“Truth Against Lies”

Following the release of the film entitled “Truth Against Lies”, I have submitted a formal complaint to the Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Poland and to the British police (Counter Terrorism Command, SO15), requesting the initiation of criminal proceedings and a full investigation into the allegations presented in the broadcast. These allegations concern the preparation of a terrorist act, in which, among other intended victims, my wife, Veronica Tsepkalo — currently residing in Cambridge, United Kingdom — and Maria Kalesnikava — presently imprisoned and with no one to advocate for her — were named. In contrast, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya is in a position to initiate her own legal defence.

I must emphasise that I do not personally believe Pavel Latushka was in fact preparing such a crime. During the 2020 presidential campaign, he carefully avoided attending any opposition rallies, clearly fearing that his presence might be noticed and interpreted as sympathy for democratic change. After 9 August 2020, when mass protests erupted in response to electoral fraud and violence was used against the population, he likewise remained absent from public protest.

He only emerged on 13 August — at a point when hundreds of thousands of people were already on the streets nationwide and the entire staff of the theatre he directed had publicly supported the protesters. By his own admission, his “struggle” while in Belarus was limited to making private notes in a notebook, kept secret from everyone, while in public he consistently praised Alexander Lukashenko and his regime.

Nevertheless, I could not ignore the grave allegations made in the broadcast, accusing him of preparing and inciting the murder of women who stood — sincerely, and not for personal gain — for democratic transformation in Belarus. Particularly appalling was the fact that an individual, discussing the supposed necessity of a “sacrificial victim,” did not propose offering himself or his own relatives, but instead cowardly and cynically suggested targeting women with small children.

In my view, the decisive piece of evidence in this matter should be an independent forensic voice analysis conducted outside the territory of Poland, to preclude any allegations of bias and ensure the highest possible credibility of the findings.

Unlike video footage — which can be fabricated more easily, particularly when there is no visible lip movement, no facial micro-dynamics, and no ability to match speech with facial expressions (especially when filmed from behind) — the human voice is a unique acoustic “fingerprint.”

Forensic voice identification examines timbre, individual micro-pauses, intonation patterns, articulation and breathing features, and the acoustic structure of the oral cavity. Even with the most advanced speech synthesis and deepfake voice technologies, telltale anomalies remain detectable — such as spectral noise, formant inconsistencies, and the absence of natural frequency fluctuations. These characteristics cannot be fully replicated without leaving forensic traces identifiable through professional analysis.

If the recording proves to be falsified, it would constitute further evidence of the Belarusian regime’s deliberate fabrication of criminal cases and should serve as grounds for additional sanctions against both the Belarusian State Television and Radio Company (BTRC) and the officials responsible for the falsification. If, however, the recording is confirmed as authentic, it would constitute highly significant evidence in court against an individual who conspired to commit mass murder.

The full text of my formal complaint follows. The original has been submitted in both Polish and English.

Prokuratura Krajowa
ul. Postępu 3
02-676 Warszawa
Poland

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT

On suspicion of preparing a terrorist act and attempted murder
(Articles 148 § 1–3, 163–165, 255 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Poland)

I, Valery Tsepkalo, hereby report actions brought to my attention which bear the characteristics of crimes under the Criminal Code of the Republic of Poland, namely:

Article 148 § 1–3 – attempted murder;

Articles 163–165 – acts creating danger to the life and health of many persons, including a terrorist act;

Article 255 – public incitement to commit a crime.

1. Case background

According to the report broadcast by the Belarusian State Television and Radio Company (BTRC), entitled “Truth Against Lies”, and based on the audio and video materials presented therein, as well as the comments of officials, relating to the 2020 presidential campaign in the Republic of Belarus, a person closely resembling Belarusian citizen Pavel Pavlovich Latushka (currently residing in the Republic of Poland) is alleged to have met on multiple occasions, on his own initiative, with Alexander Ivanovich Gusak, then head of security for the campaign headquarters of presidential candidate Viktar Babaryka.

During these meetings — according to Gusak and other individuals mentioned in the broadcast — the possibility of carrying out a terrorist act at Minsk, 25/1 Vera Khoruzhaya Street was discussed. At the time, this address housed the joint headquarters of the three opposition candidates — Viktar Babaryka, myself (Valery Tsepkalo), and Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya. This location was allegedly considered as a potential target for arson, intended to cause the deaths of those present.

