Central Asia: Strengthening Safeguards, Oversight and Accountability to Prevent Torture

Joint Statement for OSCE Supplementary Human Dimension Meeting on ‘’Preventing Torture and Ill-Treatment - Strengthening Co-operation and Implementation’’, Vienna, 29-30 June 2026 

Despite legislative reforms, the adoption of action plans and engagement with international human rights mechanisms, torture and ill-treatment persist across Central Asia. While comprehensive statistics are lacking, available information indicates that such practices remain prevalent in the five countries of the region. The primary challenge is not the absence of formal prohibitions or standards, but the failure to effectively implement safeguards, ensure independent oversight and secure accountability in practice, in violation of the Central Asian countries’ international obligations. 

We, civil society actors committed to the promotion of human rights in Central Asia – including the NGO Coalition against Torture in Kazakhstan, the Civil Society Coalition against Torture and Impunity in Tajikistan, the Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law (KIBHR), the Association for Human Rights in Central Asia (AHRCA), the Turkmen Initiative for Human Rights (TIHR), International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR), the World Organisation against Torture (OMCT) and the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (HFHR) – call for renewed efforts to translate international commitments into tangible improvements on the ground, including through the effective implementation of recommendations and decisions issued by international human rights bodies concerning torture, unfair trials and impunity. 

Inadequate implementation of safeguards 

While the risk of torture and ill-treatment is highest during arrest, interrogation and the early stages of detention, safeguards designed to prevent such treatment are often inadequately or inconsistently implemented in the Central Asian countries. Although legislation in the region generally provides for key protections such as access to a lawyer, independent medical examination, notification of relatives and avenues for challenging the legality of detention, these guarantees are frequently delayed, restricted or applied only after detention has been formally registered.

It is also problematic that existing safeguards are not applicable to all cases of detention. For example, in Tajikistan, those who are subject to administrative detention or detained as ‘’witnesses’’ do not have a legally protected right to fundamental safeguards. Concerns further persist regarding inadequate documentation of injuries, unreliable custody records and the lack of accessible, independent complaint mechanisms. 

While confessions continue to play a central role in criminal proceedings, important safeguards such as comprehensive video recording of detention and interrogation processes remain insufficiently developed or inconsistently applied. For example, in Kazakhstan, video recordings have played a crucial role in corroborating victims’ allegations in some torture cases that have attracted public attention. However, such recordings have yet to be used as a standard legal safeguard applicable to all detainees. 

Lack of independent oversight 

Another major factor undermining torture prevention in the region is the lack of robust independent oversight of detention facilities.

Established under the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture (OPCAT), a National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) has functioned in Kazakhstan for more than a decade. While the NPM provides an important institutional basis for independent monitoring, its effectiveness is currently limited by insufficient operational independence, resources and follow-up powers. Public monitoring commissions also need to be strengthened. 

Kyrgyzstan experienced a significant setback last year when the National Centre for the Prevention of Torture (NCPT) – a NPM that was established under the OPCAT in 2012 and had served as a regional model, including in terms of its cooperation with civil society – was abolished despite widespread criticism. This step contradicted numerous recommendations received by Kyrgyzstan during the April 2025 Universal Periodic Review (UPR) to maintain the NCPT as an independent body and strengthen its operations. Following the NCPT’s liquidation, its functions were instead transferred to the Ombudsperson’s Office amid concerns about the lack of full independence of this body and its capacity to handle the new role. The ongoing transition has created a gap in torture prevention efforts and prompted concerns about an increased risk of ill-treatment in detention. 

The other three Central Asian countries have not ratified the OPCAT to date. 

In Uzbekistan, the Ombudsperson’s Office has conducted an increasing number of visits to places of detention, in cooperation with public groups created to assist in this task. However, this office remains dependent on the executive, impairing its effectiveness. 

In Tajikistan, the Ombudsperson’s Office likewise carries out visits to detention facilities, but it is also not an independent body. In a positive development, the prison service allowed members of the NGO Coalition against Torture to monitor most penitentiary institutions as of 2024, although its access has yet to be regulated by law. 

In Turkmenistan, there are serious ongoing concerns regarding the limited scope and lack of independence of the monitoring conducted by the Ombudsperson’s Office and government supervisory commissions. International monitors have not been granted access for regular monitoring. 

Failure to systematically investigate, prosecute and ensure justice for torture 

Across the region, serious concerns persist regarding the failure to systematically investigate, prosecute and penalise acts of torture and ill-treatment, as well as to ensure appropriate support and redress for victims.  

While torture is criminalised in Kazakhstan, the relevant Criminal Code provision is not fully aligned with international standards and allows for penalties that are not commensurate with the gravity of the crime, including fines and community service. Following legal amendments adopted in 2023, allegations classified as torture are investigated by the General Prosecutor’s Office, but complaints involving other forms of ill-treatment are handled by the police, which creates potential conflicts of interest and undermines impartiality. Many complaints of abusive treatment are not effectively investigated or prosecuted, with victims often being expected to substantiate allegations themselves, contrary to international standards. Insufficient protection against reprisals also discourages victims from reporting abuse. It remains of concern that those convicted of torture often receive lenient penalties in practice, including non-custodial sentences. At the same time, comprehensive mechanisms for rehabilitation, support and compensation of torture survivors are lacking, and compensation to victims is often inadequate, if provided at all.

