ACCORD Anfragebeantwortung

Nach einer Recherche in unserer Länderdokumentation und im Internet können wir Ihnen zu oben genannter Fragestellung Materialien zur Verfügung stellen, die unter anderem folgende Informationen enthalten:

Der Jahresbericht zur Menschenrechtslage des US Department of State (USDOS) vom März 2008 enthält zu Belarus im Jahr 2007 folgende Informationen: Folter, Misshandlung und erniedrigende Behandlung oder Bestrafung seien gesetzlich verboten, das Weißrussische Komitee für Staatssicherheit (BKGB) und die Spezialeinheiten der Polizei (OMON) würden jedoch gelegentlich Häftlinge und Demonstranten schlagen. Auch die Polizei würde Personen bei der Verhaftung oder in Haft für die Teilnahme an oder Organisation von oppositionellen Aktivitäten schlagen.

Die Haftbedingungen seien weiterhin schlecht und von einem Mangel an Lebensmitteln und Medizin und der Verbreitung von Krankheiten (TBC, HIV) geprägt. Die Situation in Gefangenenlagern sei aufgrund von mangelhaften hygienischen Bedingungen und aufgrund der Einschränkung der Rechte auf Besuch, Telefon und Schriftverkehr noch schlechter als in Gefängnissen. Einheimischen Menschenrechtsorganisationen zufolge hätten sich die Haftbedingungen in den letzten 10 Jahren verbessert, allerdings würden die Insassen keine angemessene Nahrung oder warme Kleidung bekommen, und oft würden ihnen Betten, Decken, Kleider zum Wechseln und Toiletten verweigert. Daher würden sich Tuberkulose, Lungenentzündung und andere Krankheiten verbreiten. Medizinische Untersuchungen seien selten und würden von unqualifiziertem Personal durchgeführt, Zahnärzte gebe es noch weniger.

Ein ernstes Problem sei die Überbelegung von Gefängnissen und Straflagern gewesen. Über 38 000 Menschen seien laut Regierung in Haft gewesen, zusätzlich hätten 7000 Personen in Haftanstalten auf ihre Verhandlungen gewartet.

Gefangene, die sich über die Verletzung ihrer Rechte beschwerten, seien oft mit dem Tod, mit Erniedrigung oder anderen Strafen bedroht worden.

Es gebe glaubhafte Berichte über die Misshandlung, Folter und Erpressung von Häftlingen durch die Polizei oder Gefängnispersonal.

Es sei nicht bekannt, dass die Regierung unabhängigen Organisationen, Medien oder dem Internationalen Komitee des Roten Kreuzes gestattet habe, die Haftbedingungen zu überwachen:

“c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

The law prohibits such practices; however, the Belarusian Committee for State Security (BKGB), the Special Purpose Detachment riot police (OMON), and other special forces on occasion beat detainees and demonstrators.

Police also occasionally beat individuals during arrests and in detention for organizing or participating in demonstrations or other opposition activities. […]

Prison and Detention Center Conditions

Prison conditions remained austere and were marked by occasional shortages of food and medicine and the spread of diseases such as tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS. In March Leila Zerrougui, chairperson of a UN working group on arbitrary detention, reported that conditions in detention centers were worse than those in prisons because of poor sanitary and living conditions and restrictions on visitation, phone, and mail privileges. According to domestic human rights monitors, prison conditions have somewhat improved over the past 10 years. However, these groups reported that prisoners did not receive adequate food or warm clothing and were often denied a bed, sheets, change of clothes, and restroom privileges. As a result, tuberculosis, pneumonia and other diseases remained widespread. Former prisoners reported that medical check-ups were rare and conducted by under-qualified medical personnel and that examination results were often fabricated. Dental services were even less available.

The law permits family and friends to bring detainees food and hygiene products, but in many cases authorities did not respect this law.

Overcrowding in prisons, detention centers, and in work release prisons, also known as "khimya," was a serious problem. Persons sentenced to khimya, which is a form of internal exile, live in prison barracks and are forced to work under conditions set by the government. According to the government, the total number of confined persons in the country was more than 38,000, which included 30,000 inmates in prisons and nearly 8,000 convicts in open-type correctional facilities. In addition an estimated 7,000 persons were awaiting trials in detention centers.

