<\/p>\n\n\n\n
BATUN began to notify the Commission on Human Rights of the Soviet violations of the human rights of Balts soon after the Economic and Social Council established procedure 1503, called the \u201cProcedure for dealing with communications relating to violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms\u201d and this continued until early 1991. For every session of the Commission on Human Rights BATUN prepared a memorandum dealing with a characteristic, recent human rights violation in the Baltic States. BATUN also attempted to get other exile organizations and individuals to report human rights violations to the Commission on Human Rights. The responses to BATUN from the UN\u2019s Division of Human Right recognized the Baltic Question as an admissible human rights question and recognized BATUN as an organization that was eligible to provide information on the Baltic Question. BATUN provided information in more than 80 communications related to the 1503 procedure between 1971 and 1991. The information provided by BATUN was accessed by dozens, and possibly hundreds, of diplomats and members of the UN staff.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.archiv.org.lv\/diaspora\/batun\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/xScan_20210303-24.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
The delegates for the first Geneva visits were recruited by the board in Europe. The first visit in 1971 was conducted by Baltic exiles living in Sweden (Andres K\u00fcng, a prominent Swedish-Estonian journalist and politician), Geneva (Arnolds Skr\u0113bers, a Latvian diplomat living in Geneva) and Germany (Walter Banaitis, editor for the Lithuanian news agency ELTA in Germany). Later, the delegate was Gatis Masti\u0146\u0161, BATUN\u2019s part-time office manager at the time, assisted by Arnolds Skr\u0113bers. In 1977 the delegates – Juta Ristsoo (formerly Virkmaa) who had left New York for Munich and Pauls K\u013cavi\u0146\u0161 came from Germany. There was no visit to the Commission on Human Rights session in 1978, but Ristsoo visited the Human Rights Commission session held in Geneva in October. In 1979 the delegates to the Human Rights Commission session came from Germany: Ristsoo, J\u016blijs Kadelis, the director of PBLA Bureau of Information, and the dissident Olafs Br\u016bveris. In 1980 the delegates were board member Fr. Casimir Pugevicius and alternate board member Vija Siksna Kl\u012bve. In 1981 and 1982 the delegates were Ristsoo, Kadelis and Narcizas Prielaida the Swiss-Lithuanian journalist residing in Geneva. The experience that the four delegates \u2013 Ristsoo, Kadelis, Br\u016bvers, Prielaida \u2013 acquired by attending two and more sessions, may have increased the efficiency of BATUN\u2019s Geneva visits after 1978.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n During 1971-82 BATUN undertook one to three lobbying campaigns each year, for a total of 31 in twelve years. The subject of each lobbying campaign, such as in the bodies dealing with human rights \u2013 the Commission on Human Rights or the Third Committee of the General Assembly \u2013 was determined by BATUN\u2019s access to the increased knowledge about the current events in the Baltic countries (and the Soviet Union) in the West and among the Baltic exile resulting from the availability of dissident-produced documents and the reporting of Western journalists stationed in the Soviet Union.<\/p>\n\n\n\n BATUN prepared materials to educate and provide instruction for the BATUN delegates prior to their parti\u00adci\u00adpa\u00adtion in lobby visits. The available information was used to prepare three types of materials: a) the instructions for BATUN\u2019s lobbyists, b) the informative documents delivered to the UN, and c) BATUN\u2019s news releases. The instructions packets for Geneva were adapted for both the novice and experien\u00adced delegates who conducted visits to the Permanent UN Missions in NY. During 1971-82, the informative documents that BATUN delivered to the UN Member States and institutions can be divided into three categories: a) Baltic dissident documents; b) non-BATUN exile materials; c) BATUN-prepared materials.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Each fall, before the beginning of the new General Assembly session, BATUN prepared a memorandum designed to apply to a specific item on the General Assembly agenda. In result, several representatives of various countries have mentioned the Baltic States in their speeches. The speech of Hon. Edward J.Derwinski, Member of US Congress and US Delegate to the 26th General Assembly to UN, in the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) on November 15, 1971 opened two days of battle royal between the USA and USSR over the Baltic States. The event also marked a change of the US attitude in the UN. Derwinski felt that the US has let the Russians get away with too much propaganda in the UN and that the UN is mainly a propaganda forum – “debating society”. When the time came for Derwinski to make a speech in the Third Committee, he decided to take a new approach. After every pro-Soviet statement he asked for a right to reply and patiently repeated the facts, only in a more elaborate way. This course of action ultimately led to the strongest pro-Baltic stance ever expressed by the US in the UN.