Legal base	Articles 29 EU; unanimity
Department	Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Basis of consideration	EM of 25 November 2009
Previous Committee Report	None; but see (30507) — : HC 19- xii (2008-09), chapter 10 (1 April 2009); also see (30076) —: HC 16-xxxiii ( 2007-08), chapter 5 (29 October 2008); and (27458) 8836/06 and (27459) — : HC 34-xxviii (2005-06), chapter 15 (10 May 2006)
To be discussed in Council	7 December 2009 General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC)
Committee's assessment	Politically important
Committee's decision	Cleared

Background

17.1 The Belarus "Country Profile" on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website catalogues a litany of repressive and undemocratic behaviour since Alyaksandr Lukashenko won the first Presidential elections in July 1994.[46]

17.2 In September 2004 the EU imposed a travel ban on four individuals implicated in the disappearances of four well-known persons in Belarus in 1999/2000 and the subsequent obstruction of justice. A further two names were added in November 2004 because of:

(a) their role in the flawed elections and referendum held in October 2004, lifting a constitutional ban on a third term for President Lukashenko (the Chair of the Central Electoral Committee); and

(b) for the severe repression of the subsequent peaceful demonstration in Minsk by the authorities and the arrest of the opposition leaders (the commander of the Minsk riot police).

17.3 It was renewed the following September, given that there had been no independent investigation into the disappearances, nor any reform of the electoral code, in line with OSCE recommendations, nor any concrete action to respect human rights with respect to peaceful demonstrations: on the contrary, the situation had continued to deteriorate.

17.4 At the 7 November 2005 and 30 January 2006 GAERCs, EU Foreign Ministers stated their readiness to take restrictive measures against those responsible if the Presidential election in Belarus on 19 March was not conducted in line with OSCE and other international standards. According to the OSCE/ODIHR International Election Observation Mission, the Belarus Presidential election failed to meet OSCE commitments ; and, following the election, peaceful demonstrations in Minsk were again forcibly broken up, and demonstrators and opposition leaders arrested. The 24 March 2006 European Council accordingly agreed that the EU would take restrictive measures against those responsible for the violation of international electoral standards, including President Lukashenko. At the 10 April GAERC, EU Foreign Ministers agreed to impose a travel ban on 31 officials (in addition to the original six; Common Position 2006/276/CFSP, repealing Common Position 2004/661/CFSP).

17.5 On 10 May 2006, the Committee cleared amendments to Common Position 2006/276/CFSP and an accompanying proposed Regulation, which imposed an assets freeze on those individuals (plus an additional five) and on any person or entity associated with them. The amendments also made some technical amendments to the annexes to Common Position 2006/276/CFSP. Conditions for releasing frozen assets were set out in the instruments.

17.6 Both the travel ban and assets freeze lists included President Lukashenko. Common Position 2006/276/CFSP was renewed by Common Position 2007/173/CFSP on 19 March 2007. On 7 April 2008 the Council adopted Common Position 2008/288/CFSP extending the measures by 12 further months until 10 April 2009.

17.7 In so doing, the Council agreed that the restrictive measures provided for by Common Position 2006/276/CFSP should be extended for a period of 12 months, but that the travel restrictions aimed at certain officials of Belarus — with the exception of those involved in the 1999-2000 disappearances and the President of the Central Electoral Commission — should not apply for a reviewable period of six months, so as to encourage dialogue with the Belarus authorities and the adoption of measures to reinforce democracy and respect for human rights; at the end of this six-month period, the Council would re-examine the situation in Belarus and evaluate the progress made by the Belarus authorities on reforming the Electoral Code to bring it into line with OSCE commitments and other international standards and consider any other practical action to strengthen respect for democratic values, human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of expression and of the media, as well as the freedom of assembly and political association and the rule of law.

