Written evidence submitted by HE Tukhtapulat
Riskiev, Ambassador of the Republic of Uzbekistan
REFUTATION AND CLARIFICATION OF UZBEK SIDE
OF CHAPTER 1.7 (UZBEKISTAN) OF FCO's ANNUAL HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT
2004
1. Section of Chapter 1.7 Introduction
Allegation Over the past year progress
in the human rights situation in Uzbekistan has been negligible.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side
Purposeful measures are being carried out by the government of
Uzbekistan on improvement of a situation in the field of human
rights. Reforms of judicial-legal system are underway, basic purpose
of which includes creation of effective mechanisms of observance
and protection of human rights.
The parliament of Uzbekistan has ratified more
than 60 international agreements in the field of human rights
confirming its legal adoption on national level. By ratifying
International Acts on Human Rights Uzbekistan has testified its
serious attitude to human rights issues, aspiration to respect,
observe and protect all complex of human rights, and use of positive
experience gained by humanity in this sphere, and to create the
balanced mechanism of their maintenance.
Invitation to Uzbekistan UN Special Rapporteur
on tortures Teo Van Boven and approval of Action Plan on implementing
the UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment by the Government of Uzbekistan
on 9 March 2004 also demonstrate seriousness of approaches of
Uzbekistan to respect norms of human rights.
It is necessary to note, that within the framework
of realization of positions of the Action Plan the Uzbek side
is undertaking purposeful measures on realization of UN Special
Rapporteur's recommendations. In nearest future the Government
of Uzbekistan will provide corresponding information concerning
realization of Teo Van Boven's recommendations where undertaken
measures in the field of ensuring of human rights will be described
in detail.
2. Section of Chapter 1.7 Introduction
Allegation While the UK welcomed
the Uzbek government's verbal and written commitments on human
rights reform, our primary benchmark for judging the government's
record on human rights remain changes in actual practice and a
decline in reported human rights abuses. Until we see such improvements,
human rights will remain the primary focus of the UK's bilateral
relations with Uzbekistan.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side
The Uzbek side appreciates the United Kingdom's attention and
its support for democratic and market reforms, which are being
carried out in Uzbekistan, and at the same time believes that
content and tone of part of the Report on Uzbekistan does not
correspond to the constructive atmosphere, which has traditionally
been inherent in mutual relations.
Uzbekistan is interested in developing mutually
and equally advantageous collaboration with the United Kingdom
on a level at which the British side is ready to cooperate, and
therefore it deems that, preconceived and mentor tone of the report
is impermissible
3. Section of Chapter 1.7 Combating terrorism
Allegation In fact human rights organisations
have reported mass arrests following the bombings, including that
of female relatives of alleged extremists. The Uzbek government
has continued to use the fear of Islamic extremist terrorism as
a pretext for wider repression of opposition groups.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side
Uzbekistan completely realizes the big threat of terrorism, religious
extremism and fundamentalism to the bases of democratic statehood
and will actively struggle against these threats within the framework
of existing international legal norms. At the moment, the best
efforts are being made by the authorities of Uzbekistan in order
to ensure that challenge of terrorism and religious extremism
was not reflected in the fundamental rights and freedom of the
person, observance of legality in all stages of criminal legal
proceedings.
Uzbekistan strongly believes that elements,
propagating ideas of terrorism, religious extremism and violent
overthrow of constitutional order of the country cannot be represented
as opposition groups which would have made it possible to conduct
constructive dialogue with them.
Struggle against terrorism and religious extremism
in Uzbekistan is not directed against the freedom of worship.
We believe that there is nothing between Islam as a religion and
terrorism, religious extremism and fundamentalism.
After series of terrorist acts in March-April
2004 in Tashkent and Bukhara, exclusive measures were undertaken
by law enforcement bodies of Uzbekistan to prevent possible terrorist
acts and reveal their organizers. Actions of law enforcement bodies
on revealing members of extremist and terrorist groupings had
been of addressed character. Applications of some human rights
organizations "about mass arrests" are groundless, and
look like an attempt to discredit the international authority
of Uzbekistan, and policy of the Government in the field of human
rights.
According to the Supreme Court of Uzbekistan,
after terrorist acts in March-April 2004 courts on criminal cases
of republic on 14 criminal cases have issued verdicts with regards
to 138 persons who were charged pursuant to Articles 155 (part
3), 159 (part 4) and other articles of the Criminal Code of Uzbekistan,
136 of them—to various terms of imprisonment, two persons
are sentenced conditionally with the setting of trial period.
4. Section of Chapter 1.7 Political reform
Allegation We are extremely disappointed
that no opposition political parties have been able to register
in Uzbekistan. This will prevent the participation of opposition
parties, such as Ozod Dehqon and Birlik, in the December 2004
parliamentary elections. The ministry of justice refused registration
of Birlik on the grounds that it required 20,000 signatures in
support of its application. Yet on 26 January, at the time Birlik's
documents were submitted, the requirement was to collect a minimum
of 5,000 authentic signatures.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side The
Charter of National movement "Birlik" was registered
at the Ministry of Justice on 11 November 1991. In January 1993
due to blatant violations of provisions of the charter activity
of the movement was suspended by the decision of the Supreme Court.
