By Madeline Schiesser
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

BUDAPEST, Hungary – Despite protests in the capital city throughout the weekend, Hungary’s parliament voted to pass an amendment Monday which critics say amounts to an attack on democracy.  The amendment, the fourth to Hungary’s 14-month-old constitution, will limit the ability of Hungary’s Constitutional Court to Challenge new laws as well as effectively annul all decisions made by the Court since January 2012.  Rolling back the Court’s decisions will bring back a narrow definition of marriage as a heterosexual union, a ban on sleeping on the streets, a requirement for students who accept state scholarships to stay in Hungary, and a ban on political campaign adverts in private media.

The European Union and United States expressed concern over the effects the amendment would have on the independent judiciary, the latter saying the amendment deserved “closer scrutiny and more deliberate consideration”.  The Council of Europe (an independent human rights body) urged for delays to allow legal experts time to examine the amendment, claiming the amendment “raise[s] concerns with respect to the principle of the rule of law, EU law and Council of Europe standards.”  However, members of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz ruling party remained persistent, and passed the amendment.

MP Antal Rogan declared in a speech in the chamber: “We won’t allow either any international business lobby or the political forces that speak on their behalf to interfere with the decisions of the Hungarian parliament.”

The amendment, passed by the Fidesz party, which has a two-thirds majority, says that the Constitutional Court will no longer be able to overturn laws passed in parliament with a two-thirds majority and enshrined in the constitution.  Rather, the court will only have the power to review cases on procedural grounds.  PM Orbán explained that the amendment would create an “irreversible” situation in which parliament’s role in protecting the constitution supersedes that of the Constitutional Court.

Furthermore, the president’s veto power has been removed and he will be obliged to sign amendments, except when there is an objection on procedural grounds.

“When they lay down in the constitution how those who have nowhere to go may or may not sleep on the street then we need to ask whether it’s us protesters who have gone crazy or those who write the constitution,” opposition activist Miklos Tamas Gaspar said.

The EU may decide Thursday, when heads of state are scheduled to gather in Brussels, whether to take action. Although the EU has the power to strip a country of voting rights, doing so is a laborious process.

Rui Tavares, a Portuguese MEP, stressed the importance ensuring Hungary’s new constitution remains compatible with European values: “You have to ensure that the judiciary in every member state is compatible with these values we have in the treaties.”

For further information, please see:

Al Jazeera – Hungary amends constitution despite warning – 11 March 2013

The Independent – Hungary Erupts in Protest after PM Viktor Orbán is Accused of Assault on Democracy – 11 March 2013

The Independent – Hungary Votes Yes Over Change to Constitution Despite Human Rights Concerns – 11 March 2013

Xpatloop – EC Prepared To Enforce EU Law In Hungary – 11 March 2013

By Alexandra Sandacz
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

MOSCOW, Russia – On Monday, a Russian court postponed the posthumous trial of a dead lawyer, Sergei Magnitsky, who accused law-enforcement authorities of massive corruption.

In 2008, Magnitsky was jailed for tax evasion. However, the charges arose after he claimed several officials and organized criminals conspired to claim $230 million in tax rebates. Suspiciously, while awaiting trial, Magnitsky died in prison of untreated pancreatitis. The Russian presidential council on human rights said that Magnitsky was deliberately denied medical treatment and most likely beaten.

While Magnitsky’s trial is the first posthumous prosecution in Russian legal history, the judge in the Tverskoi district court quickly adjourned the trial until March 22 to give the court-appointed defense team additional time to prepare evidence.

Magnitsky’s family and their lawyers refused to attend last week’s pre-trial hearing because they believe the case in simply politically motivated.

Natalya Magnitskaya, his mother, stated, “It’s inhuman to try a dead man. If I take part in this circus, I become an accomplice to this. I won’t take part in the hearings.”

The European Parliament said the prosecution was “a violation of international and national laws and clearly shows the malfunctioning of the Russian criminal justice system”.

As a consequence of Sergei Magnitsky’s death, the United States passed a law, which provides for asset freezes and visa bans on Russian officials who violate human rights. This law was meant to push the European Union to pass a similar law.

William Browder, CEO of the investment firm Hermitage Capital where Magnitsky worked in Moscow, affirmed, “After the passage of the Magnitsky Act in America, our single biggest priority became the passage of the same act in Europe. The American action was extremely significant because it set the precedent, but the European action will be even more material to the Russians because they keep orders of magnitude more property and money in Europe.”

Kristiina Ojuland, a member of the European Parliament from Estonia, said, “Russians consider themselves, really, like a part of Europe – European. And therefore it’s significant that Europe reacts, not only [to] the Magnitsky case, but in broader terms, reacts against this corrupt, black money that is flying into the EU countries.”

She continues to explain that Russian officials frequently engage in vacationing, shopping, and educating their children in EU countries. As a result, they are also more likely to keep money in European banks. Therefore, asset freezes and visa bans in Europe would hit Russian officials considerably harder than similar sanctions in the United States.

In order for EU-wide sanctions to come into effect, all 27 member states would need to agree to them.