17.8 In her accompanying Explanatory Memorandum of 28 October 2008, the then Minister for Europe at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Caroline Flint) recalled that, following the (as described by the OSCE) "seriously flawed" 2006 Presidential elections, the Government supported the EU wide visa ban and asset freeze on key members of the regime in Belarus, and had had a ban on ministerial contact since 1997. As a result of these actions, she said, Belarus had become increasingly isolated in the international community. She continued thus:

"This year, we have seen some signs that Belarus might be interested in increasing its contacts with the Member States and willing to adopt a more moderate stance on other issues. Belarus released its last three internationally recognised political prisoners in late August. This meets one of the 12 conditions for engagement set out by the EU in the Commission document 'What the EU could offer Belarus' published in November 2006.[47] Meanwhile, President Lukashenko promised that parliamentary elections on 28 September would be free and fair. Whilst the initial report by OSCE monitors does not support this (it said that the elections failed to meet OSCE standards) Belarus was significantly more co-operative in their interactions with OSCE monitors.

17.9 The then Minister said that this represented less progress than she would have liked: but she shared the view of other EU Member States that "isolating Belarus will not promote further positive progress but rather focus the leadership on strengthening their ties with Russia whilst failing to deliver on EU demands." She therefore supported the EU consensus in favour of suspending the visa ban for six months whilst renewing the restrictive measures for a further 12 months, "backed up by a strong statement from Council Members", as "the approach most likely to encourage the Belarusians to make further progress on the road toward human rights and democracy."

17.10 The Minister then said that:

"We will continue to follow a path of critical engagement ensuring Belarus understands that the process begun by the General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC)[48] must be sustained by further Belarusian steps. Whilst it is unlikely that all 12 conditions for engagement will be met over the next six months we expect to see some positive progress, particularly in the areas of freedom of the media, civil society and elections. In addition to pushing for the EU to set down clear modalities measuring progress we will continue to deliver clear and firm messages basing our demands explicitly on the EU's '12 Propositions.'[49]

"The lifting of the visa ban will enable us to engage at senior levels and create personal incentives for senior officials in Belarus, who will be keen to ensure that the ban is not imposed again.

"The proposal gives Belarus a six month window in which to demonstrate concrete improvements in human rights and democracy. We hope that Belarus will make the most of this opportunity to rebuild the relationship with the EU. If Belarus fails to move toward the necessary reforms, it ensures that the restrictions will be automatically re-imposed at the end of that six month period. A unanimous decision will be required to extend the decision by another six months."

Our assessment

17.11 We said that it was clear from our examination in chapter 4 of the same Report of a similar process, and change of approach, regarding another repressive regime — in that case Uzbekistan[50] — why we were somewhat sceptical of the notion of a "probationary period" during which progress in relation to clear benchmarks would determine whether or not a temporary suspension is made permanent.

17.12 As with the revisions to the Common Position on Uzbekistan, we were also concerned that we were effectively being presented, not with a proposal to be scrutinised, but with a fait accompli — a decision announced in the 13 October GAERC Conclusions, followed by changes to the Common Position to give it effect. So we asked the Minister to appear before us to explain the position she had taken, and why she had handled the process in this way. The first part of that evidence session (held on 4 February 2009 )[51] was devoted to a discussion out of which the Minister, in referring to the six-month deadline, suggested "a conversation about that before we get to the final stage of renewal or extension of that package"[52]

The Minister's letter of 9 March 2009

17.13 In her letter, the Minister reported that the EU had made clear its five priorities — no new political prisoners, freer media, reform of electoral code, liberalisation of NGO environment, and freedom of assembly — and that the Belarusians had "refrained from flagrant human rights abuses" and introduced "a number of small reforms." But progress against the five priorities had been mixed, the positive changes had not been systemic and could be reversed and the Minister was concerned by some negative steps in the immediately preceding couple of weeks — including the arrest of three human rights activists, two of whom had been recognised as political prisoners by the international community during previous periods of detention.

