PRIVATE P2 WORKING PAGE — not an active pilot yet.
Scope. Power of attorney / representation for Belarus procedures, with exact separation between Decree No.278 Annex 1 actions and ordinary non-Annex-1 representation.
<aside>
Draft POA solution in brief
A power of attorney is only an access mechanism; it never substitutes for the underlying Belarus document or act. The first question must therefore be: what exact Belarus action is required, and is that action inside Annex 1 to Decree No.278? For an Annex 1 procedure involving a Belarusian citizen, the current project-verified rule is special: personal filing or representation under a power executed in the Republic of Belarus. Apostille, legalisation or translation of a Spanish-notary POA can authenticate the foreign document but cannot change its place of execution. Outside Annex 1, that special rule must not be imported; ordinary sector-specific representation law applies and a Spanish/foreign notarial POA may in principle be usable after the required authentication/translation. The practical solution is therefore exact action → Annex 1 test → representation rule → valid route or documented dead end. Where the Annex 1 rule creates an objective dead end for a person lawfully abroad, Spain should treat the proven source-side barrier as documentary impossibility in the receiving procedure rather than insist on an act the person cannot lawfully perform.
</aside>
Primary project record: Power of attorney / access to Belarusian public document
Do not begin with “which POA should I make?”
Record first:
A POA that is valid in the abstract may still be unusable for a particular special procedure.
For an Annex 1 procedure involving a Belarusian citizen, item 1 of Decree No.278 establishes the special representation structure identified in the project:
A Spanish-notary POA remains a foreign-executed power even if: