Summary of Belarusian legislative and law-enforcement practice shows that restrictions of freedom of associations have been groundlessly broadened in comparison with the Constitution and international standards. Moreover, the tendency that has been outlined since 1999 towards systematic deterioration of legal regulations related to establishment and activity of non-governmental non-profit organizations becomes more and more evident. Thus, a whole range of illegitimate restrictions on purposes of creation, activities, membership and conditions for registration of public associations has been introduced in Belarus. Besides, some of these restrictions are enacted in laws and subordinate normative acts, others have been introduced by state authorities and administrative agencies as a result of legal practice.

Additional restrictions were first introduced by the Decree No.2 of the President of the Republic of Belarus "On Certain Measures for Regulation of Activities of Political Parties, Trade Unions and other Public Associations" adopted on 26.01.1999. This legislative act introduces, in the first place, the following restrictions:

• authorization-based principle of establishment of public associations, that has been implemented by creation of an additional special interdepartmental agency that makes final decisions on the questions of registration of public associations;
• prohibition of activity of unregistered public associations in Belarus, and introduction of demands of responsibility for activity on behalf on unregistered associations.

Implementation of the Decree No.2 caused substantial deterioration both within the system of legislation on public associations, and in legal practice. E.g. the law establishes a number of reasons for refusal of registration to public associations. These reasons concern precisely the nature of an NGO and should lay beyond state interference (aims of organization, methods of its of work, membership in the organization).

In order to secure implementation of the Decree mentioned above, special norms were introduced into the present legislation that presuppose liabilities for activity of unregistered public associations. According to provisions of Art. 167¹⁰ of the Code of Administrative Violations of the Republic of Belarus, activity of public associations that have not been registered (re-registered) with the state lead to a warning or imposement of a fee of 10 up to 50 times the base value. Same actions commited repeatedly within a year lead to a fee of 50 up to 100 times the base value or administrative arrest for the term of up to 15 days (the norm was in existence before March 1, 2007 – date when the new Code of Administrative Violations came into effect in the Republic of Belarus). The Law of the Republic of Belarus "On Press and Other Mass Media" adopted 13.01.1995 (amended on 29.06.2006) prohibits distribution of information from the name of political parties, trade unions or other public associations that have not, in due order set by legislation, undergo state registration (re-registration).

As of today, provisions about prohibition of activity on behalf of unregistered associations and norms that complicate registration of public associations and simplify their liquidation have been fixed within the new revision of the Law of the Republic of Belarus "On Public Associations".

Criminal proscecution was introduced in December 2005 for organizing or taking part in activities of an unregistered association. This type of liabilities was introduced by adopting on December 15, 2005 a Law of the Republic of Belarus No.71-3 "On Introducing Amendments into Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Belarus on the Question of Strengthening Liabilities for Actions directed against Personality and Public Security", according to which amendments to the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus were made. Their content was the following: Article 193 presupposes arrest for the term of up to 6 months or imprisonment for the term of up to 2 years for organizing or leading a political party, other public association, religious organization, the activity of which is connected with violence towards citizens, or with infliction of severe physical injury, or other infringements of rights, freedoms and legal interests of citizens, or hindering execution by citizens of their state, public, family duties. The same activities connected with organizing or leading a political party, other public association, religious organization that has not gone through state registration, will be subject to arrest for the term up to 6 months or imprisonment for the term up to three years.

Criminal Code was supplemented with Art. 193¹ that implies fee or an arrest up to 6 months, or imprisonment up to two years for organizing activities or participating in activities of a political party, other public association, religious organization or foundation that are charged with a legal decision of the authorized state body about liquidation or suspension of their activity, as well as organization of activity or participation in activity of a political party, other public association, religious organization or foundation that have not been registered in due order with the state.

We would like to make an additional comment about the position that state bodies responsible for the quality of law-enforcement practice within the sphere of relations analyzed undertake. In the first place, these are the bodies that, according to the present legislation, conduct registration of public associations – the Ministry of Justice, Administrations of Justice of the corresponding Executive Committees. Actions of these bodies lead overall to the situation that excercizing a legal right guaranteed by the Constitution becomes if not impossible, but rather problematic.