In a welcome development, Kyrgyzstan’s Criminal Code was revised in spring 2026 to broaden the definition of torture to include not only physical but also mental suffering and to extend liability to individuals acting in an official capacity, even if they are not state officials. As the previous wording had allowed many perpetrators to evade responsibility, these changes raised hopes for improved accountability, although civil society actors stressed that their effective implementation will be key. In a persistent trend, allegations of torture and ill-treatment have often not been adequately investigated, with procedural delays resulting in the loss of evidence and undermining prospects for prosecution. When criminal proceedings have been initiated, they have frequently been pursued under lesser offences such as abuse of office or exceeding authority rather than torture, diminishing the gravity of the crimes. Victims also face significant obstacles in obtaining compensation and rehabilitation, with remedies rarely provided and often falling short of international standards. 

While penalties for torture have been increased in Tajikistan, the application of the relevant Criminal Code provision remains limited, and the number of convictions issued remains persistently low, as the UN Committee against Torture (CAT) noted with regret during its April 2026 review of the country. When cases involving torture and ill-treatment are prosecuted, provisions on less serious offences such as abuse of power or exceeding official authority are frequently invoked. An independent mechanism for receiving and investigating torture complaints has yet to be established, with current practice relying primarily on prosecutorial bodies with close links to law enforcement authorities, undermining prospects for effective and impartial investigations. There are also no independent forensic medical institutions. Judges routinely dismiss allegations of abuse raised in court, ordering investigations only in isolated cases. At the same time, victims and their lawyers are often reluctant to report such treatment due to fear of reprisals and a lack of confidence in obtaining justice. Although legislation on compensation for torture has been strengthened, courts often dismiss compensation claims or award inadequate amounts. There is no comprehensive, state-funded rehabilitation system for torture survivors, with only limited services provided by civil society thanks to foreign funding. It also remains of concern that torture is subject to a statute of limitations and that national law does not exclude the possibility of amnesty for such acts.

Turkmenistan criminalised torture in 2012 and further strengthened the relevant provision in 2022. However, according to official information, no cases initiated under this provision have been examined by courts since it was introduced. While the authorities report conducting internal investigations when law enforcement officials are accused of exceeding their authority, they have failed to demonstrate any progress on ensuring that allegations of torture and ill-treatment are investigated in a thorough and impartial manner. In several recent cases of torture that exile-based civil society organisations have learned about, no effective investigations are known to have been conducted. Overall, the lack of prospects for obtaining justice, combined with the serious risk of reprisals, strongly discourages victims and their families from reporting torture and ill-treatment. When reviewing Turkmenistan’s compliance with the Convention against Torture in 2025, CAT expressed  grave concern about the authorities’ failure to effectively investigate and prosecute torture and hold perpetrators accountable. It also regretted the lack of progress in investigating enforced disappearances, with the fate and whereabouts of victims in dozens of documented cases remaining unknown. 

Under Uzbekistan’s Criminal Code, torture and ill-treatment are punishable by up to 10 years’ imprisonment. However, according to available information, this provision is rarely applied in practice, with cases involving abusive treatment instead being pursued under other Criminal Code provisions, such as abuse of power or negligence in service. Such cases are frequently tried behind closed doors. Allegations of torture are typically not investigated effectively, while judges often disregard complaints raised by defendants and their lawyers and fail to order forensic examinations. Serious concerns also persist over the lack of an independent mechanism for investigating torture complaints and the absence of an independent forensic medical examination system, undermining prospects for accountability. Moreover, despite continued reports of torture and ill-treatment received by human rights defenders, including from individuals at heightened risk such as members of vulnerable groups and those prosecuted on politically motivated grounds, victims are often reluctant to report torture due to fear of reprisals and a lack of confidence in obtaining justice. An additional concern is that those convicted based on evidence obtained under duress face significant obstacles in seeking redress and overturning wrongful convictions, with authorities often refusing their claims, citing the statute of limitations. 

Impunity for torture

Due to inadequate efforts to investigate, prosecute and punish acts of torture and ill-treatment – as described above – widespread impunity for such practices remains a key concern across Central Asia. This broader problem is illustrated by patterns of impunity relating to torture and other gross human rights violations committed in connection with crises in the region, including the suppression of mass protests in three Central Asian countries in 2022. While far from the only examples, these cases represent some of the most serious recent failures to ensure accountability for abusive treatment – a concern that has also been highlighted by international human rights bodies.

Following its June 2025 review of Kazakhstan, the UN Human Rights Committee regretted that many investigations into torture related to the January 2022 protests were closed because complaints allegedly were unsubstantiated. Likewise in a May 2025 report based on monitoring of court proceedings related to these events, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) raised concerns regarding inadequate investigations, disparity between widespread allegations of abuse and the low number of prosecutions, and the lack of appropriate redress for victims.

When reviewing Tajikistan in April 2026, CAT criticised the lack of effective and independent investigations into allegations of torture, ill-treatment, and extrajudicial killings reportedly carried out by security forces during the suppression of protests in Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Region (GBAO) in 2021 and 2022, noting that only a very small number of cases had been reviewed by court.