17.14 The Minister then went on to say that, while some Member States shared her concerns, most were leaning towards renewal of the suspension on the grounds that there had been some progress; though renewal could demonstrate the EU's commitment to engagement with Belarus, and "tie them closer to international organisations and internationally accepted standards through the Eastern Partnership and the Council of Europe, so encouraging further reform", renewal on the basis of the limited reforms so far, the Minister said, "risks suggesting that we were satisfied with progress, weakening an important lever for further reform" and "could lead them to believe that sanctions would be lifted altogether when they come up for renewal in October." Conversely, the Minister said, re-imposition could be interpreted negatively by international bodies other than the IMF and jeopardise the additional assistance that their $2.5bn loan in January assumed, and make Belarus vulnerable to Russian influence, which would in turn be unlikely to help the reform process.

17.15 Overall, the Minister concluded, her judgement on whether to support renewal of the suspension would be based on the most effective way of supporting reform; the Belarusian reaction to whichever step the EU took was unpredictable, with neither option providing guarantees of improved performance; an important part of the effectiveness of her approach would be achieving EU unity, "so Belarus was left in no doubt about our messages", which unity would be needed when the Common Position was due for renewal in October, without which the sanctions would lapse. Given "these challenges", the Minister said her position would "continue to evolve in the run up to the GAERC", and she would "inform the committee in the usual way of the outcome of the Council."

17.16 In its response of 11 March 2009, the Committee thanked the Minister for having shared her analysis with it and recognised the difficulties involved in making the right decision. But, it noted, a key EU priority was no new political prisoners: the Minister had said that the visa ban suspension provided for its immediate re-imposition if the Helsinki-Belarus commission were to assess that any of the human rights activists were political prisoners in this instance, but did not say when she expected the commission to deliver its assessment. The Committee presumed that, given the importance the EU rightly attached to this issue, the judgement of this commission would be important in determining any final decision by the Council, and that it would be available to the Council before it came to a view, and accordingly asked the Minister to let the Committee know what the situation was prior to her going to the Council, and how she expected this to affect the outcome.

The Minister's letter of 20 March 2009

17.17 The Minister then wrote on 20 March regarding the 16-17 March GAERC's decision to extend the Common Position for 12 months, and renew the suspension of travel restrictions for nine months.

17.18 The Minister again said that views differed about the best way to respond; some felt that refusing to renew the suspension would push Belarus away from the EU, discouraging further reforms; others, that renewing the suspension without clear evidence of commitment to reform would send the wrong message to the Belarusian authorities. The UK objective was "to continue to engage with Belarus to promote reform in the country, while maintaining the option to revert to sanctions if the human rights situation deteriorates", and the UK had "played an important role in building consensus around an approach that would promote engagement, while making clear that the EU was not yet convinced of the Belarusian authorities' commitment to reform." This was "a good outcome, and a good foundation for the EU's relationship with Belarus." It would be accompanied by "increased focus on reforms within Belarus"; if the EU judged that Belarus had "failed to make progress, or if there are significant human rights violations, the Common Position can be amended by unanimous agreement at any point during the next year, and restrictions re-imposed".

17.19 Responding to the Committee's recent letter, the Minister then said that "any new (our underlining) arrests of human rights defenders or prisoners of conscience in Belarus would result in a major set-back in EU-Belarus relations"; Member States had agreed that new prisoners of conscience would be a very clear indication that Belarus was not committed to reforms; and that under these circumstances would amend the Common Position to re-impose the travel restrictions: the EU had "made this position very clear to the Belarusian authorities." The Minister then noted that Amnesty International's definition of "prisoners of conscience" was "men, women or children imprisoned solely for the peaceful expression of their beliefs". To decide whether an individual met these criteria Member States would rely on the judgement of international and local NGOs, including the Helsinki-Belarus commission — in particular, on the judicial process against the three activists referred to in her previous letter, Nikolay Avtukhovich, Yuri Leonov and Vladimir Asipenka — and would "continue to raise such cases with the Belarusian authorities to make them aware of the damage continued detention of such individuals would do to their relationship with the EU."

