{"id":4784,"date":"2022-07-13T18:00:28","date_gmt":"2022-07-13T15:00:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/d9lb3qyw8jhbr.cloudfront.net\/?p=4784"},"modified":"2022-07-13T18:00:30","modified_gmt":"2022-07-13T15:00:30","slug":"death-penalty-for-attempted-terrorism-human-constantas-commentary","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/d9lb3qyw8jhbr.cloudfront.net\/en\/death-penalty-for-attempted-terrorism-human-constantas-commentary\/","title":{"rendered":"Death penalty for attempted terrorism \u2013 Human Constanta\u2019s commentary"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
On 28 April 2022, the National Legal Portal published<\/a> the draft law on amendments to the Belarusian Criminal Code. This draft law provided that the grounds for imposing the death penalty could be expanded for attempted acts of terrorism<\/strong>. Previously, such a penalty could only be applied for the fact of committing an \u201cact of terrorism\u201d with aggravating circumstances (e.g.<\/em>, acts committed by an organized group; or with the use of nuclear energy objects; or with the use of radioactive substances or nuclear materials, potent, toxic chemical or biological substances; or resulting in murder under Article 289-3 of the Criminal Code).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Belarus is the only European country still using the death penalty in its criminal justice system. Capital punishment is systematically criticized by civil society and human rights defenders. Expanding the application of death penalty amid ongoing political repressions and no fair trial guarantees implies another risk to the civil society, some representatives of which are already equated to \u201cextremists\u201d and \u201cterrorists\u201d in the rhetoric of the Belarusian de facto<\/em> authorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Human Rights Committee while interpreting the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (hereinafter \u2013 the Covenant) in its General comment No. 36<\/a> pointed out that: <\/p>\n\n\n\n the death penalty cannot be reconciled with full respect for the right to life, and the abolition of the death penalty is both desirable and necessary for the enhancement of human dignity and progressive development of human rights. According to the Committee, States which have not abolished the death penalty can only apply it in a non-arbitrary manner, with regard to the most serious crimes. It is contrary to the object and purpose of article 6, enshrining the right to life, for States parties to take steps to increase the rate and extent to which they resort to the death penalty, or to reduce the number of pardons and commutations they grant<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Human Constanta agrees with the position<\/a> of its colleagues who strongly condemn the expansion of the death penalty in Belarus. In this commentary, Human Constanta also seeks to analyze possible scenarios for the application of the Criminal Code’s new standard, taking into account the political context in Belarus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Subjects to the new standard<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Belarusian de facto<\/em> authorities\u2019 copmplicity in Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine sparked the the anti-war movement, which took a variety of forms, including participation in protest actions and humanitarian aid collection. One of the resistance forms included sabotaging the railway tracks in order to stop the advancement of the Russian army’s military equipment on the territory of Belarus. Although such actions entailed no human casualties and were merely aimed at damaging equipment, law enforcement agencies began to actively prosecute the so-called \u201crail guerrillas\u201d with firearms<\/a> and classify their actions under the most severe articles of the Criminal Code. <\/p>\n\n\n\n On the night of 1 to 2 March 2022, two residents of Sta\u016dbcy were detained<\/a> for setting fire to logs on the railway tracks in order to prevent the movement of trains with Russian equipment through Belarus to participate in the offensive in Ukraine. On 2 March 2022, the detention of a \u017dodzina resident was reported.<\/a> The detained had tried to damage railway tracks as well. On 4 March 2022, three residents of Svietlahorsk were detained. According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA)<\/a>, they had doused the relay cabinet of the signal installation with a flammable liquid and set it on fire, which led to the railway equipment falling into disrepair. On 6 March 2022, a resident of Vitebsk was detained for preparing for an act of terrorism. According to the MIA<\/a>, he had intended to disable the railway safety systems. On 22 March 2022, an Asipovi\u010dy resident was also detained<\/a> for preparing for an attempt to damage the railway. On 6 April 2022, 3 more people were detained<\/a> for «terrorist attacks» in the Babrujsk and Barysa\u016d districts. Some of them were purposefully shot in the knee joints<\/a> despite the fact that they did not resist. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In absolutely all the cases, the detainees’ actions were classified<\/a> as acts of terrorism. In addition, the authorities decided to tighten the \u201canti-terrorist\u201d legislation as a response to anti-war activities. The new law on amendments to the Belarusian Criminal Code states<\/a> that the death penalty can be imposed not only for committing a crime directly but also for preparing for crimes or attempting to commit the following crimes provided for by the Criminal Code: <\/p>\n\n\n\n Not all actions related to \u201cterrorist\u201d activities under these articles can become grounds for the death penalty \u2013 only those that involve a number of aggravating circumstances. Thus the death penalty under Articles 124 and 359 of the Criminal Code can be imposed only if the act of terrorism resulted in the murder of the target (a representative of a foreign state, or international organization, or a state, or public figure respectively). The death penalty under Articles 126 and 289 of the Criminal Code may be applied if an act of terrorism was committed by an organized group; or with the use of nuclear energy objects; or with the use of radioactive substances or nuclear materials, potent, toxic chemical or biological substances; or if it resulted in murder.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is most likely that the authorities, in order to elevate penal responsibility and increase the scale of repressions, will resort to the argument that all the actions of the rail guerrillas were committed by an organized group. Indeed, the people sabotaging the railway tracks rarely acted independently. In this regard, it is important to distinguish the classifications of crimes committed by a \u201cgroup\u201d and by an \u201corganized group,\u201d due to the fact that only the latter falls under the new changes in the Criminal Code. Crimes committed by a specifically organized group have a greater number of the criteria necessary for it to be recognized as such. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Article 18-1 of the Criminal Code, a crime is recognized as committed by an organized group if it is committed by two or more persons who have previously united into a controlled, stable group for joint criminal activity. The criteria outlined in the Criminal Code seem to be quite broad and vague, and therefore it is worth referring to the judicial practice of applying this article, which is summarized in the Resolution<\/a> by the Plenum of the Belarusian Supreme Court No. 9 on judicial practice in cases of crimes related to the forming and activities of organized groups, gangs and criminal organizations (Resolution) as of 25 September 2003.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The document defines the essence of the criteria underlying the classification of crimes as those committed by an organized group:<\/p>\n\n\n\n The rationale of the document and Article 18 of the Criminal Code implies that in order to classify an act as committed by an organized group, such an act is required to meet all of the aforementioned criteria simultaneously. Besides, paragraph 4 of the Regulation states that a sporadic act of committing a crime that required lengthy preparation can be recognized as an act committed by an organized group only if there is evidence that its participants intended to continue joint criminal activity in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Consequently, regardless of the fact that most of the \u201crail guerillas\u201d did not act individually, their actions can hardly be classified as actions within an organized group, since those individuals having committed acts of sabotage, are not members of any stable group with a clearly defined structure and leadership. Without fulfilling all the criteria, such actions can only be classified as a preparation of crime or attempted crime by an ordinary group, which cannot entail penalty in the form of the death penalty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nevertheless, it can easily be assumed that the authorities will employ the widest possible approach in classifying the actions of the \u201cpartisans.\u201d For example, it is likely that law enforcement officers, as before, can claim that the acts were provoked by \u201cthe influence of destructive extremist Telegram channels,\u201d often referring to the most popular opposition channel NEXTA, recently recognized as an extremist formation, and later as a terrorist organization<\/a>. Taking into account that in case of extremist formations, subscribers of Internet resources, labeled as such, can be recognized as the members of the formation, it is highly likely that individual offenders can be classified as members of actual organized groups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n