Similarly, during its April 2026 review of Uzbekistan, the UN Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) expressed grave concern about the lack of accountability for torture and other serious violations targeting members of the Karakalpak ethnic group – including human rights defenders – in connection with the July 2022 protests in Karakalpakstan.

The UN treaty bodies called on the authorities of the Central Asian countries to ensure effective and impartial investigations into all allegations of abuse related to the 2022 events, prosecute perpetrators, impose appropriate penalties and provide redress to victims. While issued in relation to specific events, these recommendations are equally relevant to addressing the broader problem of impunity for torture and ill-treatment across the region.

Challenges facing anti-torture advocates

Civil society organisations, activists and lawyers play an indispensable role in efforts to prevent and combat torture in Central Asia. In addition to monitoring and documenting violations, they provide victims and their families with crucial legal, medical, and psychological support, and engage in efforts to bring perpetrators to justice. However, amid a broader decline in civic space, their ability to carry out this work is increasingly challenged by hostile rhetoric, restrictive legislation, undue interference and other forms of pressure. This, in turn, weakens efforts to ensure accountability for torture and ill-treatment. Rather than obstructing civil society contributions to preventing torture, supporting victims and securing justice, the authorities should recognise, welcome and support these efforts. 

International cooperation, non-refoulement and transnational repression 

The concerns outlined above underscore the importance of continued international engagement to support efforts to prevent and combat torture in Central Asia, including through assistance aimed at strengthening safeguards, independent monitoring mechanisms, and investigative and prosecutorial capacities, in line with recommendations issued by international human rights bodies. Support for civil society actors working on torture related issues is an essential component of such engagement.

The persistent occurrence of torture and ill-treatment in Central Asia, combined with continuing shortcomings in prevention, oversight and accountability, also underscores the importance of fully respecting the principle of non-refoulement. In particular, at a time of increasing efforts to facilitate returns and removals, states cooperating with Central Asian countries should ensure that their migration policies fully comply with this principle and refrain from expelling, extraditing or otherwise transferring individuals to the region where there are substantial grounds for believing that they would be in danger of being subjected to torture or other prohibited ill-treatment. In this context, close attention should be paid to growing patterns of transnational repression and the targeting of individuals on politically motivated grounds beyond national borders, including through attempts to secure their forcible return. Such individuals are at heightened risk of torture and other serious human rights violations if returned.

Recommendations

Against the background of the concerns raised above, we call on the governments of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan to:

Translate international commitments concerning torture and ill-treatment into tangible improvements in law, policy and practice, including through the implementation of recommendations and decisions issued by international human rights bodies.

Ensure that all detainees enjoy fundamental safeguards from the moment of actual deprivation of liberty, including prompt access to a lawyer, an independent medical examination, notification of relatives and effective avenues for challenging the legality of detention.

Strengthen safeguards against abuse during detention and interrogation, including through comprehensive and tamper-proof video recording systems covering all stages of detention, transport and questioning.

Ratify and effectively implement the OPCAT, where this has not yet been done, and establish, strengthen or restore National Preventive Mechanisms, ensuring that they operate fully independently, are adequately resourced and have unrestricted access to all places of detention.

Establish independent and effective mechanisms for receiving and investigating complaints of torture and ill-treatment, and ensure that all allegations are investigated promptly, thoroughly and impartially. 

Ensure that torture and ill-treatment are prosecuted under appropriate criminal provisions, that penalties reflect the gravity of the offences, and that statutes of limitation, amnesties or other measures do not contribute to impunity.

Establish independent forensic medical examination systems and ensure that allegations of torture are properly documented in accordance with international standards, including the Istanbul Protocol.  

Protect victims, witnesses, lawyers, medical professionals and human rights defenders from intimidation and reprisals related to the reporting, documentation and investigation of torture. 

Ensure that victims of torture and ill-treatment have access to effective remedies, including adequate compensation, rehabilitation and other forms of redress, and fully implement decisions issued by international human rights bodies in individual cases.

Ensure effective, independent and transparent investigations into allegations of torture and other serious abuses committed in connection with the suppression of protests, and provide appropriate redress to victims.

We call on other OSCE participating States, OSCE institutions and international partners of the Central Asian countries to:

Continue to prioritise the prevention of torture and ill-treatment in their engagement with Central Asian governments, including through bilateral dialogues, multilateral forums and co-operation programmes.

Support efforts aimed at strengthening independent monitoring of places of detention, improving the implementation of safeguards against torture and enhancing accountability mechanisms in the region.

Provide political, technical and financial support to independent civil society organisations, lawyers and victim support initiatives working to prevent torture, document violations and assist survivors.

Consistently raise concerns regarding individual cases involving allegations of torture, impunity and reprisals against victims, lawyers, journalists and human rights defenders working on torture-related issues.

Encourage and support the full implementation of recommendations issued by international human rights mechanisms with respect to efforts to combat torture, ill-treatment and impunity.

Refrain from forcibly returning individuals to Central Asian countries in violation of the non-refoulement principle, including in cases involving transnational repression.

