Thielbörger, Pierre

English

<intR>²Dok

Flashbangs against empowermentWhat a government’s violence tells us about civiland political rightsPierre Thielbörger 2020-08-14T13:21:45The last weeks were turbulent in Belarus. For the first time in his 26 year-reign,president Alexander Lukashenko faces a meaningful challenge to his power inthe form of a unified opposition. On the evening of the presidential election on 9August 2020, shortly after polling stations had closed, government exit polls werepublished, claiming that Lukashenko won re-election with approximately 80 % of thevotes, despite independent exit polls conducted at embassies and disclosed electionprotocols showing 80 % and more for his challenger Svetlana Tikhanovskaya.Protests quickly formed all over the country, the largest ones taking place in Minsk.They were met with a harsh crackdown.This post looks at the events before and after the election through a human rightslens and highlights a particular quality of civil and political rights that becomesapparent in the way the government has reacted: their potential to empower people.An extraordinary challengeImmediately after Alexander Lukashenko came to power in 1994, he startedconcentrating power in his own hands. His reforms were accompanied by ever morerestrictive policies towards civil and political rights, even though the country is partyto a handful of international human rights treaties, e.g. the ICCPR. In 1992, theRepublic of Belarus even ratified the first optional protocol to the ICCPR, acceptingthe individual complaint procedure before the Human Rights Committee (HRC). Thereality is, however, sobering. By 2018, Belarus had not implemented a single view ofthe HRC that had found violations of the ICCPR. Belarus is the only state in Europewhich still applies the death penalty, is not a member of the Council of Europe andhas not ratified the European Convention on Human Rights.In this year’s election, Lukashenko faced a surprise contender: SvetlanaTikhanovskaya, an English teacher and the wife of an oppositional blogger andpromising presidential aspirant. After her husband had been detained in May,Tikhanovskaya took over his candidacy. She quickly grew into her unexpected roleand campaigned on two demands alone: the release of political prisoners and theorganisation of free elections within six months of her election. With these simplepromises, Tikhanovskaya was able to unite the fragmented Belarusian opposition.Once registered, Tikhanovskaya managed to organize large rallies – something thatis only allowed for registered candidates in the weeks leading up to an election – inmany Belarusian cities and towns, not only in the capital. Her rally held on 30 July2020 was the largest the country had seen in decades with an estimated number of- 1 -63.000 participants. Tikhanovskaya’s campaign created powerful images that hadnot been seen in the Republic of Belarus.Even before Tikhanovskay’s rise, the government had been hard on any formof opposition, arresting promising challengers, barring them from running in theelections, and cracking down on subsequent protests. However, the more theunlikely challenger Tikhanovskaya who was underestimated, not least because sheis a woman, gained support, the more nervous the authorities became. In the lastdays before the election, the government organized concerts in those places thatTikhanovskaya had planned to hold her rallies at. State media broadcasted imagesof Lukashenko overseeing anti-riot police trainings, and more and more peacefulprotesters were detained.On the day of the election, reports of election rigging started appearing early on. Theinternet was shut down across the country but some nevertheless managed to reportoccurrences. A particularly bizarre video widely circulated on social media showeda woman with a large plastic bag climbing down from the window of a polling stationon a ladder held secure by a police officer. The bag in her hand appeared to be filledwith sheets of paper which led many to the conclusion that it contained ballots forthe opposition the officials were trying to get rid of. Shortly after the government-sponsored exit polls had been announced, protests started forming all over thecountry. These protests were met with violent crackdowns, and shocking imageswent around the world. According to numerous reports, the police used rubberbullets and stun grenades, known as flashbangs, against the protesters, policevehicles drove into people and protesters were arrested. The Interior Ministry statedthat 3,000 people were detained, and more than 50 citizens and 39 police officerswere wounded on the night of the election alone. The protests and crackdownscontinued the following nights.A government’s fear of empowermentThat the repressions are not in accordance with international human rights law isundeniable. While political rights may be limited under certain circumstances (forinstance under Article 4 ICCPR (“derogability in times of public emergency”) andArticle 5  in conjunction with Art. 19 and 21 ICCPR (“restrictability”), the onus tojustify such limitations is on the state. The Belarusian government has not presenteda credible legitimate purpose for the restrictions imposed before and after theelection and the violence against and detentions of peaceful protesters to begin with.There have been no reports of independent media that protesters assembled in anon-peaceful way, before or after the election, or that the exercise of their civil andpolitical rights posed a threat to public order or security in any other way. Moreover,besides the lack of a legitimate purpose for the restrictions, it is hardly conceivablehow the scale of violence employed could be necessary and proportionate.Given the unprecedented challenge to power in the country, one may assumethat the real reason for the harsh crackdowns on citizens exercising their civil andpolitical rights is the authorities’ nervousness. This is proof of the empoweringpotential of civil and political rights which the HRC recognized in the first paragraph- 2 -of its most recent General Comment No. 37 on the right