17.20 In its 25 March 2009 response, the Committee said that we found this somewhat ambiguous. First, we were not clear what the difference was between human rights defenders who had already been arrested — which those in question had been — and prisoners of conscience. But it would seem that she and other Member States did draw such a distinction; in which case we asked her to explain this more fully.

17.21 Secondly, the one clear criterion among the five she had listed earlier was "no new political prisoners", and she had said that there had been no new political prisoners. But she had then said that three former political prisoners, and human rights defenders, had been arrested. To the Committee, this already suggested a breach of the one clear criterion among the five. Now, in referring to "any new (our underlining) arrests of human rights defenders", it seemed to us that Member States were instead awaiting the verdict of the Helsinki-Belarus commission regarding the status of those individuals referred to in her earlier letter. Having said earlier that the visa ban suspension provided for immediate re-imposition if the Helsinki-Belarus commission were to assess that any of the human rights activists were political prisoners in this instance, the Committee asked the Minister to clarify these ambiguities, confirm that this is what Member States intended to do, and say when she expected to know the Helsinki-Belarus commission's view; and to do so in the Explanatory Memorandum that she would now be submitting on the amendments to the Common Position.

The subsequent Common Position

17.22 That Common Position extended the restrictive measures (asset freeze and travel ban) provided for by Common Position 2006/276/CFSP for a further period of 12 months; except that the travel restrictions imposed on certain leading figures in Belarus, with the exception of those involved in the disappearances which occurred in 1999 and 2000 and of the President of the Central Electoral Commission, would be suspended for a period of nine months.

17.23 By the end of that nine-month period, the Council would conduct a review of the restrictive measures, taking into account the situation in Belarus. At any time, the Council might decide by unanimity to re-apply the travel restrictions, if necessary in the light of actions by Belarusian authorities in the sphere of democracy and human rights.

17.24 In her accompanying 25 March 2009 Explanatory Memorandum, the then Minister for Europe recalled that, following the "seriously flawed" Presidential elections in 2006 the UK supported the EU wide visa ban and asset freeze on key members of the regime in Belarus; that the UK has had a ban on ministerial contact since 1997; and that, as she said last October, Belarus had consequently become increasingly isolated in the international community. She also recalled the signs in 2008 that "Belarus might be interested in increasing its contacts with the Member States and willing to adopt a more moderate stance on other issues", including the release of its last three internationally recognised political prisoners in late August and the 2008 presidential elections which, though still failing to meet OSCE standards, had found Belarus "significantly more co-operative in its interaction with OSCE monitors." Though adding up to less progress than she would have liked, the Minister had shared the view that isolating Belarus would not promote further positive progress but rather focus the leadership on strengthening their ties with Russia whilst failing to deliver on EU demands; last October's GAERC decision had given Belarus "incentives to re-engage with the EU and a six-month period in which to demonstrate concrete developments.". She continued as follows:

"Heads of Mission from EU Embassies in Minsk have assessed Belarus' progress against five priorities (no new political prisoners, freer media, reform of electoral code, liberalisation of NGO environment and freedom of assembly) but felt progress has been mixed. Belarus has taken several positive actions — no further political prisoners, allowed limited circulation of opposition press, permitting registration of the opposition organisation "For Freedom" and the creation of three consultative councils covering foreign investor relations, media issues and civil society. However, the UK is concerned at recent negative steps taken by the Belarus authorities — e.g. their refusal to register the human rights NGO "Nasha Vyasna" and the arrest of three activists. These arrests are not currently deemed to be political imprisonment, but this is a situation we are monitoring with concern.

"Some EU colleagues felt that failing to suspend further the visa ban would discourage Belarus from cooperating with the EU, and compromise further reforms. Others felt that renewing the suspension without clear evidence of commitment to reform would send the wrong message to the Belarus authorities. The UK's objective is to continue to engage with Belarus to promote reform in the country, while maintaining the option to revert to sanctions if the human rights situation deteriorates. In the light of this divergence of views, the UK played an important role in building consensus around an approach that would promote engagement, while making clear that the EU was not yet convinced of the Belarusian authorities' commitment to reform.

"The draft Common Position extends sanctions for a further 12 months, but partially suspends the visa ban for a further 9 months. If the EU judges that Belarus has failed to make progress, or if there are significant human rights violations, the Common Position can be amended by unanimous agreement at any point, and restrictions re-imposed.

"We believe that this is a good outcome. The package promotes engagement, but makes clear that the EU is not yet convinced of the Belarus authorities' commitment to reform. The UK's proposal of a 12-month extension enables the EU to maintain leverage for a longer period than the previous Common Position. It should also be noted that the partial suspension does not apply to those involved in disappearances which occurred in 1999-2000 or the Chair of the Central Electoral Commission."

17.25 The Minister concluded by noting that in order to comply with article 3 of Common Position 2008/844/CFSP (that it be reviewed before 13 April 2009), the draft Common Position would need to be adopted at the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 6 April 2009.

The Minister's letter of 30 March 2009

17.26 The Minister responded to our letter of 25 March 2009 as follows:

"Nikolay Avtukhovich, Yuri Leonov and Vladimir Asipenka have been arrested for arson, and are currently in pre-trial detention. We have serious concerns about the independence of the Belarusian justice system and may in the future come to categorise these individuals as human rights defenders or political prisoners, but it is currently too early to make that conclusion. This view is shared by the Belarus Helsinki Commission who were consulted by officials at our Embassy in Minsk earlier this week. The Belarus Helsinki Commission are following the case especially closely because Nikolay Avtukhovich and Yuri Leonov have previously been recognised as political prisoners.

"Until the three individuals are released, or until the Belarus Helsinki Commission consider them political prisoners, we will work with our EU colleagues to continue to urge the Belarusian authorities to ensure that their case is dealt with promptly and fairly.

"We will make clear to the Belarusian authorities that any action that results in the Belarusian Helsinki Commission considering these individuals as political prisoners will have a significant impact on Belarus's relationship with the EU.

"The EU undertook to review the provisions of Common Position 2008/844/CFSP before 13 April 2009. If the current draft Common Position is not adopted by that date, the EU will be unable to review those provisions and EU colleagues may feel that the UK is not serious about its obligations under EU legislation. Furthermore, it may send a signal to the Belarus authorities that the EU is not united on this issue — a position it will exploit to undermine the effectiveness of the sanctions measures. It is possible, therefore, that we will seek to override scrutiny in order for the Common Position to be adopted on 6 April 2009."

Our assessment

17.27 Given the clear differences of view between Member States that the Minister herself discussed, we thought that it would be odd if the Belarus authorities had not already concluded that the EU was not united on this issue — especially since she had again failed to state that, should the individuals in question be classified as political prisoners, the travel ban would be reimposed.

17.28 We also found it disturbing that she should use the possibility of something that the Belarus authorities must know was lacking as a basis upon which to threaten to over-ride scrutiny.

17.29 We left it to the House to judge whether or not this was "a good outcome", particularly as was said that it would be developments in this area of "common values" and governance that would determine what place Belarus would have in the then proposed new Eastern Partnership between the EU and six Eastern neighbours — Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine[53] (which proposal was debated in the European Committee on 27 April.)[54]

17.30 We looked forward to further information from the Minister as the situation developed, particularly with regard to the arrested individuals and in the run-up to the review in nine months time.

17.31 In the meantime we cleared the document.[55]

The draft Council Decision

17.32 Common Position 2009/314/CFSP was adopted on 6 April 2009 and extended the restrictive measures until 15 March 2010, with a partial suspension of the travel restrictions until 15 December 2009.

17.33 This draft Decision supersedes and therefore repeals Common Position 2009/314/CFSP. It extends the restrictive measures (asset freeze and travel ban) provided for by Common Position 2006/276/CFSP until 31 October 2010. At the same time the travel restrictions imposed on certain leading figures in Belarus, with the exception of those involved in the disappearances which occurred in 1999 and 2000 and of the President of the Central Electoral Commission, will be further suspended. As before, the Council may, at any time, decide by unanimity to re-apply the travel restrictions, if necessary in the light of actions by Belarusian authorities in the sphere of democracy and human rights.

