identifiable. Numerous reports of arrests without introducing (name, rank, institution of the officer) and explanation of reasons of arrest were reported, despite the direct demand of the Belarusian law. Ministry of Internal Affairs stated that all such cases were justified by the "urgent needs". The Arrest of Maria Kalesnikava was sometimes compared with abduction. Forced checks of passer-by's mobile phones were widely practiced without the prosecutor's or court orders. If the police officers or troops found photos from the protest rallies or subscription to anti-Lukashenko Telegram channels, the inspected person could be detained and/or beaten. Some non-protesters, including passers-by, bicyclists, journalists and election observers, were detained at the polling stations. Court procedure violations Many people detained in the first days after the election stated that their trials were extremely simplified and short, often being conducted right at the detention center. Some detained people were forced by the police officers with batons to kneel in front of judges and not to look at them. In some cases, names of the judges weren't announced, and the judgment was read out without the judge. Many trials were held behind closed doors. Police reports (protocols) were often reported to be full of mistakes, including confusion of names, places and circumstances, but the objections about these mistakes were seldom taken into consideration by the judges. It was reported that those who didn't agree with the police reports and refused to sign them could be beaten. An election observer who was detained at the polling station, was convicted on the basis of the report claiming that 2 hours after the detention she was shouting anti-government slogans in another place in Minsk. A detained Russian tourist was successively charged for protesting in two different parts of Minsk at the same time. At least three similar cases involving journalists were known: they were first charged on the basis of one police report, but after they argued that they were in another place at the stated time of detention, they were charged and convicted on the basis of another report. A woman in Minsk was found guilty with a social network photo acting as the only evidence. Prosecution witnesses, if any, testified remotely (via video communication services), anonymously or with changed names, and their faces were sometimes covered with mask or balaclavas. One of the charged journalists claimed that the witness who testified against him was given hints by