R 181019Z AUG 09
FM AMEMBASSY MINSK
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 0420
EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
CIS COLLECTIVE
INFO AMEMBASSY MINSK

UNCLAS MINSK 000275 
 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PINR BO
SUBJECT: BELARUS DENIES NASHA VYASNA HUMAN RIGHTS GROUP REGISTRATION 
FOR THIRD TIME 
 
REF: MINSK 407 
 
¶1. (U) On August 12, the Belarus Supreme Court refused to 
overturn the denial of state registration to the Nasha Vyasna 
(Belarusian for "Our Spring") human rights organization.  The 
denial, the third since the organization was stripped of state 
registration in 2003, was an appeal of the Belarus Ministry of 
Justice's refusal to register the organization May 25.  Civil 
registration for non-governmental organizations and political 
parties is key in Belarus, as Article 193 of the Criminal Code 
makes it illegal for anyone to run, participate, or act on 
behalf of an unregistered organization. 
 
¶2.  (U) In the MOJ's May 25 registration denial, the MOJ claimed 
that four of the group's 71 founders submitted incorrect 
information on registration materials.  Among those errors: one 
founder's workplace was allegedly not registered with 
authorities, another listed a residence differing from official 
records, while one listed a shortened name of a junior high 
school and a fourth indicated that he was employed supervising a 
children's "group", rather than a "circle".  Additionally, the 
MOJ claimed that 26 of the founders had administrative or 
criminal records, thereby making them inappropriate advocates 
for human rights work.  Finally, the MOJ argued that the group's 
name itself was illegal, as the group's capitalization of the 
word Vyasna ("Spring") led MOJ to believe that the group wasn't 
referring to a season of the year but to something else, and 
that the group's registration documents failed to document the 
precise meaning behind the name of the group as required by the 
registration law. 
 
¶3.  (U) During the appeal, NV founders countered the MOJ claims. 
 They said that only four of the 71 founders made errors, that 
they were "minor and insignificant", and that the MOJ gave no 
opportunity for corrections to be made.  NV representatives also 
disputed the relevance of the administrative and criminal 
records of some founders; one founder indicated that he'd been 
charged with speeding in 2005.  Additionally, they claimed that 
administrative convictions are typically removed from records 
after a year, and that they shouldn't be used as a basis for 
refusal as they should have been expunged. 
 
¶4.  (U) With this third refusal, NV has publicly stated that 
they will continue working but will not apply for registration 
again.  They are aware that they may face criminal prosecution 
and sentences of up to 3 years in prison under Article 193.  NV 
believe their repeated denials constitute discrimination and 
plan to appeal their case to the UN's Human Rights Committee. 
 
¶5.  (SBU) COMMENT:  The refusal of registration was expected by 
NV organizers, particularly in light of repeated previous 
rulings against the organization.  Despite minor gestures during 
the appeal hearing, such as allowing numerous participants to 
photograph and audiotape the proceedings, the GOB's use of minor 
technical errors on paperwork as justification for repeated 
denials of registration (see REFTEL) demonstrates a continued 
unwillingness to let dissenting human rights groups and 
political parties legally play a role in Belarus society.  The 
registration denials underline the larger problem of the 
registration law itself, which makes illegal any action on 
behalf of an unregistered organization.  By selectively 
registering organizations, the GOB is effectively able to 
criminalize any dissent not expressly approved by the government. 
 
SCANLAN