Thus, one of the real obstacles for creation of a public association is the fact that documents submitted by an association for registration will automatically be forwardet by registry bodies to various state bodies depending on the nature of aims of activity of the association (National Academy of Science of the Republic of Belarus, Ministry of Education, Central Committee on Elections and Republican Referenda, etc.) "for an inspection of compliance with legislative requirements". Such practice of additional expertise bears a pernicious character as it ungroundedly postpones the time limits for a decision-making about registration. The reasonability of such an expertise is not quite clear as well. If it is really ananalysis of compliance of documents to legislative demands, this is exactly what the competences of registry bodies should include. There are cases when expert conclusions are built on the principle of answering a question of appropriateness of creation of a certain public association of citizens.

A special worry in the present situation is formed by the lack of a unified approach of state bodies towards law enforcement of the legislation that regulates freedom of assembly. Analysis of the legal practice allows us to talk about overall violations of legislative demands by the registry bodies. Decisions about denial of registration in many cases do not correspond with legislative requirements, especially what concerns specification of all the motiffs for denial and enumeration of legal norms violated. In the range of court precedents this led to the situation that when investigating a case by the registry body, grounds for a denial of registration have changed in corpore. It has become a usual practice for the registry bodies to edit (stylistically) the texts of the statutes of public associations, concerning strictly their intra-organizational activities, and often aims, objectives and methods of activity.

On October 6, 2006, an Edict of the President of the Republic of Belarus "On Certain Questions of State Registration of Public Associations and their Unions (Associations)" was signed. According to the present normative act, Republican Commission on Registration (re-registration) of Public Associations (hereienafter – Commission) was abolished.

The Commission was introduced into legislation of the Republic of Belarus by the Decree No.2  of the President of the Republic of Belarus "On Certain Measures for Regulation of Activities of Political Parties, Trade Unions and other Public Associations" adopted on January 26, 1999.

The only function given to the Commission by legislation was preparation and submission of opinion letters to bodies responsible for registration of public associations regarding the possibility of registration of such associations.

The present norm has seen its reflection also in the new edition of the Law of the Republic of Belarus "On Pubic Association" adopted on July 17, 2005.  The last composition of the Comission was defined by the Edict of the President of the Republic of Belarus No.160 issued on March 27, 2002 (with editions and amendments as of July 2, 2003) "On Affirmation of the Composition of the State Commission on Registration (re-registration) of Public Associations". The Comission included representatives of 12 various ministries and agencies, including the Deputy Head of Administration of the President (the Chair of Commission); Head of the Legal Expertise Department of the State secretariat of the Security Council of the Republic of Belarus; Minister of Justice, Minister of Information, Head of Administration for Securing Constitutional System and Fight against Terrorism of the Kommittee of State Security (KGB); Head of Public Security Militia and Special Fore Militia, etc.

As practice shows, decisions of the Commission have always formed grounds of decision of registration/non-registration of an association. The Commission was not a judicial body, hence, its members could not be drawn into a court process as defendants on the cases of registration of associations, neither on the cases of evasion of registration.

Minutes of the Commission had no preamble. Periodicity of Commission’s meetings was not defined by legislation but, originating on legislative demands towards timeframes of registration of public associations, one should suppose that the Commission was to hold its meetings on the average once in three weeks for timely examination of documents submitted for registration and, finally, for ensuring the right of citizens to assembly. However, Commission gathered at its meetings on averagely 3-4 times per year.

To our mind, abolishment of the Commission will not lead to substantial changes into the situation with exercizing freedom of assembly in the Republic of Belarus. This statement is based on the analysis of legislation and legal practice in the sphere of freedom of association in Belarus. Namely,

• due to the demand that a judicial address of associations should be excluded from the housing stock;
• correction of associations’ aims, objectives and methods of activity by registry bodies;
• submission of registration applications into various state bodies for an expertise;
• denial of registration or a decision of liquidation of organizations that are "out of favor";
• ban for activity of unregistered irganizations;
• denial of registration or registration withoug tax benefits for gratis aid received from international grant-giving organizations, etc.

According to the experts evaluation, all the restrictions of freedom of association mentioned above do not concord with legitimate aims fixed by the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus, Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and cannot be considered appropriate in a democratic society. All additional limitations of freedom of association, apart from those established by the Constitution, should be considered illegitimate, since their introduction is a violation of international norms and principles, of a constitutional right to freedom of assembly and an obstacle on the way of creation and development of an independent (non-governmental) viable sector of public initiatives.

We should also mention that despite a range of addresses made by public associations, Constitutional Court of the Republic of Belarus has not taken into account the question of constitutionality of provisions of certain normative acts on freedom of assembly.