A/HRC/23/52 threatened with disciplinary action. On 13 February 2013, the administration of penal colony No. 2 announced that Mr. Bialiatski would not be allowed any visits with family members for a further six months. 39 He last met with his wife on 20 December 2012. 58. On 28 August 2012, Zmitser Dashkevich, leader of the youth movement Malady Front, was sentenced to a further year in prison for allegedly violating prison rules under article 411 of the Criminal Code (deliberate disobedience to the correctional institution administration). He had originally been sentenced on 24 March 2011 to two years in a labour colony for alleged assault under article 339 (hooliganism) of the Criminal Code. On 21 September, he went on hunger strike to protest against the “inhuman” treatment of the colony‟s administration. The hunger strike lasted two weeks; he was subsequently put in solitary confinement for 15 days. On 30 October, his sentence conditions were harshened on the allegation that he had committed gross and systematic violations of the regulations, whereafter he was transferred to prison No. 1 in Hrodna. While he was able to marry in December 2012, this was initially blocked. His deprivation of liberty has been marked by provocation by the authorities, incitement from other inmates, pressure owing to his political and religious views, and restrictions on correspondence and meetings. He now has the status of repeat violator of regulations. 59. On 3 February 2013, Nikolai Statkevich, a 2010 presidential candidate, is serving a six-year prison term after having been sentenced on 26 May 2011 under article 293 (1) of the Criminal Code (organizing mass unrest accompanied by violence against individuals, programmes, arson, destruction of property and armed resistance to government representatives). He is currently in prison No. 4 in Mahiliou. Already classified as a flagrant violator in December 20111, the administration in the penal colony in Shklou, where Mr. Statkevich first served his sentence, went on to classify him as “prone to escape and assault”. He faced three rounds of disciplinary punishment in 2012 while in prison No. 4. On 27 June 2012, he was put in solitary confinement for 10 days. He has constantly faced different forms of provocation, with demands on him to sign a petition to request a pardon. On 11 February 2013, he reported another series of provocations against him. 60. The above instances are emblematic of a broader pattern of continuous, cumulative and cruel pressure applied to individuals while isolated from the outside world (for example, by limiting access to relatives, lawyers, correspondence and communication).The overall aim (often voiced even by wardens) is to “break” these individuals and force them to seek a pardon. Such practices could be viewed as amounting to ill-treatment or even torture.40 E. Independence of judges and lawyers 61. Despite the Code on the Judicial System and the Status of Judges of 2007, which according to the Government sets forth all the fundamental principles necessary for safeguarding judicial independence, concerns remain that, while article 110 of the Constitution and article 22 of the Criminal Procedure Code provide for an independent 39 40 See http://spring96.org/en/news/61860. See Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Loayza-Tamayo v. Peru, 17 September 1997, para. 58; Godínez-Cruz v. Honduras. 20 January 1989, paras.164 and 197; Fairén-Garbi and Solís Corrales v. Honduras,15 March 1989, para. 149; and Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras, 29 July 1988, paras. 156 and 187. See also African Commission on Human Rights, Law Office of Ghazi Suleiman v. Sudan, communications 222/98 and 229/99 (2003); and Amnesty International and Others v. Sudan, Communications 48/90, 50/91, 52/91, 89/93 (1999), para 43. 13