ТУРОНЗАМИН

CIVICUS: Civil Society Watch Monthly Bulletin, October 2006, No. 19

UZBEKISTAN: A year of civic repression

CSW interviews Shuhrat Ahmadjonov, an Uzbek activist and director of the Tashkent branch of the Congress of Democratic Uzbekistan

On 13-14 May 2005, the government of Uzbekistan brutally suppressed a popular uprising in the eastern city of Andijan and the surrounding area. President Islam Karimov announced his forces had acted to end a revolt by Islamist extremists, yet the hundreds of victims – possibly as many as 750 – were mostly unarmed civilians, including many children. While civil society in Uzbekistan was restricted before the uprising in Andijan, it has experienced increasing repression in the past year.

Shuhrat Ahmadjonov tells us about the challenges facing civil society in Uzbekistan.

1. Could you describe the situation for civil society in Uzbekistan?

The Uzbek parliament passed the Non-Profit, Non-governmental Organisations Law in 1991. In the past 15 years, the police regime in Uzbekistan has been trying to seize control of NGOs. National and international organisations have to register with the Ministry of Justice, while regional and local ones have to register with regional branches of the Ministry. Truly independent organisations especially those that focus on advocacy and the defence of human rights are systematically denied registration. Before the May 2005 events, about 5000 NGOs were registered. The number hasn’t changed dramatically. However, most of the currently registered NGOs are complacent with the regime and pursue uncontroversial programmes.

A poignant example of the way the NGO law is used to stifle dissent is the case of the Uzbekistan Society of Human Rights, which was denied registration six times since 1992. Seven of its activists were arrested in the aftermath of the May events and its secretary general has now obtained political asylum in France. Human rights defenders also face constant harassment and intimidation from employees of the Ministry of Interior and the State Security Service. In September 2006, the German Ambassador to Uzbekistan organised a meeting with 11 Uzbek human rights defenders. Due to the intimidation, home arrests and illegal detention of a number of invitees, only five were able to attend the event.

[ In 2003, Shuhrat co-founded the non-profit organisation Circle of Democrats. At the launching ceremony, he was elected secretary general by the remaining 14 members. After the Andijan crisis in 2005, the state security forces increased their intimidation and harassment of the Circle of Democrats members, forcing the organisation to suspend its activities. In December 2005, Karimov approved new legislation “About Amendments to the Uzbek Criminal Code and the Uzbek Code on Administrative Responsibility”, which imposes hefty fines on those attending unlicensed meetings, forcing the organisation to dismantle. ]

2. Could you explain the legal and administrative restrictions facing civil society in Uzbekistan?

The recent amendments to the NGO law, which were passed by both houses of Parliament in December 2005, place a number of hurdles on NGO activity. Article 239 stipulates that organisations which disrupt public order, fail to register, engage in political activities or in activities perceived as contrary to their declared missions, support political parties or mass movements, use unregistered symbols, fail to disclose their activities and financial reports to the Ministry of Justice are liable to pay hefty fines. Fines to be paid by employees of organisations, who are deemed in violation of article 239, range from 50 to 100 times their salaries.

3. What was the situation for civil society like before the demonstrations in Andijan in May 2005?

As a result of over 10 years of political activism and increased international pressure, in 2003 the government opened-up political space by allowing the establishment of a number of human rights/advocacy NGOs and by tolerating meetings of opposition parties. Prior to the Andijan crisis, over a dozen international human rights organisations operated in Uzbekistan supporting and facilitating the work of local activists. The government still exercised its control by only registering organisations willing to cooperate with the regime, but truly independent activists were able to carry out their activities within the limited space provided.

4. What strategies are civil society organisations in Uzbekistan using to survive?

A number of activists are now in prisons awaiting amnesty or release. Others have emigrated, but continue to raise awareness about the situation in Uzbekistan through publications and information dissemination. A small portion remains in Uzbekistan working and living under constant surveillance. They are forced to pursue their activities within the legal confines.

5. In your opinion, why is the government limiting the activities of civil society?

The police regime relies on coercion to survive by eliminating any budding form of dissent or opposition. The regime attempts to crush independent civil society through its various repressive apparatuses wary that an active civil society, which promotes citizen participation and awareness, will force the regime to relinquish its control.

6. What can international civil society do to support civil society in Uzbekistan?

The international community can support civil society activists in Uzbekistan by raising awareness about the situation in global forums, by inviting Uzbek activities to international meetings and conferences and by providing financial support. One of the main tactics that the regime uses to eradicate civil society activism is to stifle them financially by preventing their access to resources.

For more information, visit: http://www.civicus.org/csw/FRONTPAGE-Uzbekistan.htm