2. Nature of the alleged criminal intent

The materials presented indicate that the intended aim of these actions was the killing of three women representing the united opposition — my wife, Veronica Tsepkalo, Maria Kalesnikava, and Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya — along with other activists.

The person resembling Pavel Latushka allegedly expressed the view that a so-called “sacrificial victim” was necessary — by analogy to the 2014 events in Odessa, where 42 people died in a fire — with the objective of radicalising the political situation and provoking mass protests.

I particularly note the personal dimension: my wife, the mother of two small children at the time, and Maria Kalesnikava, who remains imprisoned today and has no one to defend her, were among those allegedly selected as intended victims.

3. Possible motivation

At the time of these events, this person had a public reputation as one of the most active state officials promoting the policies of Alexander Lukashenko and speaking sharply against the democratic movement. Notably, there are documented episodes in which this person, responding to criticism of human rights abuses in Belarus from a Polish journalist, threatened the use of physical violence. These circumstances may point to a personal and ideological motivation for hostility toward those advocating for human rights in Belarus.

4. The audio recording

In an audio recording dated 3 August 2020, a voice strongly resembling that of Pavel Latushka is heard saying:

“A bomb – unlikely. Fire – that’s realistic. As long as they don’t have time to react — I don’t know, spill some petrol. There need to be victims. The more, the better. And if it’s done on the 9th — even better…”

The conversation reportedly considered various options for committing a terrorist act, including the use of an explosive device — which was deemed less likely — before focusing on arson, with details of its proposed execution and the anticipated political effect.

Such content indicates a concrete criminal intent and a preparatory stage, falling squarely within the definition of preparing a terrorist act under Articles 163–165 of the Polish Criminal Code, as well as under the definition of terrorism contained in UN Security Council Resolutions 1373 (2001) and 1566 (2004).

5. Legal classification

The actions described bear the characteristics of:

preparation of a terrorist act (Articles 163–165 CC RP);

attempted murder (Article 148 § 1–3 CC RP);

incitement to commit a particularly serious crime (Article 255 CC RP).

6. International legal basis and Polish jurisdiction

As one of the alleged participants resides on the territory of Poland, the matter falls within the jurisdiction of Polish law enforcement under:

UN Security Council Resolution 1373 (2001);

UN Security Council Resolution 1566 (2004);

International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (1999, Article 18);

The Statutes and Rules of Interpol.

Given the impossibility of direct information exchange with the authorities of the Republic of Belarus, I request consideration of the use of international cooperation channels under the UN and Interpol — including via the Interpol General Secretariat and the National Central Bureaus of third countries (such as Switzerland, Turkey, or the UAE), or through the UN Office of Counter-Terrorism (UNOCT).

7. Evidence

Audio and video recording: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXabEdxCZog

Witnesses able to confirm the facts described are indicated in the video.

8. Requests

I respectfully request that the Prosecutor’s Office:

Order an independent forensic voice examination of the submitted audio recording to determine whether the voice matches that of the person allegedly involved in discussing the preparation of a terrorist act.

Conduct this examination outside the Republic of Poland, in one of the accredited international laboratories (e.g., in the United Kingdom or Switzerland), to eliminate any doubts as to the objectivity of the findings.

Question the witnesses mentioned in the broadcast.

In the event of Belarus’s refusal to cooperate — including via international intermediaries — treat this as a failure to comply with its obligations under UN and Interpol frameworks, and use this as grounds to initiate suspension or exclusion of the Republic of Belarus from the relevant mechanisms, as well as to impose additional sanctions against BTRC for disseminating false accusations of terrorism, including secondary sanctions on any domestic or foreign companies cooperating with it (advertisers, technology suppliers, software providers, hosting companies).

This complaint is submitted in compliance with Article 240 § 1 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Poland, requiring the immediate notification of competent authorities upon obtaining information regarding the preparation of crimes of a terrorist nature.

Information regarding this complaint has also been transmitted to the British police (Counter Terrorism Command, SO15), as the threat concerned my wife, a resident of the United Kingdom.