17.34 In October 2010, the Council will review of the restrictive measures, taking into account the situation in Belarus.

The Government's view

17.35 After briefly reviewing the detailed history set out above, the Minister for Europe at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Chris Bryant) says that the 17 November GAERC agreed that, "due to an absence of tangible progress in areas identified in the Council Conclusions of 13 October 2008, the restrictive measures in place on Belarus should be extended until 31 October 2010, but to encourage further reform, the suspension of the travel restrictions were also extended for the same period." He continues as follows:

"We are disappointed that Belarus has not made more progress since March, and remain concerned about the cases of Nikolay Avtukhovich, Yuri Leonov and Vladimir Asipenka, activists who were arrested for arson earlier this year. Neither Amnesty International nor the Belarusian Helsinki Committee consider these activists political prisoners. In May 2009, Amnesty International announced that they recognised as political prisoners 11 people arrested for taking part in an unauthorised demonstration against regulations on small businesses in January 2008. Since then, three of the activists have been released.

"However, we believe that the Council Conclusions[56] recognise the mixed progress made by Belarus over the past year, and reflect the balance of views between EU Member States. This outcome sends a united message to the Belarusian authorities that we are not yet satisfied with their progress. This extension enables the EU to maintain leverage whilst still promoting engagement. Appetite for sanctions within the EU has diminished so the Belarusian authorities may have believed they could sit sanctions out and wait for the measures to lapse. This renewal makes it clear that the EU is not yet convinced of the Belarus authorities' commitment to reform. It should also be noted that the partial suspension does not apply to those involved in disappearances which occurred in 1999-2000 or the Chair of the Central Electoral Commission."

17.36 Finally, the Minister says that the draft Council Decision needs to be adopted at the General Affairs and External Relations Council on 7 December 2009 before the current suspension on the existing measures expires.

Conclusion

17.37 We are reporting this further extension so fully because of the degree of interest in the House in EU relations with both the EU and Russia's "near neighbours" and in EU sanctions policy around the globe. We again leave it to others in the House to judge the effectiveness of the EU's policy, and its shifts since 2006, in relation to its avowed objectives (which are set out clearly in Annexes 1 and 2 of this chapter of our Report).

17.38 We note that the policy decision was taken on 17 November, yet the Minister's Explanatory Memorandum was not submitted until 25 November. Normally, it would have been considered by the Committee, at its weekly meeting, on 2 December. But, as the Foreign and Commonwealth Office knew, the Committee was at that time meeting representatives of the incoming Spanish Presidency team in Madrid. What would seem to have been an avoidable over-ride of scrutiny has thus arisen. We shall take this up with the Minister separately.

17.39 In the meantime, we clear the document.

Annex 1: Council Conclusions of 13 October 2008 on Belarus

"1.The Council notes that, despite some improvements, the parliamentary elections held on 28 September 2008 in Belarus failed to meet the democratic criteria of the OSCE. The Council calls on the Belarusian authorities to remedy the shortcomings observed and to cooperate fully to that end with the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights.

"2. The Council notes with satisfaction that some progress has been made during the electoral campaign compared with previous elections, in particular as regards cooperation with the OSCE/ODIHR and broader access for the opposition to the media. It again welcomes the release of the last internationally recognised political prisoners before the elections. The Council also notes that the opposition was able to demonstrate peacefully on the evening of the elections.

"3. The European Union earnestly hopes for gradual re-engagement with Belarus and is therefore ready to develop a dialogue with the Belarusian authorities, as with all those participating in the democratic debate, with the aim of encouraging genuine progress towards strengthening democracy and respect for human rights in that country. The Council has taken note of the troika meeting with the Belarusian Minister for Foreign Affairs and, in support of these developments, has decided to restore the contacts with the Belarusian authorities which had been restricted pursuant to the Council conclusions of 22 and 23 November 2004.