For further information, please see:

BBC News – Trial of Dead Russia Lawyer Sergei Magnitsky Delayed – 11 March 2013

RFE/RL – Magnitsky Trial Quickly Adjourned – 11 March 2013

RFE/RL – Push For Magnitsky Sanctions Intensified In Europe – 11 March 2013

The Washington Post – Trial of Dead Russian Whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky Postponed in Moscow – 11 March 2013

By Madeline Schiesser
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

KIEV, Ukraine – Serhiy Vlasenko is no longer a member of the Ukrainian parliament, or Rada.  He was stripped of his seat Wednesday, and the immunity from prosecution that goes with it.  Although Ukraine’s Highest Administrative Court claims that the reason Vlasenko was removed was because he illegally combined the occupations of legislator and lawyer, many believe the move was politically motivated.  Vlasenko is a member of the opposition party, Batkivshchyna, and acted as an attorney, for free, for jailed former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko.

The court acted on a motion from Party of Regions political ally, Speaker Volodymyr Rybak, of current Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich, which claimed that Vlasenko acted as a lawyer while holding office, a banned act.

Vlasenko has claimed that the Party of Regions desires his arrest in order to deprive Tymoshenko of a qualified legal defense.  He further says that he is aware of at least three criminal charges already against him.

However, opposition leader Arseniy Yatseniuk has promised that the Batkivschyna party plans to take all possible measures to prevent Vlasenko’s arrest.  “We will do everything so that Vlasenko is not arrested, including with the assistance of our Western partners,” he said on Thursday.

According to Member of the European Parliament Rebecca Harms, if Vlasenko is arrested and jailed, an Association Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine currently under discussion will not be signed.  Hams further emphasized that if the Ukrainian government continues to employ selective judgment of political opponents, the European Union would introduce sanctions against the Ukrainian authorities.

European Commissioner for Enlargement, Stefan Fuele, condemned the ruling, saying via Twitter: “Stripping a parliamentarian of his mandate like being done in case of Vlasenko is not European way. Does this bring Ukraine closer to EU?”

The United States State Department has also spoke out against the treatment of Vlasenko, saying efforts to deprive Vlasenko of his seat in parliament “appear to be politically motivated due to his connection with Tymoshenko.”  The State Department further noted that Vlasenko is not the first lawmaker to be forced out of Ukraine’s parliament.  Last month a Ukrainian court annulled the parliamentary mandates of two independent lawmakers: Pavlo Blaloha and Oleksandr Dombrovsky.  The United States called on the Ukrainian government to end “politically motivated prosecutions of opposition leaders and to abide by their international commitments to the rule of law and democracy.”

Former PM Tymoshenko has notably been a political adversary of current PM Yanukovich, of the Party of Regions.  In 2004, she led the Orange Revolution protests that stopped his first bid for the presidency.  However, in 2011, she was jailed on abuse-of-office charges, and now faces tax evasion and embezzlement charges, as well as suspicion of involvement in a political murder.  She claims she is innocent of all charges and that they are merely revenge from Yanukovich’s political camp.

Vlasenko remains undeterred by the loss of his parliamentary mandate.  “Today’s court decision does not influence my status as a defense counsel in the case of Yulia Tymoshenko. I will continue to defend her as before,” he said Wednesday.  “I realize that their goal was not just to withdraw my mandate – their goal was to stop me,”

For further information, please see:

Kyiv Post – Yatseniuk: Opposition to do Everything to Prevent Vlasenko’s Arrest – 7 March 2013

Kyiv Post – European Lawmaker: If Vlasenko Jailed, Ukraine-EU Association Agreement Won’t be Signed – 7 March 2013

Ukraine Business – Vlasenko Remains Tymoshenko’s Defender – 7 March 2013

The Independent – Ukrainian Defense Lawyer is Stripped of Seat – 6 March 2013

Returns – Ukraine Court Strips Tymoshenko Ally of Parliament Seat – 6 March 2013

RFE/RL – U.S. ‘Deeply Concerned’ Over Anti-Opposition Moves In Ukraine – 6 March 2013

By Madeline Schiesser
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

MOSCOW, Russia – U.S. Representative Chris Smith, a leading congressional human-rights advocate, was denied a visa to travel to Russia last week by authorities in Moscow.  Smith believes the denial is in retaliation for the recently passed U.S. Magnitsky Act, which imposes sanctions and visa bans on Russian officials believed involved in human rights violations.

Russia has never before denied Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on human rights, a visa.  Smith says “The Magnitsky bill is the reason I didn’t get the visa.  This is the first time.  I was shocked.  During the worst days of the Soviet Union I went there repeatedly.”  Smith vocally backed and voted in favor of the bill, as did 364 other members of the House.  Russia is now among a short list of countries, including China, Cuba, and Belarus, to deny Smith, a veteran of the House since 1981, a visa.

No official reason has been given for refusing the visa and the Russian Embassy in Washington has refused to comment on visa issues.  However, Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak told Smith that the decision was made in Moscow, not Washington.

