Belarus

Belarus, a former soviet republic, attained independence in 1991. Belarus’ ties with Russia influence both its economic and political direction. President Lukashenko is often dubbed “Europe’s last dictator”. He has been in power since 1994. In August 2020, the largest protests in the country’s history began to demand Lukashenko’s departure after he was re-appointed president in an election that was widely perceived to have been rigged.[ref]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-53796436[/ref]

On 28 June 2012, the Human Rights Council established the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus (the “Special Rapporteur”).

Use of Conscientious Objection clauses resulting in the denial of lawful services to women and LGBTI+ people
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in all or most state-funded schools with no secular or humanist alternative
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report

Countries: Kazakhstan

The state is secular, with separation of religious and political authorities, not discriminating against any religion or belief
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report
No fundamental restrictions on freedom of expression or advocacy of humanist values
Insufficient information or detail not included in this report

Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition

No condition holds in this strand
No condition holds in this strand

Countries: Andorra

No condition holds in this strand
Religious courts or tribunals rule directly on some family or ‘moral’ matters; it is legally an opt-in system, but the possibility of social coercion is very clear
No condition holds in this strand

Countries: no countries relate to this boundary condition

Localised or infrequent but recurring and widespread social marginalisation or prejudice against the non-religious

This condition is unusual in that it is applied in cases where there is some social discrimination, but it is not pervasive or nationwide. This condition is applied when there is sufficient background evidence to warrant the assertion that discrimination is not anomalous but widespread, and this condition may be applied for example even where if there is no legislative discrimination or where the non-religious may have legal recourse against such discrimination. However, societal discrimination (i.e. discrimination by peers, as opposed to state or legal discrimination) is not easily measured, and for this reason the Report does not currently have similar more severe boundary conditions to capture higher levels of social discrimination per se. In principle these may be introduced in future. However, we consider that countries with actual higher levels of social discrimination against the non-religious will generally already meet other higher level (more severe) boundary conditions under this thematic strand.

The dominant influence of religion in public life undermines the right to equality and/or non-discrimination

Applied when the influence of religion on public life undermines others’ rights, such as SRHR, women’s rights, LGBTI+ rights.

May be applied when the influence is overt (i.e. when religious laws are applied to undermine others’ rights) or covert (i.e. where religious pressure groups exert influence to affect policy)

The non-religious are persecuted socially or there are prohibitive social taboos against atheism, humanism or secularism
Complete tyranny precludes all freedoms of expression and thought, religion or belief

Applied when overriding acts of oppression by the State are extreme, to the extent that the question of freedom of thought and expression is almost redundant, because all human rights and freedoms are quashed by authorities.

Countries: North Korea

Expression of core Humanist principles on democracy, freedom and human rights is brutally repressed
Expression of non-religious views is severely persecuted, or is rendered almost impossible by severe social stigma, or is highly likely to be met with hatred or violence
There is significant social marginalisation of the non-religious or stigma associated with expressing atheism, humanism or secularism
Religious or ideological indoctrination is utterly pervasive in schools
There is a nominal state church with few privileges or progress is being made toward disestablishment

Countries: Bulgaria, Norway, Peru, Rwanda

The non-religious are barred from some government offices (including posts reserved for particular religions or sects)
‘Apostasy’ is outlawed and punishable with a prison sentence

Countries: Bahrain, Comoros, Jordan, Kuwait

‘Apostasy’ or conversion from a specific religion is outlawed and punishable by death
Some religious courts rule in civil or family matters on a coercive or discriminatory basis
Religious authorities have supreme authority over the state

Countries: Iran

State legislation is partly derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Preferential treatment is given to a religion or religion in general

This condition is applied where there are miscellaneous indicators that organs of the state offer various forms of support for a religion, or to religion in general over non-religious worldviews, suggesting a preference for those beliefs, or that the organs of that religion are privileged.

There is a pattern of impunity or collusion in violence by non-state actors against the nonreligious
State-funded schools provide religious education which may be nominally comprehensive but is substantively biased or borderline confessional
Religious or ideological instruction in a significant number of schools is of a coercive fundamentalist or extremist variety

This condition highlights countries where schools subject children to fundamentalist religious instruction with no real opportunity to question fundamentalist tenets, or where lessons routinely encourage hatred (for example religious or ethnic hatred). The wording “significant number of schools” is not given a rigid quantification (sometimes the worst-offending schools are unregistered, illegal, or otherwise uncounted); however the condition is not applied in cases where only a small number of schools meet the description and may be anomalous, as opposed to being indicative of a widespread problem.

