KOZULIN VERDICT

C O N F I D E N T I A L MINSK 000731

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/14/2016
TAGS: PGOV PREF BO
SUBJECT: KOZULIN VERDICT


Classified By: DCM Constance Phlipot for Reasons 1.4 B and D


1. (C) SUMMARY: On July 13, former opposition presidential
candidate Aleksandr Kozulin was sentenced to five and a half
years in a medium security prison on one charge of disturbing
the peace and two counts of hooliganism. The six-day
proceedings were at times chaotic and drew a heavy presence
of Belarusian security forces. The court significantly
curtailed the witness list in favor of the prosecution.
Moreover, the government's case was substantiated by dubious
victims, including members of Belarusian special forces who
claimed injuries from violence allegedly incited by Kozulin.
Kozulin's harsh sentence excludes him from participating in
the 2011 presidential race and signals to the international
community on the eve of the G-8 Summit that Belarus does not
respond to Western pressure and threats. END SUMMARY.


2. (C) On July 6-13, former opposition candidate and head of
the BSDP (Gramada) opposition political party Aleksandr
Kozulin was tried on one charge of disturbing the peace and
two counts of hooliganism (Part Two of Article 339 of
Belarus' criminal code). The hooliganism charges were for
his alleged attempts to force his way into the National Press
Center on February 17 and his attempt to register for the
All-Belarusian People's Assembly on March 2. The charge of
organizing a group demonstration to disturb the peace
(Article 342 of Belarus' criminal code) related to Kozulin's
participation in a March 25 demonstration in protest of the
presidential elections of March 17. During the March 2 and
March 25 events, police severely beat Kozulin.

Chaos and High Security at Moskovsky Courthouse
-------------- --


3. (C) As Poloff arrived at the courthouse on the morning of
July 6, dozens of journalists and Kozulin supporters were
shouting at court officers and pushing each other as they
attempted to enter the building. OMON special riot police
officers donning black berets and blue camouflage trousers
were shouting back and preventing anyone from entering,
except a small number of journalists who appeared to have
some kind of passes. A few minutes later, a delegation of
six EU diplomats arrived. The OMON officers initially
refused them entry. After several minutes, the officers
allowed the EU diplomats and Poloff to enter. Poloff
followed and entered the courtroom the EU diplomats. Two OSCE
representatives were also present.


4. (C) As Poloff entered the courthouse, former opposition
presidential candidate Aleksandr Milinkevich arrived and
answered questions from journalists who struggled to remain
standing amidst the tightly-packed crowd. During one
interview Milinkevich described the trial as "politically
motivated" and stated that he wanted to testify in Kozulin's
behalf. According to independent media reports, Milinkevich
claimed that he was refused entry.


5. (C) Inside the courtroom, there were four more OMON
officers. After a few minutes, court officers ordered
radio-television media out of the court. As the judge,
Aleksey Rybakov, entered the courtroom, five regular uniform
guards put Kozulin into a metal cage in the courtroom, a
normal feature of Belarusian criminal proceedings. (Note:
Rybakov was the judge wh sentenced opposition activist
Nikolai Statkevic to two years restricted freedom.) At that
moment, most of the audience stood and applauded (many wre
wearing T-shirts with Kozulin's image). The udge complained
about the number of family membes and other persons not
directly connected with he case and threatened to clear the
courtroom.


6. (C) The French Ambassador believed that the judge
expelled foreign diplomats from the courtroom. (Note: Only a
few diplomats remained at that time as most of the other EU
Ambassadors had already left for another meeting.) The
French Ambassador informed the German Ambassador, who as the
local head of the EU Presidency, issued a statement of
protest. However, neither Poloff nor OSCE interpreted the
judges' remarks as an order to leave. Neither Poloff nor
OSCE were asked to leave. Moreover, the OSCE representative
and Poloff left and re-entered the courtroom repeatedly
during recesses.


7. (C) During the days that followed, Belarusian authorities
enhanced security despite much smaller crowds at the
courthouse. These measures included additional OMON officers
guarding the entrances to the courthouse and what appeared to
be several two-man teams of plain-clothes police or soldiers
checking identities and conducting foot patrols inside and
outside the courthouse.