Although the State Department, including U.S. Ambassador to Russia Mike McFaul, attempted to intercede on Smith’s behalf, Moscow was not swayed.

The purpose of Smith’s visit was to discuss the frosty relations between Russia and the United States since the passage of the Magnitsky Act, particularly Russia’s reply, the Dima Yakovlev Law.  This law, passed shortly before the end of last year, ended U.S. adoption of Russian orphans (citing concerns American parents abuse Russian children) and reciprocal sanctions including visa bans and asset freezes for alleged U.S. human rights violators.

“I even have a resolution that highlights the fact that those 19 kids died.  If somebody is responsible for this, they ought to pay a price,” Smith lamented.  “I was going over to talk about adoption and human trafficking.  They have legitimate concerns that we have to meet.”

Russian authorities were incensed when U.S. President Barack Obama signed the Magnitsky Act into law in December, and considered the Act, labeling certain Russian officials as connected to human rights abuses, as meddling in Russian domestic affairs.  By mid-April, the Obama administration is required to submit a list of Russian officials to be blacklisted, which could further heighten tensions between the countries.

Valery Garbuzov, the deputy director of the Institute for U.S. and Canadian Studies in Moscow, has warned that Smith’s visa denial may be the first volley in an extended visa war.  He further cautioned that the nations’ top leaders need to take actions to halt such a visa war.  “President Obama cannot cancel the Magnitsky Act, so relations will have to be built on these premises,” he said. “At the same time, the Russian response was excessive, which made the situation snowball.”

MP Alexei Pushkov, head of the State Duma’s International Affairs Committee, said whether U.S. officials receive visas is dependent upon the United States, and noted that the sponsors of the Magnitsky Act will not be allowed to travel to Russia, in the “spirit” of the Dima Yakovlv law.  “We were not the initiators of this process,” he said.  “In every country, restrictions can be put in place for certain categories of people based on the spirit of existing legislation.”

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov declared in January that Russia has a “Guantanamo list” of 71 U.S. nationals who are barred from entering Russia due to human rights violations.

Smith, however, is determined to keep a dialogue open with Russia, and plans to continue to push for the visa. “I was going over to talk about adoption and human trafficking,” Smith said. “They have legitimate concerns that we have to meet. I’m disappointed but I am determined to have it reversed. So I’m going to reapply.”

For further information, please see:

Moscow Times – U.S. Lawmaker Says Russia Denied Him Visa – 28 March 2013

RIA Novosti – US Official Denied Russian Visa, Cites Magnitsky Row: Report – 28 February 2013

RT – We Did Not Initiate the Visa Row With US – Russian Lawmaker – 28 February 2013

The Cable – Russia Denies Visa for Leading Congressional Human-Rights Advocate – 27 February 2013

By Alexandra Sandacz
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

PRAGUE, Czech Republic – On Monday, the upper house of the Czech parliament impeached outgoing President Vaclav Klaus for treason. The charges arise over his amnesty of thousands of prison inmates and others.

On January 1, President Klaus ordered more than 6,000 inmates serving short prison terms to be released. Furthermore, his amnesty stopped court proceedings in several fraud cases because he wanted to stop “endless criminal proceedings.” These proceedings lasted for more than eight years and caused widespread public anger.

As a consequence, a dozen high-profile corruption cases, some which involved millions of dollars in asset-stripping, bribes, and fraud, were thrown out.

38 out of an 81-seat house voted to impeach the president for his New Year amnesty. Only the Senate has such power in the Czech legal system.

The senators also accuse Klaus of violating the constitution when he refusing to ratify several European treaties, and for “refusing to rule on the appointment of judges despite being ordered by courts to do so”.

Klaus’s opponents do not necessarily want to punish the former president. However, they want to clarify the rules for the future.

Senator Miroslav Antl stated, “We want to know how far a president [is permitted] go.”

Petr Necas, prime minister and chairman of the conservative Civic Democratic Party, called Klaus’s move “an attack on our country’s reputation … It is purely motivated by personal hatred.”

The Czech citizens also oppose Klaus’s orders. More than 73,000 Czechs have signed a petition backing the charges of treason, and numerous Klaus portraits have been torn down in schools and offices.

However, Vaclav Klaus stated he does not regret the amnesty and “would do it again in absolutely the same way”. Moreover, Klaus rejected the accusations that said he deliberately formulated the amnesty to free serious criminals.

The Constitutional Court expects to deal with Klaus’s case quickly, but it is still likely to be weeks before a verdict is announced.

The worst punishment Klaus faces is the loss of his presidential job, a role the 71-year-old will terminate later this week after serving two full terms in office. However, he will most likely not be able to run again.

If found guilty, Klaus will also lose his state pension as a former president that equals about $5,000 a month.

For further information, please see:

BBC News – Czech President Vaclav Klaus Faces Treason Charge – 4 March 2013

Financial Times – Vaclav Klaus Faces Treason Charges – 4 March 2013

Reuters – Czech Upper House Votes to Impeach President Klaus – 4 March 2013

The Washington Post – Czech Parliament’s Upper House Agrees to Charge President Vaclav Klaus with High Treason – 4 March 2013