State legislation is largely or entirely derived from religious law or by religious authorities
Anomalous discrimination by local or provincial authorities, or overseas territories
Religious or ideological instruction is mandatory in at least some public schools (without secular or humanist alternatives)
‘Blasphemy’ or criticism of religion is outlawed and punishable by death
Government figures or state agencies openly marginalize, harass, or incite hatred or violence against the non-religious
Government authorities push a socially conservative, religiously or ideologically inspired agenda, without regard to the rights of those with progressive views
It is illegal to advocate secularism or church-state separation, or such advocacy is suppressed
Prohibitive interreligious social control (including interreligious marriage bans)
Quasi-divine veneration of a ruling elite is enforced, or a single-party regime holds uncontested power, subject to severe punishment
Legal or constitutional provisions exclude non-religious views from freedom of belief
It is illegal to register an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization, or such groups are persecuted by authorities
There is a religious tax or tithing which is compulsory, or which is state-administered and discriminates by precluding non-religious groups
The non-religious are barred from holding government office
Some concerns about children's right to specifically religious freedom

This condition may apply if specifically religious education, religious materials, or specific religious denominations are so tightly controlled that children are in fact over-protected from exposure to religion and are likely unable to explore or construct their own worldview in accordance with their evolving capacities. This condition helps us to classify states (perhaps with secular constitutions) which have criminalized specifically religious beliefs or practices. This condition is not applied if the restricted beliefs or practices are found to be outlawed due to their being of an extremist variety. While this condition does not directly reflect discrimination against non-religious persons or non-religious ideas, it does represent an overall threat to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief; such restrictions could spill over to affect non-religious beliefs later; and they pose a risk of backlash against over-zealous secular authorities or even against non-religious individuals by association.

It is illegal or unrecognised to identify as an atheist or as non-religious
It is made difficult to register or operate an explicitly Humanist, atheist, secularist or other non-religious NGO or other human rights organization
 
Severe Discrimination
Systemic Discrimination

Constitution and government

The Belarus Constitution, Article 33 reads:

“Everyone is guaranteed freedom of thoughts and beliefs and their free expression.
No one shall be forced to express one’s beliefs or to deny them.
No monopolization of the mass media by the State, public associations or individual citizens and no censorship shall be permitted.”

In practice these freedoms are severely restricted by law.

Demography

There are few reliable statistics about non-religious or religious affiliation in Belarus. Belarus inherited its atheist stance from the former Soviet Union. There are no known humanist, sceptic or freethinker groups in Belarus. One survey suggests that 68% of the 9.4 million population is linked to the Belarusian Orthodox Church (BOC). Other religions have much smaller populations.

Religious discrimination

In 2002 Belarus adopted the Law ‘on freedom of conscience and religious organisations’. The law created formal registration requirements for religious groups to operate. The Annual Report of the Special Rapporteur noted that she remained concerned “about cumbersome regulation and extensive control over the registration and activity of religious communities”.[ref]https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G20/089/03/PDF/G2008903.pdf?OpenElement[/ref]

To register, a religious community must submit an official application including: a list of its founders’ names, places of residence, citizenship, and signatures; copies of its founding statutes; the minutes of its founding meeting; and permission from the regional authorities confirming the community’s right to occupy or use any property referenced in its founding statutes.[ref]https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/BELARUS-2018-INTERNATIONAL-RELIGIOUS-FREEDOM-REPORT.pdf[/ref] The government selectively denies registration to minority religions, while others report being deterred from registering by the fact that they must provide the State with a list of full names and addresses of all members, which they do not trust the government not to misuse.[ref]https://belarusdigest.com/story/religious-freedom-in-belarus-worse-than-in-ukraine-better-than-in-russia/[/ref]

>The law bans all religious activity by unregistered groups and subjects group members to penalties ranging from unspecified fines to two years in prison.[ref]https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/BELARUS-2018-INTERNATIONAL-RELIGIOUS-FREEDOM-REPORT.pdf[/ref]

Although there is no ‘official’ state religion, the government in practice uses provisions of the religion law to hinder or prevent activities of groups other than the BOC. A 2003 concordat between the BOC and the government provides the BOC with autonomy in its internal affairs, freedom to perform religious rites and other activities, and a special relationship with the state.

The law requires all religious groups to receive prior governmental approval to import and distribute religious literature. The government harassed members of minority religious groups, denied them permits to obtain places of worship, raided their private residences and, in one case, arrested a religious official. Members of religious groups reportedly continued to be reluctant to report abuses and restrictions, fearing intimidation and retribution.

