Vasilevich: Don't make a cult of property when we speak about drunk drivers
The experts warn that if they start seizing cars from drunk drivers it will be a violation of the Constitution.
The Prosecutor General's Office suggests confiscating vehicles from drunk drivers. However, what about the right for private property? This right is respected all over the world: they can take huge fines, or even shot you, like they do in China, but they don’t take the car! Our public prosecution has its own point of view on this discrepancy.
"If a person killed someone with a gun, then the gun is a weapon of
the crime. So, the car in this case becomes the source of increased danger. It
will also be confiscated as an instrument of the crime,"- spokesman
for the Prosecutor General Pyotr Kisyalyou explains to Euroradio.
The Prosecutor General Office claims that they will have reasons to consider a
car an instrument of a crime as they will confiscate cars from just those
drivers who committed a criminal offence. For example, if they were caught
drunk driving by the traffic police twice within a year, or caused a car
accident in the result of which someone got severely injured or killed.
In some cases, you may not pay attention to the right for private property -
says former head of the Prosecutor General Office, former head of the
Constitutional Court, and now head of the Constitutional Law Department of
the BSU Law Faculty Ryhor Vasilevich.
Ryhor Vasilevich: "Property and any other right should
not be abused! And if there’s a question of abuse, then surely the state can
look for options to protect the safety of citizens and society. Therefore, we
should not make a cult of property in this case, as they indeed commit offence.
"
Civil activist Artsyom Sharkou supports the struggle against
drunk drivers. He even does not object to confiscation of vehicles from those
who like having a drink and driving a car after this. However, it should be
done only if a person was caught drunk driving 5-6 times within a year. Otherwise,
the situation can become absurd.
Artsyom Sharkou: "Drinkers at the wheel will start buying various auto-trash
for some $ 100-200, and drive drunk – let them take away those cheap cars if
they want!"
According to the activist, it makes sense to try to fight with drunk drivers
with large fines and even limited freedom , while the confiscation of cars will
give no result.
Human rights activist, lawyer of the "Belarusian Helsinki Committee" Harry
Pahanyaila draws attention to the fact that the initiative with
confiscation "comes into contradiction" with the Constitution.
Harry Pahanyaila: "... and with a number of laws aimed at
protecting property rights and the equality of individuals and legal
entities."
For example, when the car belongs to both spouses, they bought it together, but
then it was confiscated because one of them got caught drunk driving – why
should the other one suffer? Poor control?
Ryhor Vasilevich offers organizing public hearings on the bill before sending
it to the Parliament. If people support the proposal of the Ministry of Justice
and the Prosecutor General Office, then the moral responsibility for the
violation of the right of personal property vanishes. If not – they should not
complain about the terrible accidents and victims killed by drunken drivers.
Photo: Zmicier Lukashuk