More information

For more information on the issues outlined above, please refer to the following publications: 

Kazakhstan

Submission by the NGO Coalition against Torture to CAT for the adoption of a List of issues prior to submission of the fifth periodic report of Kazakhstan, March 2026: https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=INT%2FCAT%2FICS%2FKAZ%2F69161&Lang=en

Submission by the NGO Coalition against Torture to the UN Human Rights Committee for the review of Kazakhstan’s third periodic report, May 2025: https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=INT%2FCCPR%2FCSS%2FKAZ%2F63266&Lang=en

Kyrgyzstan

Submission by OMCT and IPHR on torture issues for the UPR of Kyrgyzstan, October 2024: https://iphronline.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/joint-omct-iphr-upr-submission-on-torture-issues-in-kyrgyzstan-october-2024.pdf

OMCT country factsheet: https://www.omct.org/en/global-torture-index?country=kyrgyzstan

Tajikistan

Joint submission by the Civil Society Coalition against Torture and Impunity, IPHR, HFHR and OMCT to CAT for the review of Tajikistan’s fourth periodic report, March 2026: https://iphronline.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/joint-submission-on-tajikistan-to-the-un-cat.pdf

Joint submission by the Civil Society Coalition against Torture and Impunity, IPHR and HFHR on torture issues for the UPR of Tajikistan, April 2026: https://iphronline.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/upr-tajikistan-submission-on-torture.pdf

 

Turkmenistan

Joint briefing by IPHR and TIHR for the EU-Turkmenistan Human Rights Dialogue, May 2026:

https://iphronline.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/key-human-rights-issues-cases-and-recommendations-for-eu-turkmenistan-dialogue.pdf

Joint submission by IPHR and TIHR to CAT for the review of Turkmenistan’s third periodic report, April 2026:

https://iphronline.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/tihr-iphr-report-to-the-committee-against-torture-march-2025.pdf

Uzbekistan

Joint briefing by IPHR and AHRCA for the EU-Uzbekistan Human Rights Dialogue, June 2025:

https://iphronline.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/iphr-ahrca-briefing-for-eu-uzbekistan-human-rights-dialogue-june-2025.pdf

 

Uzbekistan: 21 Years After Andijan, Victims still await Truth and Justice

Twenty-one years after the tragic events in Andijan, Uzbekistani authorities continue to restrict independent investigation into the violent suppression of protests that claimed hundreds of lives. Survivors, witnesses, and relatives of victims still live in fear and under pressure, while participants in the May 2005 protests continue to face persecution, imprisonment, and stigmatisation. Ahead of the anniversary of the tragedy  taking place on 13 May 2005, the Association for Human Rights in Central Asia (AHRCA), the Norwegian Helsinki Committee (NHC) and International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR) reiterate calls  for an independent investigation into the tragic events and for  justice and redress for the victims.

On 13 May 2005, thousands of mostly peaceful protestors gathered on Babur Square in Andijan amid growing public anger over poverty, repression, and the trial of 23 local businessmen accused of involvement in the informal Islamic movement “Akramiya”, which was later banned in Uzbekistan. At some stage, security forces opened fire on demonstrators after some had occupied government buildings earlier that day. According to official figures, 187 people were killed, although witnesses and independent sources believe the real death toll was significantly higher, potentially reaching several hundred victims. To date, the Uzbekistani authorities have refused to allow an independent international investigation to establish what happened.

“The Andijan tragedy remains an unhealed wound for Uzbekistan,” Nadejda Atayeva, President of AHRCA, said: “Instead of ensuring truth, accountability, and justice for victims, the authorities continue to preserve a repressive narrative that shifts blame onto survivors, witnesses, and those associated with the events. Twenty-one years later, the lack of an independent investigation continues to fuel impunity and undermine trust in the justice system.” 

After the May 2005 events, many were convicted and sentenced to long prison sentences after politically motivated trials. However, new sentences have also been imposed in recent years.  

For example, as recently as in January 2023,  Mukhamadvali Kayumov was sentenced to over 15 years in prison on charges relating to his alleged involvement in the Andijan events. After living in Sweden for 6 years, where he was granted asylum, he travelled back to Uzbekistan in March 2022 based on diplomatic assurances from the Uzbekistani embassy in Sweden that it would be safe for him to return. Four months later, he was arrested. Initially accused of hooliganism (a less serious crime), he was subsequently charged with terrorism, encroachment on the constitutional order, participation in a criminal organisation, and involvement in a banned religious organisation Akromiya. On 5  January 2023, he was sentenced to 15 years and 6 months in prison.

The newly available case materials raise serious concerns regarding violations of the right to a fair trial, the prohibition of arbitrary detention, and the principle of legality guaranteed under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The prosecution appears to have relied primarily on Kayumov’s previous social connections, religious environment, and alleged association with persons labelled as “Akromists”, whilst failing to provide any evidence of specific criminal acts or wrongdoing.

Particularly troubling is the fact that many of the activities cited in the indictment allegedly took place years before “Akramiya” was officially banned in Uzbekistan in 2016. Prosecuting individuals retroactively for involvement in an organisation that had not yet been formally prohibited directly contradicts the principle of nullum crimen sine lege (“no crime without law”), a cornerstone of international criminal justice, which is also enshrined in Uzbekistani law – specifically Article 30 of the Constitution (prohibiting the use of unpublished laws) and Article 13 of the Criminal Code (barring retroactive application of laws that criminalise acts or worsen a person’s legal position).

