Jan Kavan
CZECH LETTER
To celebrate the thirty-fifth anniversary of the liberation of
Czechoslovakia by the Red Army, the president of Czechoslovakia, Dr.
Gustav Husak, announced an amnesty, because, as he declared, "the
consolidation of political and moral unity of the people provides the
guarantee that certain persons who have violated the law can be
reformed even without being sentenced and without serving a prison
term." However this "guarantee" looks quite shaky when confronted
with the actual text of the amnesty. It applies only to people with
suspended sentences and
to
those sentenced to less than twelve months
imprisonment, provided that they are first offenders.
It
specifically
excludes those sentenced for leaving or attempting to leave Czechoslo–
vakia without permission. This, in fact, means that of those impri–
soned for so-called crimes against the republic-the label for political
prisoners-at best only a handful will be released.
This will be a bitter disappointment for many Czechs and Slovaks
who argue that twelve years after the Soviet invasion the time is more
than ripe for a genuine gesture from the . government toward its
political opponents. Their wishful thinking was encouraged by a
comparison with Janos Kadar's Hungary where a form of reconcilia–
tion was apparent only six years after the 1956 events, and also by the
strength of international protests against last year's Prague trial of six
members of the Committee to Defend the Unjustly Prosecuted (VONS),
including prominent playwright Vaclav Havel, who were sentenced to
up to five years' imprisonment. An amnesty, it was argued, could
provide a face-saving device and rid the regime of a case which serves as
a focus of attention and exposes the government's lack of "consolida–
tion" and fear of criticism by human rights activists.
However, it now seems that those who believed that the govern–
ment was not strong enough to afford a genuine amnesty have been
proven right.
©
Palach Press