Education and children’s rights

The concordat provides a framework for individual agreements between the BOC and various state departments. At least 12 such agreements are in existence, including with the Ministries of Defense, Healthcare, Information, and Education. The agreement with the Ministry of Education provides for joint projects between the state and the BOC for the “spiritual and moral education” of students based on BOC traditions and history.[ref]https://www.state.gov/reports/2019-report-on-international-religious-freedom/belarus/[/ref]

Persuant to the agreement, school administrators may invite BOC priests to lecture to students, organize tours to BOC facilities, and participate in BOC festivities, programs, and humanitarian projects.

Family, community and society

The 2020 Annual Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus highlighted significant problems in Belarus, including the continued use of the death penalty,  torture and ill-treatment in prisons and the use of arbitrary detention against civil society activists, peaceful protesters and independent journalists.

Death penalty

Belarus is the only European country to use the death penalty. Its use is provided for by the Constitution of Belarus, Article 24 of which states that the death penalty may be applied as an “exceptional measure of punishment for especially grave crimes”.[ref]https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Belarus_2004.pdf?lang=en[/ref] In practice, according to one source, since 1981 the death penalty has largely been applied in cases involving murder committed under aggravating circumstances.[ref]https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/belarus683angbassdef.pdf[/ref]

Those condemned to death are executed in a cruel and inhumane fashion – by a shot to the head. Moreover, the executions themselves are shrouded in secrecy, characterised by a failure to inform family members of execution dates, to release the bodies of executed prisoners to their families (so that they may be buried in accordance with family traditions and beliefs) or even to reveal their place of burial. While the exact number of persons convicted to death and executed in Belarus is unknown, human rights defenders estimate that since Belarus gained its independence in 1991, over 300 people have been sentenced to death and about 400 have been executed.[ref]https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/Treaties/CAT/Shared%20Documents/BLR/INT_CAT_CSS_BLR_30786_E.pdf[/ref]

Detainees are put under strong psychological pressure to self-incriminate during pre-trial detention, leading to gross due process violations at trial. A report by the International Federation for Human Rights records how detainees on death row are mistreated in prisons:

According to evidence obtained, persons sentenced to death are kept in total isolation, they are forbidden to take walks, and prison staff treat them as if they are no longer ″among the living. Isolation makes them especially vulnerable to physical and psychological coercion. Conditions of detention on death row have repeatedly led to suicide attempts.”[ref]https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/belarus683angbassdef.pdf[/ref]

Torture and ill-treatment in detention

Reports of torture and ill-treatment in the criminal justice system remain endemic. During the crackdown on peaceful protesters by Belarusian authorities in August 2020, Amnesty International and local human rights groups recorded the mass use of torture against protestors, including reports of individuals being stripped naked, beaten, and threatened with rape. Members of the public reported that the screams of torture victims held in a detention centre in Minsk were audible outside the facility.[ref]https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/08/belarus-mounting-evidence-of-a-campaign-of-widespread-torture-of-peaceful-protesters/[/ref]

Freedom of expression, advocacy of humanist values

Belarus has been heavily criticised by rights bodies for suppressing free speech, muzzling the press and denying the opposition access to state media.

Article 17.11 of the Code of Administrative Offences penalizes the “distribution, production, storage or transportation of extremist information”. In practice, this law is used against activists, journalists and bloggers who criticize the Government and voice dissenting views.[ref]https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/05/17/belarus-media-under-attack-european-games-loom[/ref]

Freedom House reports that the internet remains subject to strict state control, with the government blocking numerous news websites on dubious grounds and without judicial oversight. The popular independent news site Charter 97 has been blocked for spreading “extremist” content since 2018, and during the lead up to the June 2019 European Games a presidential decree was passed which empowered the government to block internet resources calling for protests during games.[ref]https://freedomhouse.org/country/belarus/freedom-net/2019[/ref]

Freedom of Assembly

The largest protests in the country’s history took place in August 2020 against what was widely seen as a fraudulent attempt by President Lukashenko to retain his hold on power. Lukashenko’s government responded to the protests with excessive force. Riot police violently dispersed protesters with rubber bullets and tear gas, at the time of writing at least 2 people have died of injuries and 6,000 have been arrested.[ref]https://www.euronews.com/2020/08/11/belarus-protesters-incited-to-change-tact-for-third-night-of-demonstrations[/ref] An Internet blackout was also imposed in an attempt to stifle dissent and prevent protesters from organizing.[ref]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-belarus-election-internet/internet-blackout-in-belarus-leaves-protesters-in-the-dark-idUSKCN2571Q4[/ref]