GREEK HELSINKI MONITOR
(Greek National Committee of the International Helsinki Federation)
& MINORITY RIGHTS GROUP - GREECE
(Greek Affiliate of Minority Rights Group International)
P.O. Box 51393, GR-14510 Kifisia, Greece Tel. 30-1-620.01.20;
Fax: 30-1-807.57.67; E-mail: office@greekhelsinki.gr

PRESS RELEASE
3/8/1997
TOPIC: “HELSINKI” DOESN'T GUARANTEE FAITHFULNESS TO HUMAN RIGHTS
By Panayote Elias Dimitras and Aaron Rhodes
Since the signing of the Helsinki Final Act over 20 years ago, the name
“Helsinki” has become emblematic of specific political principles and values. The
so-called “Human Dimension” commitments undertaken by the members of the Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) are “politically-binding” pledges to
uphold the freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief; the freedom of expression
and the principle that independent media should be permitted; the freedom of movement; and
the obligation to hold free and fair elections. The “Helsinki” commitments also
obligate the participating countries to prevent torture and cruel and degrading treatment;
to uphold international humanitarian law; to work toward the abolishment of capital
punishment; to uphold the “rule of law”; to promote tolerance and protect the rights
of national minorities.
Following the lead of the first “Helsinki committees,” who in the
1970s stood up to the Soviet government by citing its failures to abide by its commitments
under the Helsinki Final Act and recommending how it could better comply, human rights
groups that call themselves by the “Helsinki” label thereby associate themselves with
these basic principles and values. The International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights
(IHF) and its constituent 31 national Helsinki committees in Europe, North America and the
former USSR, committed to the defense of human rights principles consistently and across
the political and geographical spectrum, have by now established a long record of strong
criticism of all OSCE governments for whatever human rights violations are recorded. We
have done this in both the East and the West, and regardless of a government's political
orientation. In many cases, including the troublesome case of Greece, an EU member, the
IHF has been the sole source for the international exposure of such problems. But lately,
the official defensive rhetoric of two of the Europe's most human rights-abusing
governments is being supplied by an organization named the British Helsinki Human Rights
Group. This organization is not affiliated with the IHF, whose British member is the
Parliamentary Human Rights Group. But the IHF now finds itself dogged by reporters and
angry members, especially in Belarus and Albania where the British human rights
organization has staked out strongly political positions defending Presidents Lukashenko
and Berisha against criticisms of their human rights records, and the group has also
defended the policies of Slovakia's authoritarian Prime Minister Vladimir Meciar.
In Belarus, Hitler-admiring President Lukashenko has made much use of
press releases, articles and statements by the British Helsinki Human Rights Group to
defend his program of returning Belarus to totalitarianism. Anyone believing in liberty,
in freedom, in civil society, in the cherished democratic principle of checks and
balances, in the need to constrain the absolute power of the state, and in free markets
has to be horrified by the concentration of huge powers in the presidency; by a
rubber-stamp parliament consisting of presidential appointees; by a program of “rule by
decree;” by police violence and inhumane conditions in pre-trial detention for those
having participate in opposition demonstration; and by the regime's economic
re-nationalization program and it flaming attacks on civil society. But in a 1 December
1996 article published in the Wall Street Journal, a representative of the British
Helsinki Human Rights Group defended the rigged referendum, which massively violated the
law and democratic principles, and by which Lukashenko destroyed the 1992 constitution;
they claimed it proved that Lukashenko was “genuinely popular.” How would anyone know
that, in the absence of a free and fair poll? Of course, the red-brown Lukashenko regime
has made maximum propaganda use of such political assertions by a “human rights
group,” and as part of a program of degrading the IHF-affiliated Belarusan Helsinki
Committee.
In recent days the British Helsinki Human Rights Groups has taken to
de-legitimating the results of the recent Albanian election, in which its apparently
favored candidate Sali Berisha lost his shirt. The story actually started a year ago, when
virtually every international governmental and non-governmental organization monitoring
the 1996 parliamentary elections concluded that Berisha's Democratic Party had improperly
used the state apparatus, plus old-fashioned vote fraud, to win a landslide. A report by
the British group at that time was a long political harangue against the OSCE, including a
ludicrous charge that Albanian socialists have manipulated the OSCE's election monitoring
mission by packing it with left-wing fellow-travelers from countries like Norway. The
charge was made again two months ago in the pro-Berisha newspaper “Albania”.
The corruption of the 1996 elections was one of the factors feeding
into the final collapse of confidence in the president and his party, whose undemocratic
practices started soon after he first come in power in 1992. Now we are hearing from the
British Helsinki Human Rights Group that the OSCE has papered-over the problems in the May
1997 elections. The group followed the official Berisha line that “the communists” are
behind the armed gangs that made it impossible for Democratic Party candidates to campaign
in some of the areas they control. They have even used selected and distorted incidents of
violence to back their arguments, such as claiming that a Democratic Party leader's
relative's assassination was politically motivated, which even the victim's family denied.
They have also apparently deliberately ignored equally condemnable incidents of violence
involving victims who are members of other parties, the result of the chaos into which the
country had slid.
It is hard to find any Albanian outside of the desperate inner circle
of the Democratic Party who accepts this distortion of the facts. The Democratic Party
also has ties with many of the gangs, while some of them are political free-agents. And,
not every armed group is a criminal gang. The Democratic Party, too, has been associated
with many of the attempts to disrupt the elections by violence; indeed, the
“Presidential Guards” under Berisha's direct control were responsible for several such
actions. The British Helsinki Group's Jonathan Sunley, in another Wall Street Jounral
article (2 July) quotes Vlore's “Public Salvation Committee statement that they well
topple Berisha “dead or alive,” but forgets the oath of Berisha to his guard that he
will prevent the socialists from coming to power. Anyone who has spent a night in Tirana
in the past months knows that the armed violence there is often highly coordinated and
would be impossible without some level of approval or even cooperation with the police and
other officials.
All the Albanian parties agreed to accept the results of the elections,
but in recent days, and using arguments like Sunley's, it seems that the Berisha clique
has joined forces with the other big loser, viz. the would-be King, attempting once again
to create chaos, which always serves to keep those who would have dictatorial powers. The
IHF published a well-documented statement about the recent Albanian elections.
Irregularities were mentioned, but overall, and especially under the circumstances, we
considered the elections free and fair, like almost all other monitors. This did not
prevent us from including in our statement a warning that Albania's human rights record is
a far cry from expected standards, and an appeal to the new government to work towards its
improvement.
To avoid confusion, our statement carried a note that the IHF is not
associated with the British Helsinki Human Rights Group. To retaliate, British Helsinki
Human Rights Group published a denunciation of the IHF in -where else?- “Albania”, as
full of distortions as anything ever published in the notoriously truth-trashing Albanian
state media-a piece that sounds like denunciations the IHF receives from statists in the
region who resent independent human rights monitors, decorated with prickly Oxford
debating-club flourishes. Our uncompromising 15-year record is a guarantee that we will be
as vigilant in Albania as in Belarus, Croatia, Serbia, Kosova or Turkey. But our job isn't
made any easier by the work of another group which, rather than monitoring adherence to
the Helsinki principles, seems to prefer the role of PR flack for a new breed of
authoritarian rulers in Europe.
Panayote Elias Dimitras is Spokesperson for Greek Helsinki Monitor
& Minority Rights Group - Greece (Athens). Aaron Rhodes is Executive Director of the
International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (Vienna).