"4. In order to encourage dialogue with the Belarusian authorities and the adoption of positive measures to strengthen democracy and respect for human rights, the Council — while deciding to extend, for one year from today's date, the restrictive measures provided for by Common Position 276/2006/CFSP, as extended by Common Position 288/2008/CFSP — has decided that the travel restrictions imposed on certain leading figures in Belarus, with the exception of those involved in the disappearances which occurred in 1999 and 2000 and of he President of the Central Electoral Commission, will not apply for a period of six months which may be renewed. At the end of that period, the Council will reconsider whether the Belarusian authorities have made progress towards reforms of the Electoral Code to bring it into line with OSCE commitments and other international standards for democratic elections and other concrete actions to respect democratic values, the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of expression and of the media, and the freedom of assembly and political association. The Council may decide to apply travel restrictions sooner if necessary, in the light of the actions of the Belarusian authorities in the sphere of democracy and human rights.

"5. With a view to strengthening links with the administration and population, the Council supports the intensification of technical cooperation initiated by the Commission with Belarus in areas of mutual interest. The European Union will continue to provide assistance for Belarusian civil society in order to promote the development of a democratic and pluralist environment.

"6. The European Union reiterates that it remains ready to deepen its relations with Belarus and to review the restrictive measures taken against leading Belarusian figures in the light of progress made by Belarus on the path towards democracy and human rights. The Council is ready to assist Belarus in attaining these objectives. "

Annex 2: The EU's "12 points"

• "respect the right of the people of Belarus to elect their leaders democratically — their right to hear all views and see all election candidates; the right of opposition candidates and supporters to campaign without harassment, prosecution or imprisonment; independent observation of the elections, including by Belarusian nongovernmental organisations; their freedom to express their will and have their vote fairly counted;
• "respect the right of the people of Belarus to independent information, and to express themselves freely e.g. by allowing journalists to work without harassment or prosecution, not shutting down newspapers or preventing their distribution;
• "respect the rights of non-governmental organisations as a vital part of a healthy democracy — by no longer hindering their legal existence, harassing and prosecuting members of NGOs, and allowing them to receive international assistance;
• "release all political prisoners — members of democratic opposition parties, members of NGOs and ordinary citizens arrested at peaceful demonstrations or meetings;
• "properly and independently investigate or review the cases of disappeared persons;[57]
• "ensure the right of the people of Belarus to an independent and impartial judicial system — with judges who are not subject to political pressure, and without arbitrary and unfounded criminal prosecution or politically-motivated judgements such as locking-up citizens who peacefully express their views;
• "end arbitrary arrest and detention, and ill-treatment;
• "respect the rights and freedoms of those Belarusian citizens who belong to national minorities;
• "respect the rights of the people of Belarus as workers — their right to join a trade union and the right of trade unions to work to defend the people's rights; respect the rights of the people of Belarus as entrepreneurs to operate without excessive intervention by the authorities;
• "join the other nations of Europe in abolishing the death penalty;
• "make use of the support which the OSCE, the EU and other organisations offer to Belarus to help it respect the rights of its people."

Annex 3: Council Conclusions of 17 November 2009

1.  "The Council notes that since October 2008, as a result of the release of internationally recognised political prisoners, new possibilities have opened up for dialogue and deepened cooperation between the EU and Belarus. The Council welcomes the increased high-level EU-Belarus political dialogue, the establishment of a Human Rights Dialogue, the intensified technical cooperation and the participation of Belarus in the Eastern Partnership, as ways of building mutual understanding and creating opportunities to address issues of concern.

2.  "The Council recalls its Conclusions of 13 October 2008, and the areas of concern identified therein, including the need for progress towards reforms of the Electoral Code to bring it into line with OSCE commitments and other international standards for democratic elections, the freedom of expression and of the media, and the freedom of assembly and political association. After a number of encouraging decisions taken earlier in these areas, the Council deeply regrets the recent lack of significant progress in addressing its concerns in the area of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including as regards the crackdown on peaceful political actions and the continued denial of registration of many political parties, nongovernmental organisations and independent media. The Council furthermore regrets the recent death sentences in Belarus and urges Belarus to introduce a moratorium on the death penalty, as an interim step leading to the early abolition of the death penalty.