Some former political prisoners reported that they were treated worse than murderers, subjected to psychological abuse and often had to share a cell with violent criminals. They also reported that their legal rights were neither explained nor protected. Prisoners who complained about abuse of their rights often were threatened with death, humiliation, or other forms of punishment.

Credible reports indicated that police and prison officials continued to mistreat, torture, and blackmail prisoners. Numerous credible sources claimed that applications for parole frequently depended on bribing prison personnel. While standard bribes were generally between $200 to $300 (430,000 to 646,000 Belarusian rubles) high-profile prisoners were often asked to pay larger sums. For example, on June 5, the independent Belarusian Committee for Protection of Prisoner's Rights, Nad Baryerom, reported that a parole board denied Dmitriy Korolyov, a former intelligence officer, early release in March after Korolyov refused to pay $2,000 (4.3 million Belarusian rubles) to a fellow inmate who claimed to be demanding the bribe on behalf of prison officials. […]

During the year there were no reported instances of the government permitting independent monitoring of prison conditions by local or international human rights groups, independent media, or the International Committee of the Red Cross. However, the government granted some international experts access to the general prison population. In September an official German delegation visited inmates in three correctional facilities in and around Minsk. On occasion, authorities granted foreign diplomats access to political prisoners in the presence of officials; however, most requests to visit political prisoners were denied.” (USDOS, 11. März 2008, Sek. 1 c)

Die Polizei habe laut USDOS-Bericht im Jahr 2007 häufig ohne Haftbefehl Festnahmen und Verhaftungen vorgenommen. Laut Gesetz erfordere die Festnahme für mehr als drei Stunden eine Erlaubnis der lokalen Staatsanwaltschaft, in der Praxis seien diese „Protokolle“ aber eine Formalität. Verdächtige Personen könnten bis zu 10 Tage ohne formelle Anklage und bis zu 18 Monate nach Erstellung der Anklage gefangen gehalten werden. Staatsanwälte und Ermittlungsbeamte hätten laut Gesetz das Recht, ohne Konsultation eines Richters die Haft zu verlängern. Häftlinge hätten das Recht, die Gesetzmäßigkeit ihrer Verhaftung anzufechten, derartige Anträge würden in der Praxis jedoch oft unterdrückt oder ignoriert. Auch die in der Verfassung festgelegte Unabhängigkeit der Rechtsprechung werde nicht in die Praxis umgesetzt.

Laut Präsidentenerlass seien alle Rechtsanwälte dem Justizministerium unterstellt und somit nicht unabhängig. Sie müssten alle fünf Jahre ihre Lizenzen erneuern; private Rechtsvertreter dürften nicht arbeiten. 

Obwohl das Gesetz die Öffentlichkeit der Verhandlungen vorsehe, gebe es gelegentlich geschlossene Verhandlungen, wodurch Beobachter ausgeschlossen seien.

Im September sei ein 17-jähriger Oppositionsaktivist zu einer Geldstrafe verurteilt worden. Verlässlichen Quellen zufolge seien während des Prozesses einige Jugendliche von der Polizei zu Zeugenaussagen gezwungen worden.

Die gesetzlich geltende Unschuldsvermutung sei in der Praxis oft nicht angewendet worden, und häufig seien erzwungene Aussagen gegen die Angeklagten verwendet worden.

Das Gesetz sehe vor, dass verhaftete Personen Zugang zu Rechtsberatung haben sollten und dass die Gerichte jenen, die sich keinen Anwalt leisten könnten, einen Anwalt zur Verfügung stellen sollten. Diese Bestimmungen seien jedoch nicht immer berücksichtigt worden, manche Häftlinge hätten keinen Zugang zu einem Anwalt gehabt.  

Die Angeklagten hätten das Recht, bei den Verhandlungen anwesend zu sein und für sich einzutreten. Auch dieses Recht sei aber in der Praxis nicht immer respektiert worden.

In den meisten Strafsachen seien Berufungen eingelegt worden, die jedoch meist zu keiner Änderung des Urteils geführt hätten:

“Police frequently detained and arrested individuals without a warrant. Under the law, police must request permission from the local prosecutor's office to detain persons for longer than three hours. In practice, however, these "protocols" were usually a formality. Detained persons suspected of a crime may be held for up to 10 days without formal charge and for up to 18 months after charges are filed. Under the law, prosecutors and investigators have the authority to extend detention periods without consulting a judge. Detainees have the right to petition the legality of their detention; however, in practice, appeals by suspects seeking court review of their detentions were frequently suppressed or ignored. (1d)

The constitution provides for an independent judiciary; however the government did not respect judicial independence in practice. There was credible evidence that prosecutors and courts convicted individuals on false and politically motivated charges. […]

By presidential decree all lawyers are subordinate to the Ministry of Justice, which compromised their independence. Lawyers must be licensed by the ministry and are required to work for the state in regional collegiums. The law prohibits private attorneys from practicing, and lawyers must renew their licenses every five years. Unlike in previous years, there were no reports during the year of the authorities officially revoking lawyers' licenses for defending NGOs or opposition political parties. However, in February Igor Rynkevich resigned from the lawyers' collegium after receiving multiple reprimands for violating "professional discipline" in connection with his representing imprisoned former opposition presidential candidate Aleksandr Kozulin. […]

The law provides for public trials; however, trials were occasionally closed and frequently held in judges' offices, which often prevented interested observers from attending. Judges adjudicate all trials; there is no system of trial by jury. However, in the case of grave crimes, judges adjudicate the trial with assistance of two civilian advisors. Judges depended on executive branch officials for personal housing. There were widespread reports that executive and local authorities dictated the outcome of trials. […]

On September 11, a court in Baranovichi fined 17-year-old opposition activist Yaroslav Grishchenya $435 (930,000 Belarusian rubles) after convicting him for running an unregistered NGO. During the proceedings the judge questioned several minors regarding apparent discrepancies between their oral testimony and pretrial depositions. According to credible sources, police pressured the youths to write the depositions after lengthy interrogations. During the trial, the judge repeatedly taunted one of the minors for testifying in Russian instead of Belarusian; under the law, both languages have equal status. […]

The laws provide for the presumption of innocence; however, in practice defendants frequently had to prove their innocence. Information obtained from forced interrogations was often used against defendants in court.

The law provides for access to legal counsel for detainees and requires that courts appoint lawyers for those who cannot afford one; however, at times these rights were not respected, and some detainees were denied access to a lawyer. The law provides for the right to choose legal representation freely; however, a presidential decree prohibits members of NGOs from representing individuals other than members of their organizations in court.

Defendants have the right to attend proceedings, confront witnesses, and present evidence on their own behalf; however, in practice these rights were not always respected.

Defendants also have the right to appeal court decisions, and most criminal cases were appealed; however, in the vast majority of those cases, lower court verdicts were upheld. In an appeal, defendants and witnesses seldom appear before the court; in most cases, the court only reviews the protocol and other documents from a lower court trial.” (USDOS, 11. März 2008, Sek. 1e)

Freedom House (FH) schreibt im Bericht Nations in Transit 2007, dass die Unabhängigkeit des Rechtssystems nicht gegeben sei. Davon würden willkürliche Verhaftungen von politischen Gegnern, unmenschliche Behandlung von Häftlingen und Psychiatrie als Mittel zur politischen Unterdrückung zeugen. Die rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen und die rechtliche Unabhängigkeit würden weiterhin auf 6,75 eingestuft. [FH beurteilt die Entwicklung einzelner Komponenten von Demokratie in bestimmten Ländern auf einer Skala von 1 bis 7, wobei 1 die höchste Entwicklungsstufe im demokratischen Fortschritt bedeutet, 7 die niedrigste, Anm. ACCORD gemäß FH-Bericht.] Folter, Misshandlung und Erniedrigung seien per Verfassung verboten, tatsächlich würden aber Verdächtige und Verurteilte berichten, von Polizisten und Gefängniswärtern geschlagen zu werden. Aktivisten, die nach der Wahl im März verhaftet worden seien, hätten von unhygienischen Haftbedingungen und eiskalten Zellen berichtet. Ein Ermittlungsbeamter der Polizei im Bezirk Woranawa habe im Juli einen offenen Brief verfasst und einen weit verbreiteten Gebrauch von Folter im weißrussischen Justizvollzugssystem behauptet:

„Judicial Framework and Independence. In 2006, arbitrary arrests of political opponents, allegations of inhumane treatment of detainees in jail, and the return of psychiatry as a tool of political harassment highlighted the legal system’s lack of independence. Facing the inability to defend their political and economic rights against the consolidated autocratic state, an increasing number of citizens engaged in extreme forms of protest, such as hunger strikes. Belarus’ rating for judicial framework and independence remains unchanged at 6.75. […] The Constitution prohibits torture and cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment. In practice, however, the rights of the convicted may be violated; suspects and convicts have reported being beaten by police and prison guards. Activists detained and sentenced during the March post-election protests reported unsanitary prison conditions and near freezing temperatures in cells.Allegations of widespread use of torture in the Belarusian prison system were pronounced in an open letter to UDF leader Alexander Milinkevich signed by Pavel Mielko, the police investigator from the Voranava district in the Hrodna region, which appeared in the press in July.“ (FH, Juni 2007)

Die UN Commission for Human Rights (UNCHR) schreibt im Bericht des Special Rapporteur im Jänner 2007, in Belarus würden Bürger- und politische Rechte systematisch verletzt, und Mechanismen zum Schutz der Menschenrechte seien extrem schwach. Das Justizsystem sei der Exekutive unterstellt, es gebe keine wirklich unabhängige Legislative und keine nationale Menschenrechtsinstitution. Die Arbeitsgruppe zu willkürlicher Verhaftung habe 2004 eine deutlich ungleiche Machtverteilung zwischen Strafverfolgung und Verteidigung festgestellt, was gegen internationale Standards verstoße. Vor allem in Verbindung mit der Todesstrafe sei dieses Ungleichgewicht besorgniserregend. Außerdem seien die Bedingungen in Untersuchungshaft sehr hart, die Häftlinge würden psychologisch stark unter Druck gesetzt, und die Unschuldsvermutung werde missachtet.

Für Minderjährige würde trotz ihrer erhöhten Verletzlichkeit dasselbe System der Untersuchungshaft gelten wie für Erwachsene. Weiters seien die Verhaftung von Personen in Gefängnissen unter Aufsicht des Geheimdienstes, die Einweisung von Personen, gegen die ermittelt wird, in die Psychiatrie und die Unterdrückung der Meinungs- und Versammlungsfreiheit durch Verhaftungen Anlass zur Sorge. Seit 2005 habe sich die Lage durch einen neuen Präsidentenerlass noch verschlimmert.

Die Menschenrechtsorganisation Viasna und die International Federation for Human Rights hätten im April einen Bericht über Folter und andere unmenschliche Behandlung in Weißrussland und die mangelhafte Reaktion seitens des Staates darauf veröffentlicht.

Der exzessive Gebrauch von Gewalt durch die Polizei schränke die Demonstrationsfreiheit ein und setze sich in den Gefängnissen und Strafkolonien fort, ohne strafrechtlich verfolgt zu werden:

“19. The present situation in the Republic of Belarus is characterized by the systematic violation of civil and political rights and the deprivation of Belarusian citizens of their right to effectively take part in the conduct of public affairs, and by the extreme weakness of human rights protection mechanisms. The judicial system is submitted to the executive power, there is no really independent legislative power, and no national human rights institution.

Administration of justice and law enforcement, death penalty, disappearances and summary executions

20. In 2004, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention visited Belarus. In its report (E/CN.4/2005/6/Add.3), it noted the evident imbalance between the powers of the prosecution and the rights of the defence, in breach of international standards. This situation is of extreme concern since Belarus is the last country in Europe to apply the death penalty. A system which deprives accused persons of their right to defence can lead more easily to judicial errors. Such imbalance is embodied further by the abusive nature of the detention system. Physical conditions of pretrial detention are harsh. Detainees are often put under strong psychological pressure. The presumption of innocence is seriously undermined.

21. The regime of pretrial detention for minors is the same as for adults, which has worse consequences for them than for adults on account of their vulnerability. The situation of persons detained in facilities under the control of the KGB and the lack of oversight in cases of placement in psychiatric hospitals of persons under investigation are also issues of serious concern. Administrative detention is used against persons peacefully exercising their right to assembly, demonstration and freedom of expression, opinion or dissemination of information. The Code of Administrative Offences is used to repress demonstrators or political opponents.

22. The situation has worsened in 2005. In addition to the presidential powers of amnesty and to appoint and dismiss judges (art. 84 of the Constitution), Presidential Order No. 426 of 12 September 2005 gave President Lukashenka the right to release from any criminal liability, without trial, persons responsible for crimes inflicting an essential damage to State property or public interests.