The judgment against Kayumov includes testimony from Uzbekistani citizens who had previously received international protection abroad but later returned to Uzbekistan, often because they found it hard to endure separation from family members remaining in the country. The testimonies suggest a pattern in which returnees become drawn into repressive practices and used by the state to testify against one another in criminal proceedings linked to the 2005 Andijan events. Kayumov is currently suffering from a serious liver condition and urgently requires hospital treatment, which the prison authorities have reportedly refused to provide. He has also reportedly been subjected to other forms of ill-treatment in detention, including being forced to stand for hours in the sun without a hat or exposed to rain.

Brigitte Dufour, Director of IPHR, stressed “we remain seriously concerned that the Uzbekistani authorities have not ensured accountability for past and recent grave human rights violations, including the 2005 Andijan events and the more recent violent crackdown on the July 2022 protests in Karakalpakstan. Lasting stability and public trust cannot be built on impunity and the suppression of critical voices. Meaningful progress requires transparent investigations, justice for victims, and an end to the persecution of people connected to these events.”

 

AHRCA, NHC, and IPHR call on the Uzbekistani authorities to facilitate an independent, transparent, and international investigation into the killings of civilians in Andijan and to ensure that those responsible for grave human rights violations are held accountable. 

“It is especially disturbing that individuals who spent years in exile and returned to Uzbekistan in the hope of rebuilding their lives have reportedly become targets of renewed prosecution,” said Berit Lindeman, Secretary General of the Norwegian Helsinki Committee. “Such practices reinforce fear among former refugees and exiles and risk deepening the long-term trauma associated with the Andijan events.” 

The organisations urge the authorities to review politically motivated convictions and to immediately release individuals imprisoned solely for their peaceful involvement in the May 2005 protests in Andijan or in the “Akramiya” movement prior to its official banning. In line with Uzbekistan’s international human rights obligations, peaceful civic engagement, even when addressing  politically sensitive issues, should never be treated as a criminal offence.

In addition, the authorities should guarantee fair trial rights and  protection from torture and ill-treatment for all those imprisoned on charges connected to the Andijan events. They should  cease  the intimidation and harassment of survivors, witnesses, relatives, journalists, and human rights defenders associated with the Andijan events.

The organisations further call on the international community, including the European Union, to continue pressing for truth, justice, and accountability for the Andijan massacre, as well as for the more recent killings linked to the violent suppression of the July 2022 “Nukus protests” in Karakalpakstan.

Central Asia: Repressive Digital Measures Undermine Civic Space and Free Expression

 

As in other parts of the world, digital technologies have transformed civic activism in Central Asia, creating new platforms, strategies and opportunities for engagement, mobilisation and oversight. However, International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR), Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law (KIBHR), Association for Human Rights in Central Asia (AHRCA) and Turkmen Initiative for Human Rights (TIHR) are alarmed by the escalating use of legal, technical and informal measures to silence dissent, restrict civic space and obstruct access to information in the digital sphere across the region. We call on the Central Asian governments to uphold their human dimension commitments by ending the misuse of legislation targeting online expression, halting harassment and intimidation of civil society actors, and ensuring that digital spaces remain open, secure and accessible. Concrete steps must be taken to protect journalists, bloggers and human rights defenders from retaliation for their online activities.

Across Central Asia, independent civil society actors and media platforms face growing online intimidation, including smear campaigns, trolling and threats. Those working on issues such as corruption, women’s rights and the protection of vulnerable groups – particularly when receiving foreign funding – are frequently portrayed as threatening national security or “traditional values.” Official rhetoric has contributed to this hostile environment. In Kyrgyzstan, for example, the adoption of the 2024 “foreign representative” law was accompanied by narratives accusing civil society organisations (CSOs) of serving foreign interests, fuelling stigmatisation and mistrust. According to a UN study, nearly 40 percent of surveyed CSOs reported experiencing social media attacks. Individual human rights defenders, including those in exile, are regularly attacked through pro-state media and online platforms, with women activists disproportionately affected. 

Technical restrictions further compound these challenges, with cyberattacks, website blocking and internet shutdowns obstructing the activities of civil society and independent media. In Kazakhstan, targeted cyberattacks have repeatedly rendered independent media sites inaccessible for hours or days a time, and in November 2025, the Respublika.kz news site was blocked in apparent retaliation for its critical reporting. In Kyrgyzstan, the investigative Kloop platform has been ordered closed and its materials labelled “extremist” by court. Other independent news sites have temporarily been   blocked over allegedly ‘‘false’’ information without court approval. Independent online   information  without court approval. Independent online   platforms have also repeatedly.

been blocked and closed on spurious grounds in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. In Turkmenistan, pervasive censorship – reportedly linked to corruption – has resulted in systematic blocking of independent websites, alongside restrictions on VPN services used to bypass such controls. Reoccurring internet outages and slow speeds further limit access to information. Extensive internet shutdowns linked to the suppression of mass protests in Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan in 2022 not only curtailed freedom of expression but also obstructed efforts to document violations and assist victims.