3.  "Due to the absence of tangible progress in the areas identified in the Council Conclusions of 13 October 2008, the Council is not able to lift the restrictive measures in place against certain officials of Belarus. Therefore, it decides to extend until October 2010 the restrictive measures provided for by Common Position 2006/276 CFSP, as extended by Common Position 2009/314/CFSP. However, in order to encourage progress in the areas identified by the EU, the Council decides at the same time to extend the suspension of the application of the travel restrictions imposed on certain officials of Belarus, in accordance with the terms set out in Council Common Position 2009/314/CFSP, until October 2010.At the end of that period, the Council will review the restrictive measures in the light of the situation in Belarus. The Council may decide to reapply or lift travel restrictions at any time, in light of actions by the Belarusian authorities in the sphere of democracy and human rights.

4.  "The Council recalls the Joint Declaration of the Prague Eastern Partnership Summit on 7 May 2009 and welcomes the constructive and active participation of Belarus in the Eastern Partnership. In this context, and recognising the importance of enhanced people-to-people contacts, the Council invites the Commission to prepare recommendations in view of obtaining negotiating directives on visa facilitation and readmission agreements with Belarus, taking into account the common approach on visa facilitation, the recent evaluation of the existing visa facilitation agreements, as well as the findings of a technical expert mission to Belarus, and with a view to the possible adoption of these negotiating directives once relevant conditions are met.

5.  "The European Union reaffirms its readiness to deepen its relations with Belarus in light of further developments in Belarus towards democracy, human rights and the rule of law and to assist the country in attaining these objectives. Subject to progress in Belarus in these areas, the Council stands ready to take steps towards upgrading contractual relations with Belarus. Meanwhile, the Council invites the Commission to make a proposal for a joint interim plan to set priorities for reforms, inspired by the Action Plans developed in the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy, to be implemented with Belarus.

6.  "In due time, the Council will review EU policy towards Belarus, in line with the above. In case of positive developments, the Council would respond accordingly.

7.  "In light of its engagement policy with Belarus, and in order to support the development of a democratic and pluralist environment, the European Union will further intensify its cooperation with the Belarusian civil society, including in the framework of the Eastern Partnership."

47   See http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/belarus/intro/non_paper_1106.pdf for the full text of the paper. Back

48   Presumably a reference to the Council Conclusions on Belarus, which are available at http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/en/gena/103299.pdf and at Annex 1 of this chapter or our Report Back

49   Which are set out in the Council Non-Paper to which the Minister refers, and which we reproduce at Annex 2 of this chapter of our Report. Back

50   (30048) -: see HC 16-xxxiii ( 2007-08), chapter 4 (29 October 2008). Back

51   Published on 2 March 2009 as HC 231. Back

52   Ibid, Ev 4. Back

53   (30248) 16940/08 and (30249) 16941/08: see HC 19-xi (2008-09), chapter 5 (18 March 2009). Back

54   For the record of that debate, see http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmgeneral/euro/090427/90427s01.htm  Back

55   See headnote: (30507) - : HC 19- xii (2008-09), chapter 10 (1 April 2009). Back

56   Presumably those adopted by the 17 November GAERC and reproduced at Annex 3 of this chapter of our Report (and also available at http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st15/st15593.en09.pdf)  Back

57   Yuri Zakharenko (former Minister of the Interior, disappeared on 7 May 1999), Victor Gonchar (former Vice-President of the Parliament of Belarus, disappeared on 16 September 1999), Anatoly Krasovski (businessman disappeared with Mr Gonchar) and Dmitri Zavadski (cameraman for the Russian TV channel ORT, disappeared on 7 July 2000) Back