to peaceful assembly (GC37), Article 21 ICCPR:“The fundamental human right of peaceful assembly enables individualsto express themselves collectively and to participate in shaping theirsocieties. The right of peaceful assembly is important in its own right, as itprotects the ability of people to exercise individual autonomy in solidaritywith others. Together with other related rights, it also constitutes the veryfoundation of a system of participatory governance based on democracy,human rights, the rule of law and pluralism. Peaceful assemblies can playa critical role in allowing participants to advance ideas and aspirationalgoals in the public domain, and to establish the extent of support for oropposition to those ideas and goals. Where they are used to air grievances,peaceful assemblies may create opportunities for inclusive, participatoryand peaceful resolution of differences.”Similarly, on the freedoms of opinion and expression, Article 19 ICCPR, thecommittee holds in its General Comment No. 34:“Freedom of opinion and freedom of expression are indispensableconditions for the full development of the person. They are essential for anysociety. They constitute the foundation stone for every free and democraticsociety. The two freedoms are closely related, with freedom of expressionproviding the vehicle for the exchange and development of opinions.Freedom of expression is a necessary condition for the realization of theprinciples of transparency and accountability that are, in turn, essential forthe promotion and protection of human rights.”It is this enabling dimension of political rights that scares autocratic governments.The exercise of civil and political rights enables individuals to hold those in poweraccountable, even in states where democratic accountability through fair electionsis impossible. When ideas and sentiments are expressed collectively in exerciseof the right of peaceful assembly, people are enabled to experience that they arenot few, but many. This collective experience allows them to overcome fear, andit empowers them to challenge oppressive governments. In the weeks leading upto the Belarusian elections, this is exactly what happened. The fear of the peoplediminished with every rally Tikhanovskaya held.Reporting on the exercise of civil and political rights (or the suppression thereof)amplifies their empowering potential. Thus, the HRC acknowledges that “[t]herole of journalists, human rights defenders, election monitors and others involvedin monitoring or reporting on assemblies, is of particular importance for the fullenjoyment of the right of peaceful assembly, and they are entitled to protection underthe Covenant” (GC 37, para. 30). Especially today, when reporting via the internetcan create immediate global reactions of empathy, togetherness can be felt beyondborders and further empower those who want to hold their government to account.This explains why for this year’s challenging elections, it was reportedly even moredifficult than previously for foreign journalists to get accreditation for Belarus, andwhy OSCE observers were not invited to monitor the elections. It also explains why- 3 -since the day of the election, access to the internet has been severely restricted.Such action can be interpreted as a nervous reaction to the empowerment thatTikhanovskaya’s rallies embodied.Which way forward for the European Union?The apparent human rights violations in Belarus are indicative of the government’sincreasing weakness and the authority’s fear of the empowering potential of civiland political rights. As the last nights have made utterly clear, their nervousnessis dangerous. In the face of the most serious challenge to its power yet, thegovernment seems so far set rather on fight than on flight. What does this meanfor the international community, in particular for the European Union, Belarus’immediate neighbour? Calls for sanctions and condemnations of the events inthe country have already been voiced. Some even called for investigations of theInternational Criminal Court, despite the Court’s obvious lack of jurisdiction asBelarus is not a party to the Rome Statute. However important it may be to expresscontempt of oppression and hold those responsible to account, what is even moreimportant is that the last weeks have emphasized again the empowering potentialof civil and political rights. European leaders should be guided by this insight andmake supporting the people the maxim of their actions. Measures must not stifle thisempowerment; they must bolster it. A strong sign of support was sent by Europeanambassadors to Belarus when they went to the site where a protester had died andlaid down flowers. The European Union will discuss the possible measures at anextraordinary foreign affairs council today, on 14 August 2020. However, the wayforward is geopolitically delicate as past sanctions have often led to Belarus’ movingcloser to its neighbour on the other side, and Russia has in fact already pushed forcloser integration with Belarus – something European leaders should be mindful of. Prof. Dr. Pierre Thielbörger, M.PP. (Harvard) is professor for German Public Lawand Public International Law at Ruhr University Bochum (RUB) and the ExecutiveDirector of RUB’s Institute for International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict (IFHV).He is also Co-Convener of the Interest Group on Human Rights of the EuropeanSociety of International Law.This post appears as part of a collaboration between the IFHV and theVölkerrechtsblog. Cite as: Pierre Thielbörger, “Flashbangs against Empowerment. Whata government’s violence tells us about civil and political rights”,Völkerrechtsblog, 14 August 2020.- 4 -

Flashbangs against empowerment: What a government’s violence tells us about civil and political rights

https://intr2dok.vifa-recht.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/mir_derivate_00009017/Flashbangs_against_empowerment.pdf

Flashbangs against empowerment: What a government’s violence tells us about civil and political rights

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

<intR>²Dok