Human rights and freedoms are the supreme value and goal of the state.
Mass violence and persecution must be examined against the state's duty to protect people.
LEGAL ANALYSIS / 2022
The constitution against arbitrary rule
Constitutional provisions relevant to elections, violence against protesters, persecution for opinions and the head of state's responsibility in Belarus.
The source of power and presidential duties
The legal basis of public power and the head of state's responsibilities.
The people are the sole source of state power; unlawful seizure of power is subject to prosecution.
Proven manipulation of the electorate's will or unlawful retention of power would matter here. A disputed result alone is not judicial proof.
State powers are divided and mutually checked; officials must act within the constitution.
Concentrated authority and absent checks call for an independent constitutional assessment.
The president guarantees the constitution and human rights, and swears to serve the people and protect those rights.
These provisions frame political and constitutional responsibility for systemic state policy.
Presidential decrees and orders must conform to the constitution and laws.
Each specific act should be assessed against rights and the limits of presidential authority.
Elections and the people's will
Safeguards for candidates, transparent procedures and vote counting.
Citizens participate in public affairs and may vote and stand for election.
Excluding rivals and obstructing voters demand scrutiny under these rights.
Elections must be universal and free, openly administered, with candidates on an equal footing.
Restricted competition and opaque procedures require evidence and the law as it stood on election day.
Voting is secret; election commissions administer elections under legal guarantees of independence.
Pressure on voters or commission dependence must be established factually.
The term is five years; the new two-term limit has a transitional provision on when it takes effect.
Prior terms cannot simply be counted as an automatic breach of the new limit without article 143.
Liberty, dignity and legal protection
Documented events since 2020 raise questions under these protections.
Equality before the law; restrictions on rights only on grounds set by law.
Political discrimination and disproportionate restrictions require legal review.
Liberty, dignity and judicial review of detention; the ban on torture cannot be suspended even in an emergency.
Documented arbitrary detention and torture call most directly for independent investigation.
Presumption of innocence, an independent court and access to legal assistance.
Politically motivated proceedings, restricted counsel and ineffective appeals require case-specific review.
Freedom of expression and information; censorship and state monopolisation of media are prohibited.
Prosecution of journalists, website blocking and punishment for peaceful speech engage these protections.
Freedom of peaceful assembly and association subject to procedures prescribed by law.
Dispersal of peaceful protests and dissolution of organisations require legality and proportionality review.
State protection of citizens abroad, the right to return and officials' duty to protect rights.
Passport restrictions and pressure on relatives raise questions; denial of a consular service does not automatically equal deprivation of citizenship.
How accountability is determined
Article 88 of the current constitution provides for removal of a president for systematic or gross violations of the constitution, high treason or another serious crime. The initiative may come from at least one third of the House of Representatives or 150,000 eligible citizens; the All-Belarusian People's Assembly organises the investigation. A finding concerning constitutional violations requires the Constitutional Court's opinion. If removed for an offence, the Supreme Court hears the case on the merits.
Article 89 provides presidential immunity; article 26 requires criminal guilt to be proved by a final court judgment. A public demand for investigation and removal is not a verdict. Applying the current procedure to earlier events and identifying criminal offences require separate legal analysis.
Editorial position: the documented abuses call for an independent investigation of the entire chain of responsibility, including Alexander Lukashenko's role. What he personally ordered, knew or approved in each incident must be established from evidence. The constitution sets rights and a process for accountability; criminal offences are defined by criminal law.