vasilev Alexander Aleksandrovich, giving out themselves for heads of National Strike Committee of Belarus, since January, 2004, deliberately, began to be engaged in the vigorous activity on destabilization of a political situation in Grodno, spending active work among entrepreneurs on the organization and carrying out on May, 01st, 2004 in of Grodno of the not authorized meeting of entrepreneurs for which have called in constantly extended to territories of the Grodno area bulletins “entrepreneurs” and leaflets.

In April, 2004 they in common have prepared again a leaflet with an appeal “Come! On May, 1st are yours put! We wait for All of you on May, 1st, 2004 at 10.30 on Lenin’s Area in mountains. Grodno”, having placed on a face sheet of the given leaflet the text, and on the back – a poem “the Account on utilities or» rent invoice”, received from the unstated person by name of Nicolay, and edited by them in common which maintenance correlates a described situation in the poem text, with the concrete official – the President of Belarus and has obviously offensive character expressed in humiliation of honor and advantage of the President of Belarus, connected to charge in fulfillment ostensibly grave crime, abusing the power of the official, occupying the responsible position which has entailed causing of essential harm to the rights and legitimate interests of citizens, expressed in illegal use of public funds.

The given leaflet by them in common, for the purpose of public distribution, has been made is computer – copy way and then copied in rented by Levaneuski V.S, apartment, on a photocopier “PICOH Priport jr 1010″ in number of not less than 5.000 pieces.

In the end of April, 2004 they in common, by means of the persons involved for compensation, publicly extended the specified leaflets in public places of mountains. Grodno, including, in markets “Skidelsky” and “Southern”, and also on a residence of citizens: street Gorky ,73; street Tereshkovoj, 29; street Dzerzhinsky, 123; street Limoges,14,16,18; street Dombrovsky, 13; Hindu highway, 4, a building № 1; street of the Soviet Frontier guards,94; street Kabjaka, 4, a building № 1, the lane Southern 12 and in other public places.

The note: In the given complaint as supervision I will stop on one (from numerous) rough infringement of the remedial law which conducts to cancellation of a sentence and phase-out on business, in particular:

The court sentence is decided with essential infringements of criminally – remedial legislation and is subject to cancellation, in connection with absence of the victim on case.

The victim is the unique participant of the criminal trial who has directly suffered from a crime, in communication, with what maintenance of protection of his rights and legitimate interests gets special value in criminal trial.

It is necessary to take into consideration that the insult is always addressed to the concrete person and that on sense of item 49 of procedural criminal code to victims can admit only the physical person to whom directly the crime does physical, property or moral harm.

The person admits to victims irrespective of his citizenship, age, a physical or mental condition and other data about the person, from an establishment of the person who has committed a crime, legitimacy of behavior of the victim. The recognition the criminally-remedial law is not provided by victim of the representative of the legal person, as the legal body to whom the crime or socially dangerous act of the deranged do harm, realizes the rights by a civil suit presentation.

The decision on recognition of the person should be accepted by victim immediately on an establishment to it of the bases that is the important guarantee of maintenance of timely access of the victim to justice, realizations of the procedural rights by him and performance of duties.

The body conducting criminal trial is obliged to explain suffered his rights and duties, and also to give possibility for giving of the statement of claim about harm compensation.

The victim gets corresponding procedural rights and performs the duties defined by the law only after body of criminal prosecution or the judge will take out the decision, and court – definition about his recognition like that.

The decision (definition) about recognition is taken out by victim concerning each person to whom the crime does harm.

According to item 7 of the law of Belarus «About the President of Belarus»:

«The president possesses inviolability; his honor and advantage are protected by the law. The public insult of the President or slander concerning it, including, with use of the press or other mass media, attract the responsibility established by the law.

Criminal case about the public insult of the President or slander concerning he, including, with use of the press or other mass media, is raised in an order provided by the Criminally-remedial code of Belarus »

According to the theory of criminal law victim on criminal case on charge of the person in fulfillment of the crime provided by item 368 of Criminal Code of Belarus, is the President of Belarus.

Besides observance of the general requirements to registration of remedial decisions the decision (definition) about a recognition victim should contain without fail data on what harm (or some its kinds) is caused by criminal acts.

The person recognized to victims, is notified on it by the announcement of the decision (definition), of what the mark in the decision (the report of judicial session), or by delivery of a copy of the decision (definition) becomes.

At appointment and proceeding preparation on the arrived criminal case the court has been obliged to check up, whether the person to whom the crime does harm, victim is recognized, whether their procedural rights and duties are explained him and whether the body of criminal prosecution had been provided appropriate conditions for their realization.

In cases when the victim has been limited in realization of the rights provided by the law (for example, it is not notified on the termination of preliminary investigation and to him access to case materials has not been provided, the petition of the victim for the admission of the representative is unreasonably rejected), the judge (court) takes necessary measures to elimination of the admitted infringements.

During proceeding the court is obliged not only to explain to suffered, his lawful or other representative their rights fixed according to the item of item 50, 57, 59 of Criminally-remedial code but also to create the conditions provided by the criminally-remedial legislation providing named participants of process possibility to represent the proof, to declare petitions, to express opinion concerning arguments and petitions of other participants of process, to take part in interrogation accused, other victims, witnesses.

With a view of a possibility of the appeal of a sentence the victim who did not participate in judicial session, should be in writing informed on the taken place sentence with an explanation of the right to reception of his copy, an order and appeal term.

Apparently from the above-stated, the preliminary investigation body has been obliged to take out the decision about a recognition victim A.Lukashenka, and court to take necessary measures to elimination of the admitted infringements and protection of the rights of A.Lukashenka.

During preliminary investigation and proceeding I repeatedly orally and in writing declared petitions for observance of procedural rights of the President of Belarus A.Lukashenka and recognition to him victims. But each time received unmotivated refusals.

Deprivation or constraint of the rights of the victim guaranteed by the law by judicial consideration of criminal case is essential infringement of the criminally-remedial law which attracts cancellation of the judgments which have taken place on case.

The actions bodies of criminal prosecution (preliminary investigation and court) actually recognized absence of the victim in the given criminal case.

Investigation and court refusal to take out the decision (definition) about a recognition victim on case about the insult does senseless criminal prosecution and excludes manufacture on criminal case.

On the basis of stated, being supervised by item 404, 408-410, item 2 p.1 item 412 of the Criminally-remedial code of Belarus, I ask:

To bring the protest on the taken place judgments on the given criminal case, a sentence of court of Lenin area of Grodno from September, 7th, 2004 and definition of judicial board on criminal cases of the Grodno regional court from October, 19th, 2004 to cancel, manufacture on criminal case to stop.

The attachment:

1. Copies of a sentence of court of Lenin area of Grodno from September, 7th, 2004 and definition of judicial board on criminal cases of the Grodno regional court from the October, 19th 2004, assured when due hereunder court on 8 sheets.

2. A copy of the receipt on payment of the state duty at a rate of one base size.

25.09.2006 V.S.Levaneuski

The Press-service

« | »


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