A further worrying trend is the use of AI-enabled technologies to target individuals engaged in civic activism and independent journalism, including through AI-assisted online attacks, surveillance and profiling. In Kazakhstan, blogger Sanzhar Bokayev reported being stopped by police at Almaty airport in June 2025 after being identified and flagged as a “civic activist” by an AI-powered facial recognition system. While he was eventually released and informed that this was an error, the incident heightened concerns that such tools create new risks of arbitrary tracking, identification and reprisals against government critics.

A highly troubling development is the growing misuse of social media content complaint mechanisms, with coordinated and unfounded claims of violations of community rules leading to the suspension or removal of independent accounts. In Uzbekistan, the accounts of several independent media platforms such as Hook Report and Sarpa Media, as well as those of individual bloggers were suspended earlier this year following such complaints. Similar practices have also targeted foreign-based organisations working on Uzbekistan. For example, the YouTube channel of the France-based AHRCA was taken down over alleged copyright infringements in January 2026, and three of its Facebook accounts were blocked in the following two months. In addition, the Telegram account of AHRCA’s president was hacked in April 2026, with false messages disseminated in her name. In Kazakhstan, in recent months, an increasing number of media outlets, organisations, journalists and bloggers have reported the suspension or removal of accounts or content following spurious and apparently orchestrated complaints. Such cases peaked in the lead-up to the constitutional referendum in March 2026 but have continued thereafter.

At the same time, authorities are increasingly resorting to legal prosecution in response to critical online expression. Broadly worded charges – such as disseminating “false” information or inciting ‘’disobedience’’ or discord – are frequently used to target journalists, bloggers and activists. These practices demonstrate how efforts to counter disinformation are instrumentalised to suppress legitimate criticism in the digital sphere. 

In Kazakhstan, Orda.kz editor-in-chief Gulnara Bazhkenova, KazTAG editor-in-chief Amir Kasenov and independent journalist Botagoz Omarova all remain under house arrest pending investigations into charges of disseminating ‘’false’’ information, which stem from their online publications. In another recent case, journalist Lukpan Akhmedyarov came under criminal investigation after posting video material concerning the alleged recruitment of Kazakh citizens for Russia’s war against Ukraine. While a reported initiative of the Ministry of Culture and Information to consider partial decriminalisation of the provision in question is a step in the right direction, full decriminalisation remains essential to prevent further misuse suppressing independent journalism and legitimate public debate. A separate administrative code provision prohibiting the spread of ‘’false’’ information – even unintentional – has also been applied to restrict free speech. For example, the Kazakh service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty has been fined under this provision as part of a broader campaign of harassment, including the denial of accreditation to its contributors. In connection with the constitutional referendum held in Kazakhstan in March 2026, several bloggers were fined for conducting informal online surveys that allegedly violated rules on referendum-related polling.

In Kyrgyzstan, several journalists working with the Kloop and Temirov Live investigative platforms have been prosecuted under a vague Criminal Code provision banning calls for “disobedience” to authorities and unrest. Two Kloop contributors imprisoned on such charges were released under probation in November 2025, while Temirov Live’s director Makhabat Tazhibek kyzy was released in March 2026 pending a review of the six-year prison sentence handed to her in October 2024. The review was ordered by the Supreme Court following an opinion by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which deemed her imprisonment unlawful and retaliatory. While these releases are welcome, serious concerns persist about the broader pattern of using criminal charges to stifle legitimate online expression. In recent years, numerous other journalists, bloggers and activists have faced prosecution under the same or other broadly worded provisions following social media posts critical of authorities.

In Tajikistan, a record number of journalists and bloggers are currently behind bars on charges widely believed to have been brought in retaliation for their reporting and online activities. Among them are journalists Daler Bobiev and Abdullo Ghurbati, who are serving lengthy prison sentences on anti-state charges issued in 2022. Prior to their arrest, they had collaborated on a popular YouTube channel covering issues such as alleged unlawful housing demolitions and mismanagement by local authorities and had openly criticised government policies. Their cases have prompted serious concerns from human rights organisations and UN experts.

In Uzbekistan, blogger Shahida Salomova has been forcibly confined to a psychiatric institution for more than three years following defamation charges linked to her social media posts about the president and his relatives. Her detention has been repeatedly extended without independent medical evaluation or effective judicial oversight, raising grave concerns about the use of punitive psychiatry to silence dissent. In addition to targeting critics at home, Uzbekistani authorities have initiated criminal cases against several bloggers living abroad in apparent retaliation for their online criticism of senior officials and members of the presidential family.

In Turkmenistan, where state control over information is pervasive, individuals who challenge official narratives face severe reprisals. A stark example is the case of a blogger who disappeared in November 2025 shortly after publishing a video criticising rising food prices; independent investigations indicate that he was detained, subjected to torture and subsequently died from his injuries. Authorities have also increasingly targeted bloggers based abroad. Of particular concern is the case of Alisher Sakhatov and Abdulla Orusov, who disappeared in Turkey in July 2025. Prior to this, they had been detained pending deportation on alleged security grounds – a move believed to have been taken at the request of Turkmenistani authorities. However, Turkey’s Constitutional Court had suspended their deportation to assess the risks they would face upon return. As of May 2026, their fate and whereabouts remain unknown, with unconfirmed reports suggesting they were forcibly returned to Turkmenistan.

Recommendations

Safeguarding civic space in the digital age requires a clear commitment to uphold freedom of expression and other fundamental freedoms in this context. Central Asian governments should take concrete steps to end the misuse of digital tools and legislation to restrict civic space online, while other OSCE participating States should actively support these efforts through sustained engagement, protection and accountability measures. At the same time, social media platforms must ensure that their policies, moderation practices and business decisions do not contribute to the suppression of lawful expression or access to information but instead help safeguard open and secure digital spaces.

In light of these considerations, IPHR, KIBHR, AHRCA and TIHR urge:

Central Asian governments to:

• Refrain from using criminal law to penalise online expression and fully decriminalise broadly worded offences such as “false information,” defamation and incitement provisions that are prone to abuse.
• Ensure that measures addressing disinformation comply with international human rights standards and are not used to suppress legitimate criticism.
• End smear campaigns, intimidation and harassment of civil society actors, journalists, bloggers and human rights defenders using online platforms for their engagement, including those based in exile, and ensure accountability for such actions.
• Guarantee that any restrictions on online content, including website blocking and platform closures, are lawful, necessary, proportionate and subject to independent judicial oversight.
• Refrain from imposing internet shutdowns and ensure uninterrupted access to the internet, including during public assemblies and crises.
• Investigate and prevent cyberattacks and other forms of digital interference targeting independent media and civil society actors.
• Refrain from using AI and digital surveillance tools to profile, monitor or target individuals based on their civic engagement, journalistic work or exercise of fundamental freedoms.
• Refrain from orchestrating or supporting the misuse of social media complaint and reporting mechanisms to suppress lawful expression and engage with platforms in good faith to address such abuse by promoting transparency, due process and effective safeguards against coordinated or unfounded complaints.
• Refrain from engaging in transnational repression against activists, journalists and bloggers abroad, including by seeking their forcible return on politically motivated grounds linked to their online criticism or civic engagement.

Other OSCE participating States to:

·       Consistently raise concerns about online censorship, cyberattacks, misuse of surveillance technologies, prosecution over online expression and other restrictions on digital civic space in Central Asia, and press for compliance with international human rights obligations and accountability for violations.

·       Support independent Central Asian civil society, media and human rights actors engaged in online reporting, digital advocacy and information sharing – including those in exile – through sustained political backing, funding and protection measures, such as assistance in countering online harassment and censorship.

·       Use diplomatic engagement, regulatory tools and public advocacy to encourage social media platforms to align their content moderation and account enforcement practices with international human rights standards, including safeguards against unjustified content removal and account blocking.

·       Ensure effective protection against transnational repression within their jurisdictions, including by upholding the principle of non-refoulement and providing safe haven for Central Asian individuals at risk because of their online engagement.

Global social media platforms to:

• Ensure that content moderation and account takedown decisions are grounded in international human rights standards, and refrain from acting on coordinated complaints or direct government requests that seek to restrict lawful expression, such as criticism of public officials or policies.
• Strengthen safeguards against the abuse of reporting and complaint mechanisms, including by improving transparency, ensuring meaningful review of contested decisions, and providing effective, timely remedies for users whose content or accounts have been unjustifiably restricted.

Uzbekistan: End the Punitive Psychiatric Detention of Shohida Salomova

Today marks the 64th birthday of lawyer, blogger, and human rights activist Shohida Salomova. Instead of celebrating her life and work, she remains deprived of her liberty under coercive psychiatric measures.

On the birthday of lawyer, blogger, and human rights activist Shohida Salomova, International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR), Association for Human Rights in Central Asia (AHRCA) and the Norwegian Helsinki Committee call for her immediate and unconditional release from forced psychiatric detention. Her case raises serious concerns about the abuse of psychiatric measures to silence dissent, violations of fair trial guarantees, and risks to her health. We urge the authorities of Uzbekistan to end her arbitrary detention, ensure access to independent medical care, and uphold their international human rights obligations.

On 18 December 2022, Salomova posted a comment on social media about a high-ranking official. Later that  same day, officials searched her home and detained her. A criminal case was opened against her for defamation and insult (Articles 139, 140 and 244.1 of the Criminal Code).  According to information available to the undersigning organizations, officials attempted to coerce Salomova to incriminate herself during initial interrogations, which she refused to do.

On 22 December 2022, Salmova was forcibly committed to a psychiatric facility. Since January 2024, she has been held in the Republican Psychiatric Hospital in Tashkent under constant supervision. Her forced detention has effectively become indefinite as it has been repeatedly extended without independent medical evaluation or effective judicial oversight. As a result, she has effectively been denied justice for more than three years.

Salomova is a well-known outspoken blogger and government critic in Uzbekistan. She has often criticized Uzbek officials through her now-deleted Telegram channel “Panatonomy of the Land of Uz” and her YouTube Channel Shakhina Salomova. Through her blogging and online activities, she has drawn attention to the widespread practice of forced evictions and demolitions in the country as well as other issues.

According to information available to the undersigned organisations, 64-year-old Salomova, who suffers from chronic illnesses including diabetes and asthma, is not receiving adequate medical care which creates serious risks to her health. 

