Andrei Bondarenko
Cases- Location of case in SG report
- 2012-022-001
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2012
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 53.709807
Longitude: 27.953389
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- Belarus
- From Region
- Type of record
- Named individual
- Gender
- Male
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Individual's/organization's activity
Director of Platforma, an institution whose work is focused on the rights of persons in detention
- Type of rights defended
- Civil/political rights
- Was the victim a civil servant or member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
was among the contributors to a joint NGO report submitted in connection with the Committee‟s consideration of the report of Belarus: In November 2011, during its forty-seventh session, the Committee against Torture considered the fourth periodic report of Belarus
Mr. Bondarenko also participated in a NGO briefing to the Committee and was present during the public consideration of the report by the Committee.
- Engagement with UN body
- UN Treaty Bodies: CAT
- Dates of engagement
- November 2011
- Type of attempted engagement
- Participation in meeting on UN premises
- Submission of information to UN
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- 15 March 2012
- Location of mentioned reprisals
- Brest-Centralnyj border control
- Reprisal information
On 15 March 2012, Mr. Bondarenko reportedly learned that he was temporarily forbidden to leave Belarus when he was forced off a train between Minsk and Warsaw at the Brest-Centralnyj border control, on the first occasion he had attempted to leave Belarus since his visit to Geneva in November 2011. While the travel ban did not explicitly indicate that his advocacy work in Geneva was its direct cause, his work as a human rights defender, including his participation in the session of the Committee against Torture, was allegedly a decisive factor.
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Travel restriction
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- No
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- No
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- Yes
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- No
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?
- 0