The following is based on a communication written by the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders and other UN experts to the Government of Belarus on 17 December 2024. The communication remained confidential for 60 days before being made public, giving the Government time to reply. The Government replied on 12 February 2025, which was recently translated and made available.
Since the communication was sent, there has been no change in the situation.
This is a shorter version of the original communication.
BACKGROUND
Topic: the inspection of the Belarusian Helsinki Committee, the search of its office, its involuntary dissolution, and the designation of its online resources as extremist materials.
The Belarusian Helsinki Committee (“BHC”) is one of the oldest and most prominent human rights organisations in Belarus. Since 1995, it has been working on a wide range of human rights issues through legal aid, monitoring, analysis, reporting, and raising awareness about the human rights situation. Its work also includes advocacy, training, and organising campaigns.
We previously wrote to the Government of Belarus regarding the search at the BHC, intimidation against it, travel bans imposed on its member and the chairman of its Legal Commission, and arrest and detention of its chairman in communications dated 7 September 2021 (BLR 8/2021), 28 January 2011 (BLR 1/2011), 21 May 2012 (BLR 2/2012), and 22 December 2010 (BLR 1/2010).
We also previously raised concerns with the Government of Belarus on 30 June 2021 (BLR 7/2021) and 7 September 2021 (BLR 8/2021) regarding a series of raids of human rights organisations and the initiation of dissolution proceedings against scores of them, and on 15 December 2023 (BLR 10/2023) regarding the use of anti-extremism legislation to target another prominent human rights organisation, the Human Rights Centre Viasna, including by designating it and its regional subdivisions’ online resources as extremist materials.
ALLEGATIONS
The inspection and office search
On 6 July 2021, the Ministry of Justice initiated an inspection of BHC, requesting extensive documents and information on 30 sets of issues by 16 July 2021, citing the need to “verify compliance with legislation and the organisation’s charter”. BHC allegedly received the request on 8 July 2021.
On 14 July 2021, law enforcement agents conducted a search of BHC’s office in Minsk. None of BHC’s staff were present, and it remains unclear whether a warrant was issued. The search was part of a large-scale raid targeting the homes of human rights defenders and the offices of major human rights organisations across the country, described in communication BLR 8/2021. After the search, BHC’s premises were sealed, leaving many of the requested documents inaccessible. The seal allegedly indicated that it was placed by the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
On 16 July 2021, BHC reportedly submitted the available documents, excluding those stored in the sealed office, and promised to provide the missing ones once their representatives gain access. Nevertheless, on 20 July 2021, the Ministry of Justice issued a warning, citing failure to provide all required documents. On 2 September 2021, the Supreme Court dismissed BHC’s appeal. It was BHC’s second warning that year. The first warning was reportedly issued in March or April 2021 because a required report was not submitted on time due to technical reasons.
The involuntary dissolution
On 27 August 2021, the Ministry of Justice filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court seeking the dissolution of BHC, accusing it of a “one-time gross violation of the law.” The Ministry alleged BHC submitted false information in its 2020 activity report, which stated zero income and expenditure, claiming to have evidence that BHC had signed contracts and made payments for presidential election observation. The Ministry filed for dissolution without first imposing lesser penalties. On 30 September 2021, the Supreme Court ordered the dissolution of BHC.
The Government in its response dated 21 November 2021 to communication BLR 8/2021 maintained that the proceedings upheld the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal. However, the information received thereafter raises several concerns. It has been reported that the Ministry of Justice’s claims relied on copies of documents from a criminal investigation that was ongoing and had not been evaluated by the criminal prosecution authorities or the court at the time. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court accepted them as evidence and reportedly denied the defence’s motion to postpone the lawsuit until their evaluation in the criminal case. The court also refused to consider amicus curiae briefs prepared by international experts and the letter of the United Nations Permanent Coordinator in Belarus.
In accordance with Belarusian law, the Supreme Court decision became enforceable immediately and could not be appealed. BHC’s supervisory appeal was reportedly denied.
The shutdown of BHC was part of a larger campaign to dissolve NGOs, with at least 1,838 organisations reported dissolved in Belarus between August 2020 and October 2024. Before its shutdown, BHC was one of the last three officially registered human rights organisations in the country, and the other two were liquidated within a week.
Under article 193-1 of the Belarusian Criminal Code, participating in or organising activities of a legally dissolved organisation is a crime punishable by a fine, arrest, or imprisonment for up to two years.
The designation of online resources as extremist materials
On 7 June 2024, the Zheleznodorozhny District Court in Gomel ruled to designate BHC’s website and Facebook page “Belarusian Helsinki Committee. Human Rights in Belarus” as “extremist materials”.
The decision was allegedly issued without prior notice and in the absence of BHC’s representatives, denying them the opportunity to present a defence. The court decision was reportedly neither published nor communicated to BHC. The substance and grounds of the decision remain unknown. An appeal by BHC was reportedly impossible because the organisation had already been officially dissolved.
This designation has significant consequences for the organisation’s ability to carry out its human rights work and for other online platforms and private individuals. According to article 19.11 of the Code of Administrative Offences, the distribution of extremist materials, as well as their production, publication, storage, or transportation for distribution, are punishable by a fine ranging from 10 to 500 base units (currently 400 to 20,000 BYN or approximately 116 to 5,807 EUR), community service, or administrative detention of up to 15 days. Courts allegedly treat each action as a separate offence and favour arrests over fines, which can for instance lead to several consecutive arrests for several reposts of “extremist materials”. Additionally, “tools and means used to commit the offence”, such as a device used for writing, saving, or sharing a publication, may be confiscated. Liability is allegedly sometimes applied retroactively, penalising actions involving materials later designated as extremist. Websites that include links to “extremist materials” additionally face the risk of being blocked or themselves labelled as extremist.
CONCERNS
In the communication, we express our deep concern that the inspection of BHC and the search of its office were reportedly intended as harassment and interference with its human rights work. The involuntary dissolution appears to be a further effort to halt its activities entirely. The designation of its online resources as extremist materials appears aimed at silencing the organisation after it persisted in its work despite these pressures. We further note that the proceedings related to the dissolution and designation of resources as extremist materials raise serious concerns about the respect of fair trial guarantees and equality before courts.
We are also alarmed that the search, involuntary dissolution, and misuse of counter-extremism legislation against BHC reflect a broader pattern of targeting and silencing civil society. We remain gravely concerned about its major implications for the enjoyment of human rights of all Belarusian citizens, who can no longer count on the support of many civil society organisations in cases where their rights are violated and cannot access and essential information about human rights.
We are concerned that the alleged facts appear to form part of the systematic crackdown on the freedom of association in Belarus and of large-scale human rights violations through application of the counter-extremist legal framework. We recall that these concerns have been raised in recent reports of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus (A/78/327, A/HRC/56/65). We also recall that Special Procedures have repeatedly raised concerns about the vagueness of the Belarusian counter-terrorism and anti-extremism legal framework and its incompatibility with international human rights standards. We wish to reiterate our call to the Government of Belarus to bring its counterterrorism and national security-related provisions, the Belarusian legislation on countering terrorism and extremism, and the related Criminal Code provisions into compliance with international law, including international human rights law standards.