In this connection criminal proceedings some leaders and activists
of the movement who were later charged.
The movement "Birlik" had not submitted
necessary documents for re-registration by a specified time. And
the activity of "Birlik" was suspended by the decision
of the Ministry of Justice from 30 September 1993 and previously
given certificate was annulled.
On 22 September 2003 Initiative group of party
"Birlik" applied to the Ministry of Justice for its
registration. During examination of the submitted documents it
was revealed that there were contradicting to the laws of Uzbekistan
paragraphs in establishing documents of the party. In particular,
the Program of the party declared the right of dual citizenship,
which was in contradiction with the Articles 21 and 23 of the
Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Moreover, the requirements
of the Article 6 of the law "On political parties" were
not followed. The article requires for presence of necessary number
of signatures of the citizens who support the initiative on establishing
of the party and live in not less than eight regions of Uzbekistan
including Republic of Karakalpakstan and Tashkent city. In connection
with these and other infringements that were in the documents,
the application was returned without consideration on what applicants
were informed in accordance with the established procedure.
In later applications for registration to the
Ministry of Justice, there were revealed number of discrepancies
in the documents of "Birlik" to the positions of the
current legislation of Uzbekistan. Moreover, 329 signatures have
been forged from 448 selectively examined signatures of citizens
who ostensibly have expressed their desire to be united in the
political party. Dozens of signatures of citizens have been collected
fraudulently—under pretence of solving of "water supply"
problems or "assistance in releasing" of the convicted.
On 26 February 2004 the Ministry of justice
decided to leave applications without consideration till eliminations
of above mentioned contradictions occurred and applicants were
informed about the decision in a written form. Aftermath, there
were any more applications on registration of the Party of national
movement "Birlik" to the Ministry of Justice of Uzbekistan.
Regarding the so-called "Party of the free
farmer" and "Party of agrarians and entrepreneurs of
Uzbekistan" the Ministry of Justice of Uzbekistan did not
receive any documents, which would testify creation of such parties
on legal basis.
It is necessary to note that the Ministry of
Justice of Uzbekistan received application for registration of
the "Party of free farmers" (Ozod Dehqon) on 5 January
2004. In connection with the revealed in the applied constituent
documents contradictions to the requirements of the existing legislation
of Uzbekistan and detection of forgery (there were facts of falsification
of protocols of regional branch sessions), on 5 February 2004
the Ministry of Justice decided to suspend consideration of application
documents for registration of the "Party of free farmers"
and informed the applicant about it. Since then the organizing
committee of the "Party of free farmers" has not submitted
any more applications to the Ministry of Justice regarding registration.
"Party of agrarians and entrepreneurs of
Uzbekistan" applied for registration of its charter in September
2003. On 3 October 2003 they were informed of contradictions of
the submitted documents to requirements of the legislation of
Uzbekistan. Particularly, the documents were missing the list
of initiative groups and necessary number of signatures of the
citizens supporting the idea on creation of the party; also there
was no information on supervising body of the party, the order
of its formation and authority (Articles 6 and 7 of the Law "On
political parties").
Moreover, applicants were informed that they
had the opportunity of re-application for registration after elimination
of the revealed contradictions. Nevertheless, the party did not
re-apply to the Ministry of Justice on registration of the Party's
charter.
5. Section of Chapter 1.7 Civil society
Allegation The international NGO
community in Uzbekistan has continued to complain of harassment.
The Uzbek authorities claim that they introduced a new requirement
last year for international NGOs to re-register with the ministry
of justice in order to streamline the registration process. However
the new requirements have meant that the ministry of justice has
refused to re-register the Open Society Institute . . .
However, we believe that the new requirements
seriously curtail the activities of international NGOs by stipulating
that they can only use nominated state banks, must submit programmes
of work in advance for approval, and must invite Uzbek government
officials to all meetings.
On 10 February the EU wrote to the minister
of justice stressing the important role that NGOs play in society
and raised the issue again with the deputy minister of justice
in March. As acting local EU Presidency, our Ambassador Craig
Murray raised these and other human rights issues, with the Uzbek
foreign minister in April. We are still awaiting an official response.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side
The main purposes of the NGO's registration at the Ministry of
Justice of Uzbekistan with provision of the stated documents are
as follows:
1. It was necessary to bring the recording
of activities of International NGOs and registration requirements
into conformity with provisions of the acting legislation of Uzbekistan,
norms of international law and international practice.
For example, there is no practice of accreditation
of international NGOs in Germany with the Ministry of foreign
affairs. In Austria, registration of NGOs is carried out by the
Regional divisions of the Federal Ministry of Internal Affairs,
except for the main international organizations. Local administrations
also carry out registration of international nongovernmental and
foreign funds. The US practice of registration of international
NGOs testifies that any nongovernmental organization is registered
at the US State Department, except for International Red Cross
Committee. Pursuant to Chapter 3, Article 10 "On public organizations
and their associations" of the Latvian Law from 15 December
1992 "public and international organizations and their associations
are registered with the Ministry of Justice". Similar practice
of registration of international NGOs is established in many other
countries.
Thus, as international practice shows, each
state has the right to define as of its department, which will
be authorized to carry out registration and regulation of international
NGO's activity within its territory. In most cases, the state
bodies that are qualified in jurisprudence are authorized to register
such organizations.
It is important to state, that regional bodies
of the Ministry of Justice will also be involved in registration,
which we think, will facilitate activities of NGOs in regions
and their relations with local authorities in realization of their
projects whilst the numbers of international NGOs are increasing.
2. It is well known today, that taking into
account new threats and challenges linked with the spread of different
extremist forces and pursuant to the United Nations documents,
the states are obliged to carry out all necessary measures in
prevention of the additional sustaining and increasing number
of financing centers' of the groups, from which threat of terrorism
proceeds.
So, pursuant to the UN Security Council resolutions
£1,455 (in 2003) and £1,526 on 30 January 2004, all
states and regional organizations should promote realization of
obligations to counter terrorism and undertake immediate steps
to create interstate systems and procedures of producing reports
on transfer of currency, and to provide, that their national legislation
or administrative measures should allow to realize precautionary
measures concerning the safety of their citizens and other persons
and/or the organizations, which carry out their activity in the
territory of the concerned state.
This principle cannot be applied selectively.
Otherwise, there may appear opportunity for abuse of main purposes
of being NGO with weak parts to counter illegal transfer of overseas
financing, and also inadequate financial operations. Despite of
the numerous requirements of the UNSC on strengthening of the
state control on streams of financial assets, after 11 September
2001 only 170 million US dollars belonging to the terrorist organizations
totally has been frozen.
Whereas, pursuant to the UN data, the criminal
groups have annual income above two billion US dollars only for
realization of drugs from Afghanistan. Therefore, the list of
documents required from all international organizations at registration
is directed to implementation of accepted obligations of Uzbekistan
pursuant to the United Nations documents on fulfillment of which
the government of Uzbekistan should quarterly send the report
to the UN SC Counter-Terrorism Committee.
3. Efforts of anti money laundering and
criminal incomes are becoming more and more challengeable for
international community. Based on recommendations of the Financial
Action Task Force (FATF), the European Parliament, legislative
bodies of some western countries and the US are taking necessary
measures, including legal actions to counter money laundering.
Undertaking of similar measures is required from other states
also. Pursuant to Article 70 of the Agreement of 1996 on partnership
and cooperation between Uzbekistan and EU, Uzbekistan took obligation
to apply necessary measures by using its financial systems and
development of standards accepted by Community and International
forums, including FATF, to prevent money laundering, flow of incomes
from criminal activity or crimes connected with drug dealing.
Pursuant to Article 8 of the Law of Uzbekistan "On nongovernmental
noncommercial organizations", which directed to implement
the accepted international obligations, non-government and international
organizations are obliged to provide available information, concerning
the use of their property and financial resources. They are also
obliged to present reports on their activity to the agencies of
tax and statistics. To implement provisions of the above mentioned
Law, on 4 February 2004 the Cabinet of Ministers adopted Resolution
55, which enacts the system of reporting on attraction, development
and monitoring of the addressed use of financial assets of grants.
In accordance with the same resolution of the Cabinet of the Ministries,
grants will be exempt from payment of bank commission.
In order to create necessary conditions and
taking into account existing technical complexities with re-registration
of international NGOs, deadline for re-registration was prolonged
till 1 April 2004.
Corresponding divisions of the Ministry of Justice
of Uzbekistan have been instructed to render necessary assistance
to NGOs in the process of re-registration and to avoid every form
of bureaucracy.
The matter concerns normal and true process
of bringing the existing inconveniences in conformity with the
Law. An agiotage and fears are unreasonable—the measures
are being carried out not to impede activities of NGOs.
The application of the international non-governmental
and noncommercial organization "Open society Institute of
Fund of Assistance" dated 27 February 2004 on registration
of the representatives was considered in Ministry of Justice of
Uzbekistan.
During investigation of the representative's
documents and its activity since 1996 till present time it was
revealed that there were number of infringements of the legislation
of Uzbekistan.
In particular, the organization established
three educational resource centers for teachers and students of
universities of Uzbekistan without license for conducting educational
activity, which contradicts to the Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan
"On licensing separate types of activities" (12 May
2000) and to Resolution of Oliy Majlis of the Republic of Uzbekistan
222-11 "On the list of types of activity for realization
of which license is required" (12 May 2001) according to
which activity of non-government educational institutions in Uzbekistan
have to be licensed in accordance with the established procedure.
It also broke the Article 6 of the law of Uzbekistan
on public foundations. According to the article, foreign foundations
may open the representative offices in the territory of the Republic
of Uzbekistan whereas, while Paragraphs 5.2 and 9.1 of Charter
provide for activity expansion of representative office both in
the territory of Uzbekistan and the other countries.
Paragraph 11 of the Charter, which provides
the right for the representative office to grant and protect the
rights and interests of its members, contradicts to the Article
12 of the Law on non-governmental non-commercial organisations
and Article 2 of the Law on public foundation. In accordance with
these articles public foundations in the territory of the Republic
of Uzbekistan shall be founded by voluntary donations of physical
or legal entities and shall have no members. Activity of public
foundation shall pursue development of charitable, cultural, educational,
social and publicly beneficial purposes.
Representative office situated in private house
at 31 Zarbog St, Tashkent and this contradicts Article 600 Civil
Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, in accordance with which legal
entity may only use living apartments for the purpose of living
accommodation only.
We also would like to draw your attention to
non-transparent spending of organisation's financial resources
in Uzbekistan.
Despite numerous appeals of the Ministry of
Education, Foundation bought and distributed teaching and methodological
textbooks among educational institutions on social and humanitarian
subjects, distorting essence and content of social, economic and
political reforms of Uzbekistan.
Electronic library of 9 compact disks, released
by representative office in 2001, was distributed among higher
education institutions of Uzbekistan and included materials that
contradict to national interests of Uzbekistan and discredit policy
of the State.
Based on above-mentioned and according to Article
25 of the Law on non-governmental non-commercial organisations,
registration of representative office of International non-commercial
organisation "Open Society Institute" was declined.
At present, 76 non-governmental organisations
are registered with the Ministry of Justice, 11 international
and 17 international governmental organisations are registered
with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
During the Third Meeting of Uzbekistan-EU sub-committee
on justice, internal affairs, customs and other relevant issues,
Uzbek delegation provided the European side with informational
brochures in English, which included detailed information about
the situation with human rights in Uzbekistan.
6. Section of Chapter 1.7 Torture
Allegation In August 2003 the EU
raised with the Uzbek foreign minister the case of Orif Eshanov,
who died in custody on 15 May 2003 while detained on suspicion
of belonging to Hizb ut-Tahrir. None of the EU and UK lobbying
efforts has so far yielded a credible investigation into his death
by the Uzbek authorities.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side On
4 May 2003 O Eshonov distributed the leaflets of religious extremist
organization "Hizb ut-Tahrir".
On 6 May 2003 O Eshonov was detained as a suspect
in committing the crime stipulated by an article 159, part 1 of
the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan (an encroachment
on the existing constitutional system) and from May 9, 2003 was
held in custody.
During questioning of the suspect held in the
presence of solicitor (Mr F Khalilov), O Eshonov didn't deny the
fact of distributing the leaflets and explained that after detention
he was not victim of illicit methods of investigation.
On 10, 11 and 13 May 2003, being at the temporary
isolator of Karshi-city internal affairs unit, Eshonov had sudden
rise of the blood pressure and for this reason he was hospitalized
to the Kashkadarya region branch of the Republican science center
of first aid.
On the basis of medical inspection his diagnosis
was formulated as following: "Hypertensive illness of 2nd
level, hypertensive crisis of 1st level, heavy form of pulmonary
asthmas, chronic kidney insufficiency, anemia of heavy level,
chronic bronchitis and pneumonia".
Despite all undertaken medical treatment measures,
O Eshonov died in the named medical institution on May 15, 2003.
The Office of the Prosecutor of Karshi authorized
to carry out judicial- medical examination of the O.Eshonov's
death, which concluded, that his death was caused by hypertensive
illness, infringement of brain blood circulation and a hemorrhage
in a brain, physical injury indication was not revealed.
7. Sections of Chapter 1.7 Torture
Allegation In January 2004, the EU
asked the Uzbek authorities for further information on the cases
of Komoladhin Djumaniyozov and Nodijon Zamonov, who both died
in suspicious circumstances while detained in custody in August
and December 2003 respectively.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side On
29 November 2003 Kamoliddin Djumaniyazov, who arrived at the coach
station of Turtqul and didn't have identity documents, was detained
by the officers of internal affairs body and conveyed to the Turtqul's
internal affairs department with the purpose to establish his
identity. Following the checking of his clothes carried out in
the presence of witnesses, seven grams of drug resembling matter
was found into his pocket. As K Djumaniyazov explained, it was
marijuana and was in his personal use.
Forensic chemical and medical examination carried
out in the laboratory of Khorezm regional forensic medical office
established that in various parts of the Djumaniyazov's body and
his mouth there were drugs related to the hashish.
In this regard and taking into account the evidences,
the criminal case was brought K Djumaniyazov in accordance with
the article 276 part 2 <<a>> (illegal possession of
drugs without purpose of selling) and investigation started. K
Djumaniyazov himself in accordance with the approval of Prosecutor
of Turtqul region was arrested.
7 December 2003, while being in detention at
the temporary isolator of Turtqul's internal affairs department
at approximately 5.45 am K Djumaniyazov hung himself by using
his underclothes.
Official investigation was carried out on this
case and several officers of internal affairs agency were punished
in a disciplinary order for neglect of and careless attitude towards
their duties. Materials of the official investigation were sent
to the Prosecutor's office of the Republic of Karakalpakstan in
the course of supervision.
On 17 December 2003 on the basis of materials
of pre-investigation checking in accordance with the article 207
part 3 (official negligence) the criminal case was brought into
action by the Prosecutor's office of the Republic of Karakalpakstan.
Now investigation is going on in accordance with established procedure.
The information regarding Nodijon Zamonov will be
provided additionally.
8. Section of Chapter 1.7 Torture
Allegation We shall continue to raise
these and other suspected cases of torture with the Uzbek authorities
and to ask for impartial and transparent investigations into deaths
in custody.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side
The government of Uzbekistan in the person of its competent organs
is ready to co-operate in conducting independent investigations
of complains and other appeals regarding use of torture which
had negative social, including international resonance.
Independent investigations were carried out
in 2004 on "Shelkovenko case" and "Arnasay case"
with the participation of the international experts, including
representatives of Human Rights Watch and Freedom House. The results
of death conditions of Shelkovenko and Umarov (so called "Arnasay
case") proved inconsistency of claims about involvement of
law enforcement organs to their death. From those cases, it may
be concluded that international non-governmental organizations
on human rights, including Human Rights Watch are often guided
by inadequate information and their activity, in most cases, is
directed towards deliberate discreditation of human rights policy
of the government of Uzbekistan. It is necessary to note that
conducting of the two above-mentioned investigations is just the
try-out of the institution of independent investigation and it
is not the exclusion from the rules.
9. Section of Chapter 1.7 Torture
Allegation A national action plan
on torture, signed by the Uzbek prime minister on 9 March 2004,
was a positive step. However, publication of the plan was severely
delayed and it fails to mention the recommendations made in the
UN special rapporteur's report of November 2002.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side Several
positions from the recommendations made in the UN special rapporteur's
report have already been implemented. For example, article 235
of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan was adopted
in its new addition, the offence of torture was included into
the criminal legislation and its definition of torture completely
corresponds to article 1 UN Convention against Torture and other
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
It is necessary to note that the recommendations
made by the UN special rapporteur are directed to the implementation
of the UN Convention against Torture by Uzbekistan. Therefore,
the Plan of the Government is aimed to implement not only the
UN special rapporteur's recommendations, but also the UN Convention
against Torture as a whole.
10. Section of Chapter 1.7 Torture
Allegation However, we believe she
(Fatima Mukadirova) may have suffered persecution for publicising
the case of her son. Our Ambassador to Tashkent Craig Murray publicly
criticised the Uzbek authorities' handling of Mukadirova's case
in BBC media interviews. We believe this played a significant
role in bringing the case to the attention of the international
community.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side Fatima
Mukadirova, was born in 1943 and was a member of a forbidden religious
extremist organization "Hizb ut-Tahrir" in Uzbekistan,
was engaged in propaganda of ideas of the "Hizb ut-Tahrir"—on
violent change of secular system of Uzbekistan and creation of
Islamic khalifat. She illegally distributed printed materials
of extremist nature, which openly appealed to overthrow Constitutional
system, to infringe territorial integrity of the Republic of Uzbekistan
by seizure of political power and creation of the Islamic state.
F Mukadirova carried out her propaganda among
population, especially women, and attempted to bring them into
"Hizb ut-Tahrir". She also participated in organizing
illicit meetings of the members of the organization.
Asserting democratic transformations and civil
reforms in Uzbekistan as inappropriate to dogmas of Shariat, F
Mukadirova spreaded slanderous fabrications and unreasonable hearings
about activities of Uzbek Government.
Taking such kind of actions, Mukadirova pursued
a specific goal—to cause splash of disorder, incite non-authorized
and spontaneous meetings and launch offences on representatives
of legal authorities.
F Mukadirova had already been conditionally
prosecuted for her illegal actions in 2001 according to the decision
of Shayhontohur Area Court of Tashkent which was adopted pursuant
to articles 159 part 3 (an encroachment on the existing constitutional
system of Uzbekistan), 244-1 part 3 paragraph "a" (publishing
or spreading materials containing threat to public security and
public order) and 244 part 1 (mass disorders) of Criminal Code
of Uzbekistan. However, she did not follow the way of correction
and did not make corresponding conclusions. She continued criminal
activity by representing danger to calm and a peaceful life of
the population of Uzbekistan.
On 4 September 2003, as a result of sanctioned
search of F Mukadirova's house, held by officers of the Central
administrative board of Criminal investigation department and
fight against terrorism under the Main Department of Internal
Affairs of Tashkent at participation of the witnesses, there were
found printed materials of the forbidden religious extremist organization
"Hizb ut-Tahrir". Among them there were leaflets, a
book called "Democracy—the law for nonbelievers"
and other extremists literature of anti-Semitic contents.
Based on mentioned evidences, on 5 September
2003 Department of Investigation of the Main Department of Internal
Affairs of Tashkent brought the criminal case against F Mukadirova
and she was charged with violation of Article 159 part 3 paragraph
"b" (an encroachment on the existing constitutional
system of Uzbekistan) of the Criminal Code. She was condemned
to preventive punishment to sign a statement of an appropriate
behavior.
Despite this, F Mukadirova continued to carry
out destructive activity, distributing extremist materials, in
which she called to membership into "Hizb ut-Tahrir".
On 19 October 2003 enforcement's units of the Main Department
of Internal Affairs of Tashkent carried out authorized re-inspection
at Mukadirova's house. During that search it was again revealed
and withdrawn a multitude number of (above 370 copies) leaflets
of religious extremism. Based on evidences and extremist materials,
criminal case was re-instituted against Mukadirova. Found leaflets
were—"The opportunity of America's access to oil—treachery
towards the Creator, the Prophet and muslims", "Muslims
cannot be friends of Jews", "Treachery of Palestinians
by the Arabic and Muslim governors", "Danger of global
American domination and Khalifat, as a unique guarantee against
it", "Missionary storm", "Difficulties of
creation of the Islamic state", etc.
Both cases were combined into one and the preventive
punishment regarding F Mukadirova was changed into holding in
custody.
The conclusion of the Committee of religious
affairs under the Cabinet of the Ministries of Uzbekistan (NoAB-050
on 9 September 2003 and NoAB-060 on 4 November 2003) said that
evidences found at F Mukadirova's house contained ideas of religious
fundamentalism, extremism and separatism, appeal to anti-constitutional
actions and change of present governing system in Uzbekistan and
create "the Islamic state of khalifat" which would be
based on ideology of religious fundamentalism and religious laws.
Tashkent's Shayhontohur Area criminal Court
investigated evidences of F Mukadirova case and held inquiries
with S Razzokov, U Pulatov, V Hidiraliev, O Dadaboev, B Kurbonov,
A Ajdarov, A Mohirov, D Tursunboev, S Avazova and L Avazova. Taking
into account the fact, that earlier F Mukadirova had been condemned
conditionally for commitment of similar crimes, and she did not
draw the conclusions about committed and continued her illegal
activity in the religious-extremist organization with the purpose
of undermining the constitutional system of the Uzbek society,
on 12 February 2004 F Mukadirova was found guilty on charges of
crimes stipulated by Articles 159 part 3 paragraph "a,b",
244-1 part 3 the paragraph "a" and 59 Criminal Code
of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Pursuant to Article 60, particularly
combining the verdict of the court of 5 November 2001, Mukhadirova
was sentenced to six years of imprisonment.
On 18 February 2004 F Mukadirova appealed on
the verdict of Shayhontohir Area Court to the Tashkent City Court.
Appeal was heard on 24 February 2004 at Tashkent
City Court and pursuant to the Articles 57 and 60 of the Criminal
Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan decision of the Shayhontohur
Area Court was changed to the penalty and F Mukadirova was released
from custody.
At the same time it is necessary to note that
F Mukadirova was sentenced for imprisonment not for her statements
regarding her son's (M Avazov) death, but for unconstitutional
actions which are considering in many states as a serious criminal
crime.
11. Section of Chapter 1.7 Freedom of
expression
Allegation The UK believe that the
serious allegations made against him (Ruslan Sharipov) may have
been politically motivated. It is not clear if this move was simply
procedural for prisoners who have served one-third of their sentence.
Mr Sharipov has now been released on probation, but is effectively
under house arrest.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side On
13 August 2003 pursuant to the verdict of the court, Ruslan Sharipov
was charged with criminal offence for entering into sexual intercourse
with people of minor age (Article 128 of the Criminal Code of
Uzbekistan). Presence of criminal action was proved during judicial
inquiry.
Despite seriousness of the above-mentioned crime,
which is persecuted and condemned in European countries in particular,
penalty of five and half years imprisonment for Sharipov has numerously
been revised in his favour based on principles of humanity and
individual approach to consider the criminal case.
For instance, in accordance with the Article
113 of the Criminal Code of Uzbekistan, on 10 March 2004, after
completion ¼ part of his sentence, he was sent by the Court
to the colony-settlement, and on 23 June 2004, remaining period
of the sentence was replaced by correctional labour in his home
town Bukhara with 30% deduction from his salary in favour of State.
After the transfer late August 2004, Sharipov,
violating his obligations and breaking the law, ran away to the
United States of America where he is staying at present.
12. Section of Chapter 1.7 Judicial system
Allegation On 9 April, an Uzbek court
sentenced Muhiddin Kurbanov, chairman of the banned opposition
party Birlik in Jizzak province and chairman of the Human Rights
Society of Uzbekistan in Zarbdor district, to three-and-half years'
imprisonment for possession of drugs and firearms. This was in
spite of the prosecution's evidence being discredited in the courtroom.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side In
accordance with the verdict of Zarbdor district Court of Jizzakh
Region, Muydinjon Kurbanov was charged with Article 248, p1 (illegal
possession of weapon, ammunition, explosives or explosive assembly),
Article 276, p2. <a> (illegal production, purchase, warehousing
and other actions with drugs and psychological substances) and
Article 59 of Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan and
was sentenced to three and a half years. At the same time, preventive
punishment, until the verdict came into force, was left as a written
undertaking to behave properly
According to Court's verdict Kurbanov was found
guilty of illegal possession of weapons, ammunition and 19.82
g. of kuknar without relevant permission.
On 4 May 2004, Board of Appeal of Jizzakh Regional
Court changed the Verdict from 9 April 2004 and replaced prison
sentence with three and a half years to payment of fine.
13. Section of Chapter 1.7 Photograph
over the section "Judicial system"
Allegation Relatives and friends
of Andrei Shelkovenko, who allegedly died from police torture,
mourn over his body at a funeral in Gazalkent, Uzbekistan, May
2004.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side In
reality, this man committed suicide in investigation cell on 4
May 2004 by hanging himself.
This fact was confirmed by the group of independent
international experts from the USA and Canada, who, after participating
in the supported by the Freedom House medical re-examination of
the body of Andrei Shelkovenko on 27-28 May 2004. It was also
established that nor torture or brutal treatment had been used
with Mr. Shelkovenko at the time when he was taken into custody.
Corresponding conclusion of the experts was announced
at the press conference on 31 May 2004 in Tashkent, which was
attended by representatives of embassies of the US and some European
countries, Human Rights Watch and number of local and foreign
media, including BBC, Associated Press and United Press International.
Human Rights Watch, which initiated re-examination
of the body, in its press release dated 1 June 2004 acknowledged
that the statement from 21 May 2004 indicating on use of torture
towards A Shelkovenko was made on groundless conclusions.
14. Section of Chapter 1.7 UK and EU
actions
Allegation However, the EU reiterated
its concern about the human rights situation in Uzbekistan, .
. . noted that the implementation of the UN special rapporteur's
recommendations had been slow, and that President Karimov had
still not publicly condemned the use of torture.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side Torture
in all its forms was publicly condemned by representatives of
three branches of power. In March 2003 during the meeting with
representatives of Diplomatic Corps and foreign journalists State
Advisor to President Mr Kamilov made a statement on the intention
of the Uzbek government to fight against torture and other forms
of cruel treatment. Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment were also publicly condemned by all law
enforcement agencies.
At the session of the highest hierarchy of the
court system—Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan
on 19 December 2003, use of torture during investigation was condemned.
In decree on Practise of Application of Law by Courts in Securing
Protection for Suspects adopted by Supreme Court, the attention
of Inquiry and Investigation bodies and Courts was directed towards
the necessity of strict fulfilment of requirements of international
and national legislation on human rights. Decree prohibits implementation
of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment in the process of gathering, checking and evaluating
of evidence.
At the same time with reference to the concept
of torture, definition, used in Convention against torture, was
given. This position was also noted during meeting of Coordinating
Council under General Prosecutor Office of Uzbekistan on 29 May
2004.
On 22 May 2003 at the collegial meeting of the
Ministry of Internal Affairs the decision was taken on recognition
of inadmissibility in activity of the Ministry of Internal Affairs
of any facts of breach, infringement of human rights in any form
including torture. On 24 June 2003 on the bases of the Resolution
the collegial meeting issued an Order of the Ministry of Internal
Affairs No 187 "On establishing of Central Commission on
adherences of human rights".
As enclosure for this order was elaborated and
approved as a Program of measures on strengthening of legality
and provision of observance of rights and freedom of people in
activity of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Such Commission
was created in all branches of the Ministry of Internal Affairs
in the regions and its educational institutions. On a monthly
base these commissions inform the Central Commission of the Ministry
of Internal Affairs about realization of their activity where
the due information is analysed and summarized. At the mentioned
collegial meeting of the Ministry of Internal Affairs torture
was condemned in any its forms. There was also declared that top
officials of the Ministry of Internal Affairs do not tolerate
torture and similar brutal treatment from the direction of its
officers and whoever is involved in such cases will take personal
responsibilities.
The Ministry of Internal Affairs has also created
and established the conception of creation and functioning of
independent commissions, which would provide investigation of
the facts of torture and other brutal, inhuman or disgracing treatment
and punishment.
All above mentioned measures and decisions were
published in the printing house of Departments and the republic
press.
15. Section of Chapter 1.7 Looking ahead
Allegation Bilaterally, and in conjunction
with the EU, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in
Europe and international partners, we shall continue to press
Uzbekistan in the year ahead to take practical steps towards democratisation
and respect for human rights.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side It
contradicts to common standards of intergovernmental relations,
which intend, in particular, a mutual respect and non-intervention
into domestic affairs.
According to provisions of Agreement on partnership
and cooperation signed between Uzbekistan and EU in June 1996
Uzbekistan firmly implements its obligations including securing
of political and economical freedom. This Agreement envisages
a development of relations of partnership and cooperation with
EU and its members but not exerting pressure, which is considered
as intervention into domestic affairs.
Uzbekistan is a full member of OSCE and in a
number of other international organizations.
16. Section of Chapter 1.7 Looking ahead
Allegation The UK will push for the
abolition of the death penalty and lobby on individual cases in
co-operation with our EU partners.
Refutation and clarification of Uzbek side In
the cases of death penalty Uzbekistan adheres to the concept of
justice and takes it into consideration of requisitions of common
international standards in the field of death penalty.
For the last 12 years in Uzbekistan there is
observed a tendency to decline in number of crimes for commitment
of which can be used death penalty. It corresponds in practise
of many other democratic developed countries. So in 1991 Criminal
Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan established provisions the
death penalty in 33 types of crimes. Launched on 1 April 1995
Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan made provision for
such punishment by this time for 13 crimes. In 1998 the death
penalty was excluded from other five articles of Criminal Code
and left for eight articles. After passing in 2001 bill "on
insertion of amendments into criminal, procedural criminal codes
and Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan about administrative responsibilities
because of liberalisation of criminal punishments", the death
penalty was excluded also from four articles of Criminal Code
of Uzbekistan and leaved for four articles.
After launching the mentioned new legislative
act a tendency of decline of death penalty sentences as following:
— in 2000 less to 22,7% then
in 1999;
— in 2001 less to 21,8% than
in 2000;
— in 2002 less to 44,8% than
in 2001.
Since 2003 when Parliament of the Republic of
Uzbekistan introduced amendments into Criminal Code the death
penalty now is used two crimes only: for terrorism and premeditated
murder in aggravating circumstances.
On the based of acting legislation the death
penalty prohibited relative to man older 60 years, woman and persons
younger than 18 years old.
Moreover persons do not institute to criminal
proceedings in full measure when they are in the state of diminished
irresponsibility at the time of committing crime.
The courts pass sentence in the form of the
death penalty when it is conditioned with exceptional circumstances,
aggravating responsibilities and also if the crime is committed
by exceptionally dangerous criminals.
As in many other countries the Institute of
forgiveness functions in Uzbekistan. Any person convicted to the
death penalty has a right to apply to the head of the state through
the commission on forgiveness at the President of the Republic
of Uzbekistan.
Along with this, our justice system has practice
cases where death penalty in many cases was commuted to imprisonment
terms after appeal of sentence. For example, in 2002 more than
20 death penalty cases were commuted to other sentences. Currently
13 persons are kept in the Prison system whose death penalty was
commuted to imprisonment in the course of forgiveness and the
death penalty of 197 people was commuted to imprisonment.
Today death penalty is used in 64 countries
including USA, Japan, South Korea, China, India and others. Even
in countries where death penalty has been repealed or declared
about its moratorium the opinion of the public is not same positive.
Thereupon with the purpose to clarify the opinion
of the population of Uzbekistan on death penalty in April-May
2004 was conducted public opinion poll.
According to the results of the poll, the majority
of the citizens in our country (78%2) are believed that using
the death penalty as an extreme penalty is admissible and essential
in case of grave crime. Citizens of the country consider death
penalty as a deserved punishment for committing misdeed crime.
Moreover an opinion poll shows that the absolute majority of citizens
(75%3) believe that the presence of the death penalty promotes
containment of the increase in crime.
During the poll, opinion of population regarding
declaring moratorium to the death penalty in Uzbekistan was also
explored. In spite of the fact that the moratoria is a temporary
phenomenon rather than permanent and one of its aim is moral preparation
for the public to change their view on the extreme penalty the
opinion of citizens on this issue was negative. So more than half
of the questioned people of Uzbekistan -56,2% are against introducing
the moratorium to the death penalty. They believe that there should
not be declared moratoria for the death penalty as it may provoke
increase of number of crime in country including in committing
especially grave crimes.
So the results of opinion poll showed that now
the majority population of the Republic of Uzbekistan are against
repealing of the death penalty and declaration of the moratoria
for it.
HE Tukhtapulat Riskiev
Ambassador of the Republic of Uzbekistan
11 December 2004
| 
