Font size:


Distinguished Mr. Chairman,

First of all, I would like to recall the distinguished delegations that Belarus has already declared the rejection of the resolution 2004/14, both concerning its wordings and essence, at the 60th session of the CHR including the proposal on the appointment of a Special Rapporteur and his mandate. We made our position very clear then.

Belarus stressed that any actions according to politically motivated resolution that has been adopted under the unprecedented pressure of the USA would be counterproductive and the resources made available to the Special Rapporteur could have been much more reasonable to use for technical assistance to developing countries and realization of the right to development.

The United States attempt to exert political pressure on our country using the tribune of the 59th session of the UN General Assembly has failed. International community defeated the US resolution, which prescribed among other things cooperation with the Special Rapporteur. All this proves that our approach to this mandate was right.

In the spirit of transparency we have distributed our position regarding the mandate of the Special Rapporteur as the official document of the 61st session of the CHR (E-CN.4/2005/G/11).

Under these circumstances the regret expressed by the Special Rapportuer about impossibility to establish dialog with Belarus side we cannot consider otherwise but demagogy and hypocrisy.

Distinguished Mr. Chairman,

Being a responsible State party to all core international human rights instruments Belarus fulfills its international obligations in good faith. We are open to cooperation with the United Nations human rights bodies on the prinsiples of universality, nonselectivity and objectivity.

In January 2004 the Committee on elimination of discrimination against women considered periodical report on implementation by Belarus of the Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. In 2004 Belarus fulfilled the recommendation of the Committee concerning the ratification of Optional protocol to the Convention, thus having recognized competence of the Committee to consider individual complaints. Then in August 2004 the Committee on elimination of racial discrimination considered national report of the Republic of Belarus on implementation of the Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

All these examples as well as the visit of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention of the UN Commission on Human Rights to Belarus in August 2004 clearly demonstrate the readiness of our country to the constructive dialogue with the treaty UN bodies and specific thematic procedures of the CHR as well as underline our principle rejection of the attempts to exploit human rights issues by certain countries to promote their politically motivated interests.

To our deep regret the activities of the Special Rapporteur became the evident example of the very approach that is denied by our country.

Distinguished Mr. Chairman,

Following your recommendation we will try to be as polite as possible in the process of evaluation of the activities of the Special Rapporteur and his report.

Today we could have drawn attention of the Commission to the flagrant violations of the rules of procedure regarding the delay of submission and the fact of distribution of this document by the Special Rapporteur directly to the Missions at Geneva bypassing the UNCHR Secretariat.

However, we consider much more important to express our principle position regarding the content of the report as such.

We are grateful to the UNCHR office for its efforts to "cool off" the tone of the Mr. Severin's report and to bring him back to the legal framework. However, the refusal of the Special Rapporteur to follow the expert opinions of the Secretariat officials, clearly demonstrates the preconceived character of the document under consideration.

That conviction is strengthened by the fact of designation of the Rapporteur from the country which co-sponsored the resolution on Belarus and by the geography of his missions within his mandate (Washington, Brussels and three countries-co-sponsors of the resolution).

Under these conditions we did not expect the submitting of the constructive and balanced report, but what we read in this document really shocks by its unprecedented character.

The Rapporteur has not just gone beyond his mandate. There is a feeling that he is trying to appropriate at least the powers of the UN Security Council.

It is easy to notice that the content of the second section of the considered document is entirely based on the scandalously known report of the US Department of State on the situation with human rights in 196 countries of the world that has been released, as you know, 28 February 2005. That is, perhaps, the real reason of the late submission of this document? Moreover, the Special Rapporteur has reproduced identically the structure of the US report chapter on Belarus.

It is amusing to note that the US side till now has not lodged a claim against Special Reporter because of the infringement of the copyrights.

It is obvious that the Special Reporter completely ignored the question of implementation of the economic, social and cultural rights in our country. We would like to note that USA the main co-sponsor of the resolution is not a State-Party of the International Covenant on the Economical, Social and Cultural Rights and disregards these issues in its reports. However the fact that Special Rapporteur applies the same unbalanced approach is unacceptable.

The relevant information about positive developments in implementation of the economic, social and cultural rights in Belarus presented by different reports of international organizations could be found in an official documents of the current Session (E/CN.4/2005/G/27).

Distinguished Mr. Chairman,

Striking example of total ignorance of existing realities is the third part of the Report where Special Rapporteur asserts that " Belarus became a source of international anxiety for security reasons" and that our country "represents a threat to regional security and stability".

Belarus has the right to be proud of its contribution to the cause of international security and disarmament. We have to recall that Belarus voluntarily refused to possess nuclear weapons inherited from the Soviet Union without any preconditions and reservations. By this act Belarus actually launched the process of nuclear disarmament at the post-soviet space in the interests of international peace and security.

Belarus is a State-Party to all agreements in the field of international security and disarmament and consistently supports the efforts of international community aimed at non-proliferation of the weapons of mass destruction (E/CN.4/2005/G/28).

Distorted presentation of Belarus role in strengthening the international security is a clear evidence of cynicism, extreme political hypocrisy and irresponsibility of the author of the report.

Subsequently, the Special Rapporteur suggests (and I quote) " a proactive and flexible strategy which should combine the appropriate sanctions with the stimulating bonuses ".

By some incomprehensive logic the Special Rapporteur links that strategy with a necessity of (and I quote) "a new leadership" and "a dramatic restructuring of the Belarusian society". Should we interpret it by force?

These recommendations go even beyond the UN Security Council mandate!

The Rapporteur also proposes to create a International Fund for Belarus, a permanent Round Table, to convey a full scale international conference and to establish International Group of the Friends of the Human Rights in Belarus, including a Contact Group and a Group of Donors. As the great strategist the Rapporteur takes the initiative to establish and finance in a neighboring country of Belarus a television and radio broadcast station as well as to transfer the necessary know how, to technically assist and to support (morally, politically, financially, intellectually and logistically) the militant NGOs. We paid special attention to the last phrasing, which is for the first time introduced in the UN terminology.

By the way such NGOs are already here behind the scenes and discredit our country calling for adoption of the US drafted resolution. Maybe the US delegation could explain us who gives money for their stay and their activities here? Maybe the US delegation could tell the Commission to what purposes the United States are planning to spend 40 million US dollars in Belarus? Although there is no such a need. The Special Rapporteur has already done it for them.

We consider this not only as an attempt of a insolent interference into internal affairs of a sovereign state, but also as a so called model of humanitarian intervention of universal character that can subsequently be used and applied to any other country.

The only gentle hint of sincerity in this report comes from the speculations about external control on Belarus as a part of a more complicated geo-political game. And it is absolutely clear what kind of role in this game the co-sponsors of the resolution have reserved for the Special Rapporteur. A role of a puppet!

These forms and methods of work of the Special Rapporteur not only clearly demonstrate the hostile attitude towards a sovereign state but also discredit the very institute of CHR special procedures and undermine the authority and doings of Commission itself.

Distinguished Mr. Chairman,

Distinguished Mme High Commissioner,

We express our deep indignation at the statements of the Special Rapporteur saying that as a nation Belarus has an important problem of identity.

We perceive it as an insolent and unambiguous insult of our country and our people. I want to remind to Mr. Severin that we are at the meeting of international human rights body of the Community of Nations. And to humiliate in the Palace of Nations the whole nation of the country co-founder of the United Nations - is not allowed to anybody!

Distinguished Mr. Chairman,

Distinguished Mme the High Commissioner,

As the head of the Belarusian delegation, as the representative of the Belarusian nation and as the citizen of Belarus I strongly protest against the forms and methods of work of this Special Rapporteur as well as the content of this report!

I also demand Mr. Severin to apologize publicly for the insulting of the Belarus people and our country.

I thank You for Your attention.

Belarusian Diplomatic Missions abroad

All Missions Foreign Diplomatic Missions in Belarus
Go to



Official Internet Resources