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n Derwinski went on to say that new forms of colonialism should not be overlooked – <\/p>\n\n\n\n ” We must be ever mindful of those proud nations which have lost their freedom in this period as well as those brave people everywhere who are denied national dignity and the right of self-determination. (…) The Baltic States – Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia – represent a special case in point. They have been physically annexed by the Soviet Union and forcibly incorporated into the cluster of its ” Social Republics”.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n On November 15, just a few hours after his speech at the UN, the Hon. Edward Derwinski came at the invitation of BATUN to the Estonian House in New York, to address members of Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian organizations. <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n As information about Balts being imprisoned in the occupied Baltic States started to reach the West, BATUN started the Prisoners of Conscience (POC) program in late 1973, which sought to plead the case of the imprisoned Baltic freedom fighters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Baltic exile POC activities, in which BATUN played a prominent role, were a part of a larger movement in the West. In 1973, Uldis Blukis proposed that BATUN collect data on Baltic POCs in the USSR and establish Baltic POC support groups. The groups would be assigned the POCs known to BATUN, and they would gather information about the POCs, try to communicate with them and help them, and try to get publicity for them in the West. Whenever news would be received of another arrest, also BYFF reacted by immediately organizing a small demonstration at the Soviet Mission to the UN on East 67th<\/sup> Street. At one point, BYFF was there so often that the police from the police station, which was located across the street, who were charged with maintaining order would greet the BYFF protestors with shouts of \u201cthe Balts are here again!\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the 1970s, BATUN started a campaign by sending postcards with artwork by three Baltic artists \u2013 an Estonian, Latvian, and Lithuanian \u2013to people who had been held in Soviet concentration camps. Uldis Blukis was the initiator of this program and sent letters to dissident prisoners. The Soviet regime would not deliver the letters to the prisoners and they were returned to the senders from the detention center. The letters-to-POCs campaigns were held at Christmas events in the exile Baltic community around December 10th<\/sup>, UN\u2019s Human Rights Day, i.e., the date when the General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. At the events, BATUN activists or supporters would set up tables where the names and addresses of a few POCs, as well as of the GULAG officials and other Soviet officials, were provided. BATUN suggested that Human Rights Day greetings to the officials include politely worded requests to explore the possibility of human rights violations in regards to POC being violated. The violations might include ones related to their right to adequate food and living conditions, or their freedom of communication, conscience, opinion, and expression. Pens, paper and envelopes, as well as postcards, were provided, that could be sent to both POCs and officials included by registered mail.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Those who wanted to regularly write letters to POCs and officials were offered assistance. The first campaigns were probably held in December 1979 at BATUN office and Daugavas Vanagi headquarters in the Bronx and possibly elsewhere. In New York, the campaigns were held annually until December 1987. The number of letters sent each year ranged from more than 50 to more than 100, and even the approximately 3,000 sent by Lithuanians in New York in 1980. In the early 1980s, BATUN collected samples of the registered mail that was returned to the senders for various official reasons. These were sent to the US Congress, which was investigating Soviet mail delivery. Only one letter from a POC was found in the archive of letters. It came from Ivars Grab\u0101ns, a Latvian farmer who was born in 1922 and became an anti-Soviet guerilla. He had been sentenced to 15 years in a \u201csevere regime\u201d prison (in Perm), and his release was expected on September 1, 1983.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n Postcards with printed photographs of Estonian dissidents were distributed to Baltic exiles and organizations. The postcards contained a request for the dissident’s release and were addressed to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the USSR or the Committee for the State Security Council of Ministers of the USSR. Source: LNA LVA F.2944:<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<\/a><\/a>Two days of debate over the Baltic States<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>The Prisoners of Conscience project<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<\/a><\/a><\/a>