Garbage under the windows and unsanitary conditions in the apartment. What are the penalties for violating the rules? 

Garbage under the windows and unsanitary conditions in the apartment. What are the penalties for violating the rules? 
Photo is illustrative in nature. From open sources.
October 3, MINSK . Violating residential property rules is illegal. However, the problem remains pressing. From January to August of this year, Minsk courts heard 156 cases of residential property violations. This represents approximately 1% of the total number of administrative offenses heard by the capital's courts. Maksim Lapko, a judge with the Criminal Division of the Minsk City COURT, told BelTA about the penalties for such administrative offenses.

Living in apartment buildings can sometimes be fraught with inconveniences, including loud music, littering common areas, unsanitary living conditions, and other actions by neighbors that disrupt the peace and comfort of residents. The question arises as to whether the behavior of such individuals complies with the law and what actions can be taken in such situations.

As Maxim Lapko explained, in accordance with Article 22.12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, liability for violating the rules for the use of residential premises may arise under Part 1 of this article—for committing actions that disturb the peace of other citizens in a residential building or create vibration and noise, between 11:00 PM and 7:00 AM. Liability under Part 2 arises for the same act committed repeatedly within one year of the imposition of an administrative penalty for the same violation.

Carrying out redevelopment and/or alteration work in residential buildings on weekends and holidays that creates noise or vibration, as well as carrying out such work between 7:00 PM and 9:00 AM on weekdays, may result in punishment under Part 3 of this article. 

Liability under Part 4 is provided for violation of the rules for the use of residential premises, the maintenance of residential, utility, and auxiliary spaces in a residential building, common property in residential buildings of state and private housing stock, structural elements and utility systems, or the unauthorized reconstruction and/or redevelopment of residential and/or non-residential premises, including utility systems, without changing the load-bearing capacity of the structures, as well as the misuse of residential premises suitable for habitation.

Finally, liability under Part 5 is possible for the unauthorized reconstruction and/or redevelopment of residential and/or non-residential premises that result in a reduction in the load-bearing capacity of the building's structural elements, as well as the conversion and reconstruction of ventilation shafts and ducts.

According to the judge, when qualifying actions under Article 22.12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, one should be guided not only by the provisions of the rules for the use of residential premises and the maintenance of residential and auxiliary premises, approved by Council of Ministers Resolution No. 399 of May 21, 2013, but also by other regulatory legal acts, such as the rules for residence and internal regulations in dormitories.

Minsk courts primarily hold offenders administratively liable under Part 4 of Article 22.12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses.

For example, a court ruling held a citizen administratively liable for leaving her apartment in an unsatisfactory sanitary condition: the presence of dirt, garbage, a foul smell of sewage that blew into common areas, cockroaches, and improper storage of food.

Another illustrative example: a citizen was held administratively liable for throwing out trash (food packaging, a plastic MILK bottle, banana peels, eggshells, and the remains of boiledcoffee ), from their living space onto the lawn and pedestrian path beneath their apartment windows.

Maxim Lapko noted that, depending on the nature of the violation, its consequences, and the identity of the individual at fault, liability may result in a fine of 2 to 30 basic units, while for an individual entrepreneur or legal entity, it may result in a fine of 5 to 70 basic units.

A person who has reached the age of 16 at the time of the offense may be held administratively liable.

It is explained that authorized officials of internal affairs agencies are vested with the authority to draw up administrative offense reports and conduct administrative proceedings for offenses under Parts 1 and 2 of Article 22.12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses.

The right to draw up reports on administrative offenses under Parts 3-5 of Article 22.12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses is vested in officials of organizations operating the housing stock and/or providing housing and communal services, rural, settlement, district, city and regional executive committees, and district administrations in cities.

Authorized officials of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection may draw up reports on administrative offenses under Part 3 of Article 22.12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses; state sanitary supervision bodies - under Part 4 of Article 22.12

of the Code of Administrative Offenses. The prosecutor, in the exercise of his supervisory functions, is authorized to draw up reports on administrative offenses under all parts of Article 22.12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses.

At the same time, these provisions of the law do not deprive a citizen of the right to contact law enforcement agencies about an offense, especially one committed at night.

The court emphasized that it is imperative not to escalate a conflict with someone who violates residential property rules, as this could lead to other offenses (petty hooliganism in public areas, insults, and intentional infliction of bodily harm).

Maksim Lapko also provided a profile of those charged under Article 22.12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses: male (66%), aged between 41 and 70 (72%), unemployed or retired (80%).

"It must be acknowledged that violating residential property rules demonstrates a lack of basic culture among citizens. Therefore, those who commit such acts primarily demonstrate their lack of culture," the judge stated.

He urged people to think before committing an unlawful act. Thoughtless actions can ruin the lives of their neighbors, themselves, and their loved ones.

BELTA

Read together with it: