ANALYTIC REPORT: The state of freedom of speech in four Central Asian countries (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan) based on monitoring of violations of freedom of speech

Country analysis briefs, 2004

1. The state of freedom of speech in general

1. The state of freedom of speech in general  (up)

The state of freedom of speech in four Central Asian countries remained unsatisfactory for the II quarter (April – June, 2004). Generally it tends to get worse.

Adil Soz’ monitoring documented 636 direct and indirect free speech violations, infringements on rights of journalists in the II quarter as compared to 586 in the I quarter, including four attempted murders, 8 assaults and mass media outlets. Five times journalists were brutally beaten. They received 12 death threats. Thirty seven times journalists were prevented from doing their job. Their creative process was obstructed with demands to censor publications in 38 instances.

Vast majority of these incidents are deemed to be criminal affairs. However there were not many indictments brought against those, who committed crimes against journalists and mass media. At the time, 17 criminal charges were brought against journalists and mass media. Predominant number of these were defamatory charges filed by officials, i.e. based on ‘protection of honor and dignity’. Since the beginning of the II quarter, 62 lawsuits were filed and 11 administrative proceedings were opened against journalists and mass media. They prove we were not accidentally placed among the worst in press freedom rankings. In the U.S. human rights organization “Freedom House” survey Kyrgyzstan was ranked 156th, Tajikistan 160th, Kazakhstan 161st, Uzbekistan 182nd and Turkmenistan 190th. Noteworthy,  prosperous Kazakhstan was placed lower than Tajikistan, which was the civil war.

Senior officials, members of the Parliament, former and acting officials, and big businessmen set a trend of complete disregard for journalists’ and mass media rights once again. Furthermore, they attempted to teach journalists, i.e. citizens, how to live, what to think and write about. For instance, Islam Karimov said in a speech dedicated to the Press Day: “In today’s globalizing world, where the struggle for people’s minds gets heated, mass media are (found themselves before) placed before important decisions to be made: The most important of them is to protect true popular interests. To resist information attacks on our country, to bring some of foreign glib talkers to light, those who try to undermine the goals we stated, reveal those, who mask their faces to be considered wiser than anyone else, to be considered as our closest friends and advisors, and try to persuade that they know better, than we do, our national traditions and way of living- all these elements add up to practical protection of popular interests.

It can also be illustrated by the incident with the Kyrgyz Parliament, which rejected a President’s bill, designed to annul clause for criminal defamation by journalists and increase state tariffs on submission of protection suits.

Fortunately, the II quarter indicated the opposite trends. Journalists seem to be less afraid of authorities, who continued to act in dictatorial and arbitrary manner toward the media. The ruling elite split into constructive and radical opposition. Nongovernmental civic sector got its start.

The Constitutional Council of Kazakhstan, whose members are appointed by the President, chairmen of Majilis and Senate, found the draft media law partially unconstitutional, being pressured by international and local human rights and journalists’ organizations.

The draft law was lobbied by the Government and later approved by the Parliament. The cochairman of radical opposition party was appointed as the information minister; he immediately announced his intent to develop completely different draft media law, to fit international freedom of speech standards.

The President of Kazakhstan announced a program to democratize country in terms of politics. In number of countries, public committees were founded to protect journalists or media outlets, who suffer arbitrariness by state officials. Open letters were sent and public statements were made to heads of law enforcement agencies and authorities.

Certainly, the abovementioned processes proceed at different pace in four countries. To illustrate, civic society struggling with conservatives to repeal the criminal defamation clause, lost the fight in Kyrgyzstan. However, there are still hopes that the emerged trend is not merely a burst in electorate activity and will not fade away after the election.

2. Kazakhstan  (up)

It remains to be seen if the authorities have true intentions to liberalize media laws and democratize media business. Unfortunately the opposite is taking place. The standing committee for the development of civil society vanished before it managed to implement a single proposal. The media council under the President was not further promoted. The Constitutional Council, which mentioned the constitutional guarantees of free speech and international standards in the descriptive part of its decree, found the new media law unconstitutional to a small extent and only formally, by virtue of legal grounds. The Presidential Administration of the RK filed a lawsuit against Assandi Times newspaper based on protection of honor and dignity, demanding 100 million tenge-compensation (USD 700 thousand) in damages. Now it became known that the court of the first instance declared void the editorial opinion about presidential administration involvement in publication and distribution of false edition of the newspaper, and ordered that the editorial board pay 50 million tenge-compensation and apologize to the presidential administration. Concurrently, the property, financial assets and bank accounts of the newspaper were frozen. Such decisions can hardly be called fair, because they imply sanctions imposed on the newspaper, which inevitably will trigger the bankruptcy and complete shutdown of the newspaper.

The monitoring documented 311 reports on direct and indirect infringements on rights of journalists and mass media outlets for three months in the second quarter, as compared to 247 reports in the first quarter. Three journalists were brutally beaten. They received 4 death threats. Ten times journalists were obstructed from doing job by force. There were 18 instances, where their creative process was obstructed, including demands to censor publications, 112 instances where journalists were denied information of public importance and prevented from receiving it. These instances amount to a crime provided by article 155 of the Criminal Code of the RK and an offense, provided by article 352 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. However over five years of monitoring, there was not a single case opened under the above articles.

At the same time, law enforcement agencies treat media outlets in a different manner. Mikhailov, an owner of Diapazon newspaper, was sentenced to 1 year in prison for failing to comply with the court order. Criminal defamation charges were filed by a deputy against Navigator web-newspaper. The prosecutor’s office restored long standing Sadykov’s case (stubborn journalist), accused of hooliganism. Two courts dismissed the case, as the limitation term expired. But the prosecutor’s office wants to see him convicted. Such incidents give small hopes to be optimistic. The situation unlikely to be changed unless the laws of the RK are brought in line with international freedom of speech standards.

3. Kyrgyzstan  (up)

As mentioned earlier, Kyrgyzstan- is the only Central Asian country, the constitution of which lays ban on adoption of laws, restricting free speech. The country doesn’t have as many violations of mass media and journalists’ rights as neighbor countries do. However mass media face rather hard problems and difficulties.

The rest of media laws preserved the approaches and norms pertinent to the Soviet legal system and thus contradict the Constitution. The president submitted a number of modest draft laws, which aim to strengthen the freedom of speech, distribution and obtaining of information, but the Parliament rejected each of them. As a result, it appears that both sides do nothing to develop the information space, and status quo is fine for everybody. Press secretary of the President believes journalists themselves were guilty in rejecting a draft law on removal of criminal liability for defamation and insult. He claimed that some opposition media, which constantly complain about trials didn’t support the draft law: “These mass media outlets are interested in lawsuits, which were brought against them… now we have clear understanding that scandals are only to their financial benefit.” This statement is unlikely to be true. It is doubtful that publications can gain any benefit as multi-thousand dollar suits brought by officials against them are satisfied. TRC Pyramida having received all licenses and permissions couldn’t broadcast for 1.5 months.

Nothing principally has changed for journalists and mass media outlets. The monitoring documented 64 direct and indirect violations of rights of mass media and journalists, stipulated by the national legislation. Journalists received two death threats; Vecherniy Bishkek staff received a letter warning of a bomb, planted in the building. At the time assistant to prosecutor of Pervomaysk district promised to find a way to muzzle Babakulov, because the journalist didn’t stop recording an open court session. Journalists were obstructed from doing their job in three instances. Some ten journalists were denied information of public importance. Journalist Imankulov was sentenced on libel charges brought by Orazaliyev. The court ordered him to pay USD 240 in moral damages. Deputy Kadyrbekov filed a lawsuit against Turaliyev, consequently the latter paid compensation equivalent to $710. Deputy Sabirov brought criminal charges against journalist Zhamgyrchiyev. The deputy demanded that Kyrgyz Ruhu and Uchkun newspapers pay USD 115,000 each, and journalists Zheeenaliyev and Zhamgyrchiev- USD 23 thousand each in moral damages. Deputy Abdurasulov filed only a complain so far.

Russian Institute for Problems of Information Laws ranked Kyrgyzstan among the worst Central Asian countries, in terms of free mass media based on results of 11 researches. The only thing we are glad about is civic sector, which gradually gets bigger.

4. Tajikistan  (up)

Tajikistan is not the exception to the rule among the Central Asian states. Similar to other Central Asian countries, freedom of speech and freedom of press in Tajikistan are formal, rather than real. The lower chamber of the Parliament passed the law initiated by the President to exempt mass media from value added tax; concurrently the General Prosecutor’s office accused Nerui Suhan newspaper of all mortal sins. “The General Prosecutor’s office ascertained that the content of materials was aimed to incite interethnic and international confrontations, attacks on honor and dignity of citizens, including the President, deputies of the Parliament and other officials”. Information and analytic department on mass media under the Presidential Apparatus accused Internews-Network of illegal production of TV products and threatening information security of the country.

This rigid algorithm gives birth to cruelty. Journalists killed, assaulted as well as attempts to prevent them from doing job by force seem to be routine here.

It was a miracle that Zafar Saidov, a director of the news agency “Khabar” was not shot dead by an unidentified individual. Another unidentified individual called M. Idizoda, a reporter for Nerui Suhan newspaper and promised to kill him.

Indignant readers were trying to kill journalist Dikayev (the readers were angry about his article on moral decadence among Kulyab girls) but he survived. There was no single case opened.  Officials tried to prevent journalists from doing their job in 6 instances. Muhitdinov, deputy mayor of Dushanbe, prohibited Rakhmatullo, a reporter for Ruzi Nav newspaper, to cover a protest staged by fat and oil plant employees; police officers took away his camera. Nabiyev, head of the mayor administration, prohibited correspondents for Persian service of radio BBC and radio Ozodi from attending a press conference. The monitoring documented six instances, where their creative process was obstructed, e.g. Rustamova, governor of Gorno-Badahshan autonomous region, during a session devoted to TV and radio broadcasting, demanded that all the programs comply with hukumat policy.

Honchonova, deputy governor of Ishkashim district repeats her words: Zindachi – is a state newspaper and tribune for hukumat, journalists have no right to write anything against hukumat. Not infrequently officials along with intervening with creative process of journalists, insult them. For instance, two officers of the Ministry of Emergencies, colonel Radjabov and deputy colonel Mirzoyev demanded that Burhanov, a reporter for Ruzi Nav newspaper, simultaneously saying offending words.

Journalists were restricted or denied information of public importance in 35 instances; five times they were accused of being partial and biased.

In view of the aforementioned incidents, lawsuits against mass media produce dissonance. There were only 4 of such during the second quarter. Amirov, a deputy chairman of the city court filed the suit against journalist Jurayev for an article “There is justice over the court”.

Zoiirov, chairman of social-democratic party filed a lawsuit against Jumhuriyat state newspaper, for revealing some facts about his personal life. Gulov, a mayor of Vahdat city filed a lawsuit against journalist Rasulov for an article “Gulov and Co, or the shadow of messiah”.  On the whole, the monitoring documented 88 reports in the second quarter comparing to 81 in the first quarter.

Nevertheless nongovernmental sector in the country gradually grows. Representatives of human rights and journalist organizations dare declare themselves. State administration officials are invited to participate in forums.

5. Uzbekistan  (up)

Democratic processes and civic institutions in Uzbekistan were similar to other countries in Central Asia. Since the Independence Day, authorities have had at least to maneuver. President Karimiv, was highly critical of all 5 political parties; he attributed common features to them, by calling them similar. He also said during the break between the Parliamentary sessions: “Human rights are a cornerstone in the democratization processes everywhere. Let’s be more precise, if we violate human rights, or arrested someone and detained any journalist. Let’s talk about issues we are able to share opinions on, where I may say: “Yes, it happens, yes, these [happenings] are conditioned by such factors, interests and our position.”

At the first look, it is hard to say what caused the words of the sophisticated politician: play, state of being uninformed or naive.

Let’s remind, article 12 of the Kazakh Constitution, which, we are convinced, reflect international standards: “Human rights and liberties (including free speech) are the natural rights, considered to be inalienable and absolute, they determine the essence and application of laws and other normative legal acts”. In other words, human rights and liberties don’t overwhelm democratization process, but rather the latter is being introduced to observe and prioritize rights and liberties.”

Actually we need to be more specific. Most of Uzbek mass media are controlled by the state, their editors therefore are appointed by the Presidential Administration. All mass media should not only register, but reregister every year. The media law in Uzbekistan was amended with more limitations imposed on mass media, when criticizing the president. Moreover, Tajibayeva, a hokim of Uzbekistan region, prohibited all human rights activists and foreign journalists from coming to the region.

One journalist and one human rights activist suffered car accidents, which was intentionally planned. Nobody was killed the accidents. “Human Rights Watch” says activists were beaten by unknown individuals in two cases before the protect action. They received two threatening calls from law enforcement agencies, which serve basis to assume that these incidents were politically motivated. Four times journalists were threatened, e.g. unknown individuals tried to force independent journalist Kuziyev to leave for Russia, by saying he will be troubled. An employee for SNB, which called himself Gulam, threatened Karayev, a correspondent for Britain JWPR and Golos UR Iran radio with instituting extremism charges against him, unless he stops distributing materials about dissidents’ arrests after the series of terrorist attacks. Monitoring documented 11 instances, where journalists’ creative process was obstructed, including demands to censor the publications.

Craig Murray, Ambassador Plenipotentiary in Uzbekistan, was honest and least prejudice, when defining free speech situation in Uzbekistan. In his address to the community members, organized in the Ulukbek Park, he said:

“I would not praise Uzbek Government for the media support. It could ensure free speech, if granted freedom to independent mass media outlets, whose editors are not Government appointees. But democracy is impossible without giving opponents access to election. But the Uzbek Government doesn’t believe in democracy, and now it has no chances to become democratic. We are told that the process reflects Uzbek traditions and mentality. When one family is in power gets rich and population is sinking into impoverishment, I don’t think it is Uzbek tradition. Uzbek people love freedom as all the others. But the secrete police operates in the country, and people are being thrown into jails for their beliefs. Uzbek mass media write nothing about this. There are many educated and trained people. It happens not because Uzbek journalists are unable to do their job and they lack professionalism, but because they are stopped from doing it, they don’t want, because they fear.”

6. Conclusion  (up)

The analysis above demonstrated that the state of freedom of speech for the recent 3 months and for the half year in all four countries got no better. It tends to get worse, as it used to do. All the declared steps to protect free speech turned out to be a government trick when practically tested. These attempts on the one hand give less space to maneuver, but on the other show that the government simply lacks good will. Public human rights, professional and entrepreneurial associations originate not from the emptiness. It means, citizens began to understand that they are creators and defenders of their rights and that political and economic progress is impossible without freedom of speech and information exchange.

contents