8. (C) On July 13, the judge called the trial to order to
issue his verdict. Before the judge could do so, Kozulin
immediately began shouting at the judge that the court was a
"farce." Kozulin supporters began chanting everything
Kozulin said. A few minutes later, at least 10 OMON officers
entered the courtroom and ordered certain individuals to
leave. The judge then ordered the entire court cleared. The
international observers and Poloff slowly exited the
courtroom. Several minutes later, the court granted
permission to Poloff and an OSCE representative to observe
the verdict.

The Government's Case
--------------


9. (C) The Belarusian government attempted to substantiate
its case with testimony from witnesses including the
administration of the Belarusian National Press Center and
several officers from Belarusian security forces. Five
members of the Special Forces of the Belarusian Interior
Ministry, known as "Almaz," testified as "victims." One
claimed to have received serious head injuries as the result
of Kozulin's alleged coordination and participation in the
violence. OSCE observers expressed skepticism to Poloff
about the Almaz soldier's testimony since his account of
where on his head he had been struck seemed to change each
time he retold it.

Kozulin's Defense
--------------


10. (C) Kozulin's team argued that on point of law,
Kozulin's conduct on February 17 and March 2 did not meet the
definition of hooliganism under Belarusian statute, which
requires malicious intent against Belarusian society, and
that the administration of the National Press Center
illegally ordered security personnel to prevent Kozulin's
entry. On point of fact, the defense refuted the disturbing
the peace charge from March 25 by citing video played the
previous day that purportedly showed Kozulin could not have
disrupted traffic and endangered bystanders. Kozulin
peppered the judge with a wide array of legal motions
including requests to play a second video presentation, to
allow Kozulin's daughter, who is an attorney, to participate
in Kozulin's defense team, and to remove prosecutor Sergey
Bortnik from the case. The judge refused all of Kozulin's
legal motions.


11. (C) The judge permitted Kozulin to make a long defiant
statement in which Kozulin questioned the legitimacy of the
proceedings and refuted the charges against him, particularly
the hooliganism charges. Kozulin insisted that these charges
were politically motivated and that the government targeted
him because of his election campaign against President
Lukashenko. The judge also permitted Kozulin's defense team
to cross-examine prosecution witnesses and to call several
defense witnesses, including Kozulin's mother, a journalist
from "Radio Svoboda," and attorney Oleg Volchek.

Kozulin's Wife on Strategy and Media
--------------


12. (C) During a recess on July 7, Poloff talked with
Kozulin's wife, Irina Kozulina. Kozulina explained that the
flurry of procedural motions was part of their defense
strategy to draw out the trial into the week of the G-8
Summit in St. Petersburg so as to bring international
attention to Kozulin's case. She hoped the presence of
Western diplomats at the trial would elevate media attention.
(Note: Poloff noticed several independent Belarusian
journalists in the courtroom and subsequently saw extensive
coverage of Kozulin's trial in independent Belarusian press.)

Kozulin's Condition
--------------


13. (C) Kozulin appeared thinner than he was during the
election but did not appear to be unhealthy. Although
reporters quoted (or misquoted) Kozulina as saying that
Belarusian authorities had denied Kozulin food and water, she
separately told Poloff the authorities had offered Kozulin
only food and he refused to accept the food without water.
Kozulina added that one of the guards told Kozulin to drink
water from the toilet. During the last days of the trial,
Kozulin appeared increasingly irritable, and press reports
suggested that he suffered from dizziness.

Comment
--------------


14. (C) Belarusian authorities attempted to give this trial
a veneer of transparency and rule of law. During the first
half of the proceedings days, the judge granted Kozulin and
his defense team considerable latitude to make statements and
question witnesses. However, the court significantly
curtailed the witness list in favor of the prosecution. The
prosecution's witnesses, particularly the Almaz soldiers and
the National Press Center administrators, lacked credibility
during cross-examination. The sentence sends clear messages
to Kozulin that he will not have another opportunity to
challenge Lukashenko in the next presidential elections and
to the international community on the eve of the G-8 Summit
that Lukashenko defiantly ignores Western calls for political
reform.
Krol