All available information points to a clear and consistent pattern of serious human rights violations against Salomova, including arbitrary deprivation of liberty, violation of fair trial standards, undue restrictions on her right to freedom of expression, and the abuse of psychiatric institutions by state and medical institutions, measures which are consistent with cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.

Salomova’s case bears all the hallmarks of politically motivated persecution aimed at silencing critical expression and appears to represent a disturbing continuation of Soviet-era practices. The practice of forced psychiatric measures as a tool of repression and form of retaliation against critics originated in the Soviet Union – confining dissidents to forced psychiatric treatment enables authorities to effectively discredit and punish opponents while avoiding the scrutiny attracted by political trials. Alarmingly, Salomova’s case is just the latest in a series of other documented cases which.

We, the undersigning organizations, call on the authorities of Uzbekistan to immediately and unconditionally release Shokhida Salomova; cease the use of coercive psychiatric measures against her; and ensure her access to independent and adequate medical care. We urge authorities to conduct an independent, effective, and transparent investigation into all violations committed, and ensure Salomova is compensated for all the injustices she has endured.

We call on the international partners of Uzbekistan and UN human rights mechanisms to  pay attention to this case and take appropriate measures. The case of Shohida Salomova is a problematic example of the use of punitive psychiatry to silence critical voices and merits a strong international response.

 

Uzbekistan: Mounting concerns about health and safety of imprisoned Karakalpak activist Dauletmurat Tazhimuratov

The Association for Human Rights in Central Asia (AHRCA), International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR), and the Norwegian Helsinki Committee (NHC) are alarmed by reports indicating that the health of imprisoned Karakalpak lawyer, journalist and human rights defender Dauletmurat Tazhimuratov has sharply declined due to his treatment in prison and that prison authorities are now seeking to further isolate him, prompting renewed fears for his health. The organisations call on the Uzbekistani authorities to take prompt steps to safeguard his well-being and safety. 

In a video statement published on 8 February 2026, Dauletmurat Tazhimuratov’s sister, Maria Tazhimuratova, highlighted concerns that the defender has endured harsh detention conditions and repeatedly been subjected to physical and psychological pressure during his three years in Prison Colony No. 11 in Navoi Region. According to her, this has resulted in a serious deterioration in his health, including difficulties eating due to persistent illness after meals, significant weight loss (approximately 25 kg since his arrest) and general weakness. In what appears to constitute punitive labour, he has continuously been required to work in hazardous conditions in a lime-processing facility without adequate protective equipment, further undermining his health. In addition, there are concerns that he has not been granted adequate medical assistance. Against this background, Maria Tazhimuratova made a heartfelt plea to the authorities to ensure humane treatment, saying: “We dream of only one thing – that he survives.”

Concerns about Tazhimuratov’s well-being are compounded by reports that prison authorities have initiated his transfer to a stricter, high-security detention regime on the grounds of alleged “systematic” violations of prison rules. Such a move is likely to result in a further deterioration of his detention conditions, including more limited contact with family, further restrictions on access to medical and other services, and increased isolation at a time when his health already appears to be at serious risk. 

Tazhimuratov was arrested following the July 2022 events in Karakalpakstan, when authorities harshly suppressed mass protests against proposed constitutional amendments that would have deprived Karakalpakstan of its constitutionally protected status. Tazhimuratov had opposed these amendments and was depicted as a protest leader. In January 2023, he was sentenced to 16 years’ imprisonment on politically motivated charges following an unfair trial. His sentence was later upheld unchanged by the Supreme Court. 

Tazhimuratov’s case has attracted sustained international concern. In an opinion adopted in November 2024, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concluded that his detention violates international standards and called for his immediate release. In January 2026, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders Mary Lawlor reiterated that call, stating that she was deeply concerned that, more than a year after the Working Group’s opinion was adopted, not only has he not been released, but new allegations of torture and ill-treatment have also emerged. She expressed concern as well that his complaints have gone unanswered. She urged the government to guarantee his safety, investigate all alleged violations without delay, and allow independent international monitors to visit him in prison. 

It is also highly worrying that Dauletmurat Tazhimuratov’s family members have reportedly been subjected to pressure, including ongoing surveillance. At the same time, his treatment in prison has caused the family great distress, particularly his mother, who has personally witnessed his declining health and signs of ill-treatment during visits.

Urgent action needed

In light of the reported deterioration of Tazhimuratov’s health and the prospect of further restrictive detention conditions, AHRCA, IPHR and NHC call on the Uzbekistani authorities to take immediate steps to protect his health and safety, in line with their obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and other international human rights agreements. This should include releasing him, as called for by UN human rights mechanisms.

Pending Tazhimuratov’s release, the authorities should refrain from transferring him to harsher detention conditions that would increase his isolation and expose him to aggravated health risks and take measures to:

     — Ensure that he receives an immediate, independent medical examination and all necessary treatment, including transfer to appropriate medical facilities if required;

     — Ensure safe working conditions in line with occupational safety standards, including the provision of adequate protective equipment;

     — Guarantee unhindered access to legal counsel and regular contact with family members;

     — Promptly, thoroughly and impartially investigate all allegations of torture and ill-treatment and ensure accountability for any abuses found; 

     — Grant independent international monitors urgent access to him in detention; and

     — Ensure that his family members are not subjected to surveillance or any form of intimidation and harassment.