On 9 August 2020, Alexandr Lukashenko claimed victory in an election for Belarus’ top office. The thousands of citizens that have been protesting for over two months, however, do not seem to agree with the results. What initially looked like a domestic political shakedown quickly became an international issue mixing politics and human rights. Let us retrace the key events of this crisis and examine the local and European responses.
THE WINDS BLEW STRONG BEFORE THE TEMPEST CAME TO BE
In early August, things already looked grim for the hopeful. Opposition leader and presidential candidate Svetlana Tikhanovskaya was in hiding after police forces forcefully detained nine campaign members in an attempt to deter the opposition from persisting until the vote. She only resurfaced on election day.
Initially a “stand-in candidate” for her jailed husband, Tikhanovskaya led a campaign that attracted hundreds of thousands at rallies all across the country, with two other female politicians joining her in an effort to defeat the incumbent president who has been the ruler since 1994. Yet, the triad did not seek power. Rather, they wished to win to hold free and democratic elections in the first six months of the term, release political prisoners such as Tikhanovskaya’s husband, and reinstate the former Constitution of Belarus, which restricted a president to two terms in office.
AND THEN IT WAS UNREST AT SEA
Thus, when Lukashenko won with a grotesque 80.23% of the votes, the many supporters of the opposition gathered in the streets in protest, arguing the election was rigged. Protests carried on for over a month, despite the risk of being hauled into vans operated by the government’s strong arm.
More violence ensued, with the police using stun grenades and water cannons against protesters after information about Lukashenko’s secret inauguration leaked to the public. As of 13 October 2020, officials from within the Lukashenko’s administration have warned that police forces will fire on dissident protesters if deemed necessary.
A WAVE OF INTERNATIONAL SANCTIONS
Though “democracy” is not written in the 1945 United Nations Charter, international law promotes democracythrough the values embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), as well as through resolutions 19/36 and 28/14 of the Human Rights Council. Consequently, Lukashenko’s government’s actions go against the ICCPR-protected rights of freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and freedom of association with others.
The European Union, through its High Representative, issued two comments qualifying the results as “falsified” and the elections as “neither free nor fair”. It imposed sanctions on Belarus officials but exempted Lukashenko.
The United Kingdom was swift in addressing the issue. Alongside 16 other members of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, it mandated an independent investigation into Belarus’ exactions, notably with regards to potential human rights abuses, through the Moscow Mechanism. In an effort to be even harsher with the self-proclaimed leader or Belarus, the UK and Canada signed off on Magnitsky-type sanctions targeting Belarusian officials. The UK even went as far as recalling its ambassador to Belarus.
Will those international sanctions truly hurt a government that has not loosened its grip on power for over 26 years? International observers are scrutinising Russia in an effort to determine the extent to which it could intervene in Lukashenko’s favour. This is an unlikely situation, since Putin suggested his government would only act if protesters turned into rioters, a situation unseen so far.
Simon is a dual BCL and JD student as well as an Islamic Studies candidate at McGill University, Canada. His research interests cover public international law, comparative constitutional systems, national security laws, international trade law, public law as well as international politics and policy matters. He is also a volunteer researcher and coordinator at a pro bono organisation defending the rights of low income migrant workers in Canada.