Members of Amnesty International (AI) in Belarus are concerned about false reports that the organization has publicly commented on a recent case involving conscription into the military. While the details are unclear, the story revolved around an exemption from military service offered to Mr. Paluyan and the basis for that exemption. It appears that Belarusian LGBT activists, and Mr. Paluyan himself, have suggested that Amnesty
International has a position on this case and has commented on the same.

Amnesty International, in fact, has no position and did not make any official statements on this case. The last time AI spoke on any issues involving sexual minorities in Belarus was in 1994, in the course of its campaign to repeal Article 119- 1 of the Belarusian Criminal Code that criminalized consensual sexual intercourse between adult men.

AI does not consider a same-sex sexual orientation to be a psychiatric disease or problem. [The American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality as a disorder from the "Sexual Deviancy" section of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in 1973 (2nd edition). In 1992, the World Health Organization replaced its categorization of homosexuality as a mental illness. Several states have since followed suit.]

Regarding exemption from military conscription, AI considers a conscientious objector to be any person liable to compulsory recruitment (conscription) for military service or registration for conscription to military service who refuses to perform service in the armed forces or any other direct or indirect participation in wars or armed conflicts for reasons of conscience or profound conviction. AI interprets 'reasons of conscience or profound conviction' quite broadly. Such reasons may arise from religious, ethical, moral, humanitarian, philosophical, political or similar motives.

It would seem that in this case, Mr. Paluyan was informed that he was not
required to serve in the army, rather than actively seeking exemption himself. Furthermore, the reasons for his exemption are allegedly due to his sexual orientation - which AI does not cite as a 'reason of conscience or profound conviction'. It would appear that his exemption by the Belarusian authorities does reveal a degree of institutional homophobia and whilst AI would not condone anything that would exclude lesbians, gay men, bisexual or transgender people from any institution, including the military, they should not have to join an institution where such institutional discrimination would put them at risk.

In Belarus there is no legal grounds for conscientious objection. Where
this is the case, AI calls for the right to object on grounds of conscience to be formally recognized and for provisions to be made for a non-punitive alternative civilian service. In keeping with international standards, Amnesty International insists that all those liable to conscription be given the opportunity to perform a civilian alternative to service in the armed forces on the grounds of their conscience or profound conviction. On this basis, Amnesty International campaigns for the development of laws and procedures which make adequate provisions for conscientious objectors.

Unfortunately, the fact that Amnesty International is not officially registered in Belarus makes it easier for people with no connection to the organization to make misleading statements and attribute them to Amnesty International.

From 2002 to 2006, despite not being officially registered in Belarus, the organization was recognized by the International Secretariat of Amnesty International in London as a national structure of Amnesty International. In 2006 its status was revised in connection with the change of requirements for recognition by the International Secretariat. The official registration of the organization in the home country became a necessary requirement for recognition. Amnesty International Belarus applied for registration in 2003 and 2005, but has received only refusals from the Belarusian authorities. At the moment Amnesty International in Belarus is represented by international individual members. According to Amnesty International’s Statute, international individual members are not eligible to make official statements on behalf of Amnesty International.

For the future, while writing about Amnesty International’s activities in
Belarus, please refer to the real members of the organization or to Amnesty International’s campaigner on Belarus, Aisha Jung (ajung@amnesty.org) and to Amnesty International’s researcher on Belarus, Heather McGill (hmcgill@amnesty.org). You can also write to me at: amnesty_by@gmx.net.

Yours faithfully,

Viachaslau Bortnik
International individual member, AI
Chair, AI Belarus, 2002-2006