The Governing Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union,

Referring to the case of Mr. Victor Gonchar, a member of the Thirteenth Supreme Soviet of Belarus who disappeared together with his friend, Anatoly Krasovsky, on 16 September 1999, as outlined in the report of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians (CL/186/12(b)-R.1), and to the resolution adopted at its 185th session (October 2009),

Taking into account the letters dated 6 January and 24 March 2010 signed by the Chairmen of the Standing Committees on National Security and International Affairs and on Relations with the Commonwealth of Independent States, respectively, and noting that the letters provide no new information, on the investigation, which is regularly being extended,

Recalling the following:

• The investigation into the disappearance, on 16 September 1999, of Mr. Victor Gonchar and his friend Anatoly Krasovsky has yielded no result and the authorities have consistently refuted the conclusions of a report by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe into disappearances for allegedly political reasons in Belarus (Pourgourides report), which provided evidence linking senior officials to the disappearance of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovsky; Mr. Pourgourides had gathered evidence to this effect, including a handwritten document from the then police chief, General Lapatik, the authenticity of which the Belarusian authorities have acknowledged, in which General Lapatik accuses Mr. V. Sheyman, then Secretary of the Belarusian Security Council, of having ordered the killing of Mr. Zakharenko, a former Minister of the Interior, and that the order was carried out by a special task force (SOBR unit) under the command of Colonel Pavlishenko, with the assistance of the then Minister of the Interior, Mr. Sivakov, who provided Colonel Pavlishenko with the official execution pistol temporarily removed from SIZO-1 prison; the same method was reportedly used in the execution of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovsky;

• The Belarusian authorities have consistently stressed that despite extensive investigative work and despite examination of all possible leads, no tangible results have been obtained; however, the case has not been closed and the investigation is being regularly extended; a new investigator, Mr. Y.V. Varavko, was appointed but reportedly refused to meet Mr. Gonchar's wife as there “was no reason to meet”,

Noting in this respect the following:

• Article 198 of the Code of Criminal Procedure prohibits the disclosure of data about preliminary investigations or inquiries; such data can only be disclosed with the permission of the investigator or the person responsible for the inquiry, only to the extent they consider appropriate, and only if such disclosure does not contradict the interests of the preliminary investigation and does not infringe the legal rights and interests of the persons involved in legal procedures; according to the sources, Article 50, paragraph 14, of the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that the injured parties are entitled to receive from the investigative body notification of decisions which affect their rights and interests; that, however, the investigator is entitled to instruct defence counsels and victims not to disclose information without his/her permission; according to the sources, this means that parties to a criminal case are entitled not only to participate in criminal prosecution (Article 128 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) but also to receive reliable information on the case if it affects their rights and legitimate interests;

• Mrs. Krasovksy, who is living abroad, has declared her readiness to appear before the prosecutor in the presence of her lawyer; however, the authorities have prohibited her lawyer from assisting her, arguing that he is not a member of the Belarus Bar Association;

• Mrs. Gonchar, who is living in Belarus, and her counsel as well as Mrs. Krasovsky have repeatedly submitted petitions to the investigators of Minsk City Prosecutor's Office for the purpose of familiarizing themselves with the orders on the resumption and extension of the preliminary proceedings and other documents to which they are entitled; all the petitions were dismissed with the result that neither Mr. Gonchar's nor Mr. Krasovsky's family has received any official information on the progress of the investigation for more than 10 years; the families only keep themselves informed through statements made by State officials in the media;

• According to Article 83, part 1, paragraph 4, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the statute of limitations is 15 years from the date of commission of the crime,

Bearing in mind finally that Mrs. Krasovsky and her daughter submitted a communication under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to the Human Rights Committee, which is now pending before the Committee,

1. Thanks the Chairmen of the Standing Committees on National Security and on International Affairs and Relations with the Commonwealth of Independent States for their letters;

2. Is deeply concerned that the right of the families of Mr. Gonchar and Mr. Krasovsky to be kept informed of the proceedings and procedural decisions is not respected, while senior State officials are entitled to make unfounded allegations about the investigation;

3. Considers that the secrecy surrounding the investigation into Mr. Gonchar's and Mr. Krasovsky's disappearance prompts fears that no investigation is being conducted and that the case will be closed upon the expiry of the statute of limitations;

4. Affirms that in such high-profile cases as this one, which President Lukashenko himself has described as politically motivated, it should be in the interest of the authorities to show that they are acting and doing their utmost to reveal the truth, as is their duty;

5. Recalls in this respect that the authorities have so far failed to refute convincingly the evidence produced in the Pourgourides report and have produced no documents showing that they indeed investigated the report's findings;

6. Calls on the parliament to use its oversight function to ensure that the investigative authorities are indeed complying with their duty and specifically that of keeping the families of both victims informed in accordance with the law;

7. Requests the Secretary General to convey this resolution to all parties concerned;

8. Requests the Committee to continue examining this case and report to it at its next session, to be held on the occasion of the 123rd IPU Assembly (October 2010).

Note: you can download a complete electronic version of the brochure "Results of the 122nd IPU Assembly and related meetings" in PDF format (file size 649K approximately). This version requires Adobe Acrobat Reader, which you can download free of charge.

HOME PAGEHUMAN RIGHTSMAIN AREAS OF ACTIVITYIPU STRUCTURE AND DOCUMENTS