"Article 153 of the Civil Code, referred to by respondents, the court and us, clearly defines the procedure for defending one's honour, dignity and business reputation: 'if the information is spread' – and it has been spread; 'if it is not true' – it is not true; and 'if it tarnishes the honour and dignity of the one against whom it is directed' – it of course does it; all the three conditions are obviously in place in the publications of the belnovosti.by."
"Firstly, it is not the claimant's duty to prove whether the facts in the widely spread information are true or not – this is the duty of the respondent. In our case, the respondent failed to present a single document, confirming the slander: neither on property charges, nor on the fact that the publications allegedly did not tarnish our honour and dignity. The articles were posted on May 14 and 21, 2018, well before the trial of the so-called 'trade union case'. It's clear where this 'information' had leaked from – from those bodies who strained their efforts to prove what had never existed."
"The charges of opening bank accounts in Lithuania were not proved at the trial in last August, but the website wrote affirmatively about the accounts; and the respondent told at the February 13 session: we believed because a criminal case was opened. Yes, it was initiated; yes, there was a sentence for tax evasion. However, the court could not blame us for stealing money from the union and bought property for it."
"Moreover, speaking about the 'fictitious Fedynich's REP' is a direct insult, because the trade union is not Fedynich's and it is not fictitious; on the contrary, today it is one of the best in the country to defend workers' rights. It is clear that the campaign was targeted, aimed to discredit our dignity and the honour of the trade union, to form negative public opinion and, perhaps, to intentionally direct the court judgement, by knowing in advance that it all will go unpunished."
"The judge rejected all our motions; for example, he refused to make a request about the initial texts of publications and about authors thereof. Yesterday I tried to disqualify the judge, because I believed then and believe now: this court cannot be impartial and fair. The judge's ruling announced in the morning on February 14 is just another confirmation."
"I am convinced that the above publications and the judgement were all customized, whatever the opponents may tell us. We only need 'to thank' the belnovosti.by website and the court for the fact that the former had slandered us, while the latter found no violation of the law in it. If today it is done publicly and cynically in relation to us, then what can we say about ordinary citizens? You may say whatever you think, citizens, but only in silence," Gennady Fedynich has summed up. "Naturally, we'll appeal against this judgement, inform the broad public and relevant international structures. We are sure that the final victory is not with those, who holds the power, but with those, who sticks to the truth."