23. The personalization and selectivity of the justice administration in Belarus is evidenced further by the fact that to date, the Government failed to elucidate the involvement of senior government officials in the disappearances of Yury Zakharanka, Viktar Hanchar, Anatol Krasouski and Dzmitry Zavadzki, and the murders of journalists Veranika Charkasova and Vasil Hrodnikau. On the other hand, Mikhail Marynich, a former Minister of the Republic of Belarus, whose detention since 2004 was declared arbitrary by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in Opinion No. 37/2005 of 2 September 2005, remains in prison. On 10 March, deprived of medical assistance, he suffered a stroke. The Special Rapporteur considers that this amounts to inhuman treatment.

24. On 8 April, the Human Rights Centre “Viasna” and FIDH issued a report which concluded that numerous acts of torture and other inhuman treatment were currently practised in the Republic of Belarus, and that prosecution bodies and other State organs failed to adequately respond to acts of torture and refused to initiate criminal proceedings. Consequently, the Republic of Belarus did not meet the requirements of article 2 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The report invited the Special Rapporteur on Torture to visit Belarus, which could not happen to date.

25. Excessive use of force by police services was used to repress freedom of demonstration. On 7 July, during a demonstration on disappearances in Minsk, a police agent punched Sviatlana Zavadzkaya, the wife of the disappeared Dzmitry Zavadzki. On 16 September, an activist of the Zubr movement, Mikita Sasim, was severely beaten in Minsk during the “We Remember” action devoted to the sixth anniversary of the disappearance of Viktar Hanchar and Anatol Krasouski. Six other activists were also beaten that day.

26. Ill-treatment continues in prisons. The Human Rights Centre “Viasna” denounced the situation of prisoners in Mazyr colony, where torture and beatings were said to be common. However, abuses reportedly take place in most Belarusian prisons and their authors enjoy substantial impunity.“ (UNCHR, 15. Jänner 2007)

Auf der Website der Kampagne „Belarus ACTIONS“, die von Amnesty International-Gruppen aus aller Welt getragen wird, finden sich im Februar 2008 folgende Meldungen aus Weißrussland, die Informationen über Polizeigewalt und Haftbedingungen enthalten:

„Der Kleinunternehmer Ales Makeau wird aus der Haftanstalt in der Akrestina-Straße in Minsk entlassen. Er wurde am 12. Januar 2008 wegen der angeblichen Verwendung vulgärer Sprache verhaftet. Nach seinen Angaben waren die Haftbedingungen schrecklich; neben gesundheitlichen Problemen, die nicht behandelt wurden, klagte er über die Kälte in den Zellen. 15 Tage vor seiner Entlassung war er in einen Hungerstreik getreten. (28.01.2008) […]

Von demokratischen Kräften in Belarus wird eine Bewegung zur Eindämmung der Folter in belarussischen Gefängnissen ins Leben gerufen. Initiator ist der Leiter der Vereinigten Bürgerpartei, Anatoly Lebedko, welcher vor kurzem aus dem Gefängnis in der Akrestina-Straße in Minsk entlassen wurde. Nach Aussagen der Bewegung sind die Gefängnisregeln seit Sowjetzeiten unveränderte Überbleibsel des stalinistischen Regimes. (29.01.2008)

Der aus dem Gefängnis entlassene Syarhei Parsyukevich, Kleinunternehmer und Mitglied der Bewegung „Für Freiheit“, begibt sich nach seiner Freilassung direkt zu einem Staatsanwalt um eine medizinische Untersuchung über Verletzungen zu erreichen, welche ihm am 21.01.2008 im Gefängnis zugefügt wurden. Nach seiner Aussage wurde er von einem Gefängniswärter zusammengeschlagen, der ihn im Nachhinein eines tätlichen Angriffs beschuldigte. (29.01.2008) […]

Zwei weitere Führer der Bewegung der Kleinunternehmer, Aliaksandr Tsastura und Larysa Nasovich, werden vom Provinzgericht in Saligorsk zu 15 Tagen Arrest wegen Teilnahme an einer „nicht genehmigten Demonstration“ von Kleinunternehmern am 28.01.2008 in Saligorsk verurteilt. Im Anschluss an eine erneute Demonstration gegen ihre Inhaftierung werden neun jugendliche Mitglieder der Malady Front (Junge Front) von Polizisten geprügelt und festgenommen. (29.-30.01.2008) (Belarus ACTIONS, 3. Februar 2008)

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) veröffentlicht im September 2005 ein Interview mit zwei georgischen Jugendaktivisten, die in Weißrussland verhaftet worden seien. In Untersuchungshaft hätten sie Menschen getroffen, die zwei bis drei Monate ohne Verhandlungen oder Ermittlungen inhaftiert gewesen seien. Die Haftbedingungen seien unter jeglicher menschlicher Würde gewesen: Acht bis zehn Häftlinge hätten sich ein einfaches Holzbrett als Bett teilen müssen, Decken seien nicht erlaubt gewesen, und den Georgiern sei es bei ihrer Verhaftung nicht gestattet worden, Handtücher und warme Kleidung mitzunehmen. Sie seien nicht über die Gründe ihrer Verhaftung informiert worden, auch nicht über den Besuch zweier Konsule aus Georgien. Im Gegenteil, man habe ihnen gesagt, dass niemand sich für ihren Fall interessiere.

Außerdem sei ein Provokateur in ihre Zelle gekommen, der sie später beschuldigt habe, ihn beleidigt und bedroht zu haben.

Die Behörden hätten sie zwar im Endeffekt doch freigelassen, aber nicht zugegeben, dass sie unrechtmäßig gehandelt hätten:

“Then they took us to a pre-trial detention prison. We thought that they would release us after a day, But it happened otherwise.

Charter-97: What were the conditions like in your cell?

Kandelaki: I had the impression that the very format of that institution creates a legal vacuum there. In our cell we met people who were kept there for two or three months without trial or investigation. The conditions contradicted human dignity. The prison bed was an ordinary wooden board, on which eight to 10 people had to sleep. A cover was not allowed. When we were evicted from the hotel, we wanted to take at least towels out of our things but they did not allow us. Of course, they did not allow us to take any warm clothes either. We only managed to take toothbrushes with us. It was awfully cold at night. Only after five days, thanks to the publicity raised by Belarusian human rights activists and Georgian diplomats, we were able to take some of our things to the cell. […]

The behavior of the police was arrogant and impudent. We were isolated from any information, we were not told why we had been arrested. Even though Georgian consul in Kyiv Zurab Kvachadze and Georgian consul in Moscow Zurab Pataradze visited the pre-trial detention facility, they were not allowed to meet with us. And we were not told that they had come and were trying to see us. On the contrary, we were persuaded that nobody was interested in our lot, that there was only one telephone call from somewhere, and that was all. The Vienna Convention [on Consular Relations] was violated all the time.

On Sunday [28 August] in the evening, a man named Bondarchik was placed in our cell. He began talking about music. The most interesting thing was that he talked about those groups whose compact discs we had in our suitcases. We realized that he was a provocateur, and we refused to speak with him. After half an hour he requested that he be transferred to a different cell. They took him away and, I think, simply released him. But the following day we were taken to court and accused of insulting and threatening that man Bondarchik, who spent just half an hour in our cell. We were being persuaded to give up on a lawyer but after we insisted on having one, they found some random man. He told me: "Son, I understand everything, but the judge will not put his head under the hammer." As a result, we got 15 days in jail each. […]

The Belarusian authorities did not acknowledge that their actions were unlawful; they simply found excuses to release us after they became afraid of the consequences of the scandal [connected with our arrest]. The reason for the release of Luka Tsuladze was that his name was allegedly written down incorrectly in the police report. I was released allegedly because my knowledge of Russian is poor and it was difficult to conduct an investigation and court proceedings against me. However, as you see, my command of Russian is quite good. The most absurd thing is that we have to pay for our stay in that pre-trial detention center.” (RFE/RL, 6. September 2005)

Zusätzlich zu den hier angeführten Informationen möchten wir Sie auf eine unserer Anfragebeantwortungen (a-4727) vom Jänner 2006 hinweisen.

 

Diese Informationen beruhen auf einer zeitlich begrenzten Recherche in öffentlich zugänglichen Dokumenten, die ACCORD derzeit zur Verfügung stehen. Diese Antwort stellt keine Meinung zum Inhalt eines bestimmten Ansuchens um Asyl oder anderen internationalen Schutz dar. Wir empfehlen, die verwendeten Materialien zur Gänze durchzusehen.

Quellen: