Uzbekistan: a sentence against human rights activists Fakhriddin Tillaev and Nuriddin Djumaniyazov is upheld

On 17 April 2014 at the Tashkent City Court a meeting of the Appeal Panel on the case against Fakhriddin Tillaev and Nuraddin Djumaniyazov took place. The sentence is upheld.

On 17 April 2014 at a meeting of the Appeal Panel Nuraddin Djumaniyazov and a lawyer Polina Brownerg who represents Fakhriddin Tillaev were present. The sentence is upheld. The human rights activists intend to appeal to a Supervisory Court.

On 13 March 2014 Polina Brownerg, a lawyer representing Fakhriddin Tillaev filed appeal with the Appeal Panel of the Tashkent City Criminal Court. The defence was counting on annulment of the sentence for lack of evidence.

By Judgement  of the Shaykhantahur District Criminal Court of the Tashkent city of 6 March 2014, two human rights activists who are members of the “Mazlum” Human Rights Centre, Fakhriddin Tillaev and Nuraddin Djumaniyazov were charged found guilty of a crime of human trafficking under Article 135, Part 3, Subsection “d” of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan.

Nuraddin
Djumaniyazov

The term of the sentence (clarified information). Tillaev was sentenced to 10 years and 8 months of imprisonment. After applying an act of amnesty, his sentence stands at 8 years and 9 months. Djumaniyazov was sentence to 9 years of imprisonment; after applying an act of amnesty, his sentence stands at 6 years. Both terms are deemed to start on 2 January 2014.

Specifics of the practice of Uzbek Courts. It is not the first time that a sentence read out in the Court room is different from the one that was handed down. On 6 March 2014 the Judge Sanjar Makhmudov announced that both human rights activists received identical terms i.e. 8 years and 3 months. It later emerged that Tillaev’s term was 8 years and 9 months and Djumaniyazov’s term was 6 years. The Judgement does not explain why Tillaev received a more severe punishment than Djumaniyazov.

A summery of the Appeal Application. The Application states that according to the Judgement Fakhriddin Tillaev is found guilty of being a member of an organised group which included Nuraddin Djumaniyazov and Khurram Berdiev, who lives in Kazakhstan; in September 2013 they sent the citizens of Uzbekistan Farkhad Pardaev and Erkin Erdanov to city of Shimkent of Kazakhstan with promises of salary of 600-1,000 USD.

According to the narrative of the Judgement, Tillaev did not travel with the “victims” to Kazakhstan and is only indirectly linked to this story. According to the “victims”, he met with them at a market place, when he approached them asking to sign up to the Trade Union of Freelance Labourers. He did not see them after that.

Fakhriddin Tillaev stated that he has nothing to do with Fakhriddin Pardaev and Erin Erdavon getting into to Kazakhstan. This was confirmed by the victims themselves, who passed the border crossing legally, without assistance of Tillaev and obtained a registration once there. When they arrived at the place of work, it turned out that they know nothing about construction works. Pardaev and Erdanov were offered to return to Uzbekistan. However, they asked very insistently to be given any work. They did not do a good job of even not complex tasks. Pardaev and Erdanov partially confirmed this; a citizen of Kazakhstan Zhanar Demeuova gave a witness account to this effect. According to her, they lacked any desire to learn anything or do any work. She added that no one abused or mistreated them.

Pardaev and Erdanov always had mobile phone is their possession. They could have contacted the police in Shimkent at any time or report to their family if they were subjected to beating, or abuse. Somehow, they never took this option.

It is absolutely unclear, why the victims who have skills as an electric, plumber, driver and plasterer did not want to work locally where they lived. These skills are very much sought after and well paid in Uzbekistan.

When they returned to Uzbekistan, neither Pardaev nor Erdanov sought medical care for alleged bodily harm caused. But, thanks to timely help from Abdulla Tojiboy Ogli and under his dictation they put down a complaint to the Tashkent city Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in which they wilfully distorted the facts in relation to their time in Kazakhstan.

During the investigation stage, a statement provided by Zhanar Demeuova was included in the case materials. She asserted that Pardaev and Erdanov did not work, were not skilled and only caused expenses.

The Court received an application to call Ms Demeuva as a witness, she agreed to give evidence, but the Court rejected the application.

The investigation was expedited and it took only 1 hour 50 minutes to charge Tillaev, question him as accused and to allow time for him to read the case materials against him. The case was referred to the Prosecutor’s Office on the same day.

It took 2 hours to question Tillaev, Djumaniyazov, Pardaev, Erdanov and Abdulla Todjiboy Ogli. After this, the Court left the room to elaborate on the Judgement and rejected an application by Fakhriddin Tillaev requesting a medical examination.

The application by Tillaev requesting a medical examination was filed on 23 January 2014. The investigating officer K. Abduzhalolov accepted it. But, up to this day, neither Tillaev nor his lawyer received the results of the medical examination.

On 5 March 2014, one day before the hearing, the investigating officer reported in writing that the application was sent to the Warden of the Tashkent Prison. It is not clear what provision of which law was the investigating officer guided by when deciding that the Warden of the Tashkent Prison was an appropriate official to consider this application as opposed to a forensic specialist.

The defence is of an opinion that the case lacks evidence of Fakhriddin Tillaev’s guilt. The lawyer applied to repeal the Judgement of the first instance on the basis of the following provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan:

- Article 497-1 (Decisions Subject to Bringing Complaint and Protest against by Way of Appellate Procedure);

- Article 497-2 (Persons Who Have Right to Bring Complaint and Protest against Sentence by Way of Appellate Procedure);

- Article 497-3 (Procedure for Bringing Appellate Complaint and Protest against Sentence);

  - Article 497-4 (Procedure for Extending Time Limit for Bringing an Appellate Complaint or Protest).

The Association for Human Rights in Central Asia is of an opinion that the hearing by the Appeal Panel was not objective: it relies on the evidence given by persons who could not prove that they were subjected to exploitation in Kazakhstan; even if the exploitation took place connection of Tillaev and Djumaniyazov to this is not proven.

Uzbekistan: On the Situation of 8 Participants in an Action of Solidarity with Free Ukraine

Participants in an action which took place in January are to face a judge 4 April 2014. If they fail to appear, they face an additional fine.

On 27 January 2014 in Tashkent, 7 citizens of Uzbekistan and one citizen of Ukraine submitted a petition to the Ukrainian Embassy in Tashkent (the text is attached, in Ukrainian). They photographed themselves with the flag of Ukraine at the embassy. Then they drove to the Taras Shevchenko monument, where they photographed themselves with the flags of Ukraine and Georgia. After this, they passed through the mahalla to the Khazrati (Khast) Muslim complex and photographed themselves there.

Later, these photographs appeared on the sites of many independent Internet publications and were perceived as a show of solidarity with participants in the action “For a Free Ukraine” on EuroMaidan in Kiev – in support of those protesting and advocating for the integration of Ukraine with the Europe Union.

Three days later, it turned out that the Uzbek authorities had declared the action by the 8 participants an “organization of an unauthorized rally and picket” and punished them with a fine and administrative arrest. The terms “rally,” “picket,” “street procession” and “demonstration” are not defined in the national legislation of Uzbekistan.

On 29 January 2014, at about 20:00, Shukhrat Nurmukhamedov, a police precinct inspector and four officers of the Main Department of Internal Affairs of the city of Tashkent came to the home of Umida Akhmedova, a photo artist and documentary film-maker. They did not introduce themselves. They took away Umida Akhmedova and her son, the photo artist Timur Karpov, for a “chat.” They did not explain the reason for their detention, and did not show any papers justifying the detention. The policemen wrote out the summons to the police department only after being asked to do so by the detainees.

The same occurred with all the other participants in the action.

• Information about the participants in the photographic session:

1. Timur Karpov, born 23 January 1990 in Tashkent. Citizen of Uzbekistan. Studied at Tashkent Theatre Institute in the film-making department, left after one year. One-man show at the Ilkhom Theater in 2009. Took part in group exhibits in St. Petersburg in 2008, in Uglich in 2013 and in Minsk in 2013. On 25 January 2014 at the House of Photography in Tashkent at the initiative of the Neformat Photo Club, a photo exhibit opened titled “One Space.” Among the participants was Timur Karpov. He presented photographs from the cycle “Abandoned Cities.” His work was banned from the show two hours before the exhibit due to the wishes of two directors of the Academy of Arts of Uzbekistan – Akmal Nur, chairman, and his deputy, Ravshan Mirtadzhiev. The decision about the censoring of free art provoked a conflict.

Under administrative arrest from 29 to 30 January 2014. By order of the Khamzin Court for Criminal Cases, on 30 January, under Art. 201 of the Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan for Administrative Liability (Violation of the procedure of organizations for conducting assemblies, rallies, street processions or demonstrations), was sentenced to a fine of 5,766,300 soms, which at the official rate is US $2,597. At the trial, an amount twice as less as what was indicated in the decree was announced.

2. Umida Ahmedova, born 21 October 1955 in Parkent. Citizen of Uzbekistan. Photo artist and documentary film-maker. Graduated from cultural and education academy in Vladimir (photo and film-making department) and in 1986 from the All-Union State Institute of Cinematography (VGIK). Author of documentary films, “Burden of Virginity,” “Women and Men in Rites and Rituals,” and the photo album “Women and Men from Dusk to Dawn,” for which she was sentenced in February 2010 on charges of “insult” and “libel.” The court did not specify a punishment, since immediately after being sentenced, she was amnestied. (The Supreme Court of Uzbekistan has yet to review her appeal to date.)

Under administrative arrest from 29 to 30 January 2014. By decree of the Khamzin Court for Criminal Cases on 30 January under Art. 201 of the Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan for Administrative Liability was fined 2,402,625 soms (US $1,082). (This amount was announced in court, but Ahmedova did  not receive the decree. It is possible that it contains the amount US $2,597.)

3. Alexei Ulko was born on 26 February 1969 in Samarkand. Citizen of Uzbekistan. Lives in Tashkent. Education: Uzbek State University of World Languages (Tashkent) and College of St Mark and St John (Plymouth, Great Britain). Teaches English at the British Council in Tashkent.  

Under administrative arrest from 29 January through 14 February 2014. By decree of the Khamzin Court for Criminal Cases on 30 January under Art. 201 of the Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan for Administrative Liability, was arrested for 15 days, and served the term in full.

4. Ashot Dannelyan, born 6 November 1983, in Tashkent. Citizen of Uzbekistan. Lives in Tashkent. Leader of the rock group Wings of Origami.

Under administrative arrest from 29 January to 8 February 2014. By decree of the Khamzin Court for Criminal Cases, on 30 January, under Art. 201 of the Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan for Administrative Liability, was arrested for 15 days, and released after 8 days.

5. Gulsum Osmanova, born in Baku. Lives in Tashkent. Citizen of Uzbekistan. Not subjected to administrative punishment, does not figure in the court decree.

6. Ilgar Gasymov. Citizen of Uzbekistan. Permanent resident of Tashkent. Member of the rock group Wings of Origami.

Under administrative arrest from 29 to 30 January 2014. By decree of the Khamzin Court for Criminal Cases, on 30 January under Art. 201 of the Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan for Administrative Liability was fined 5,766,300 soms ($2,597). At the trial, the amount announced was twice as less as that indicated in the decree.

7. Artem Lyudny, born in Kiev. Citizen of Ukraine. Permanent resident of Tashkent. Worked in an advertising company. Studied sociology at International Solomon University.

Under administrative arrest from 29 January through 5 February 2014. By decree of the Khamzin Court for Criminal Cases, on 30 January under Art. 201 of the Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan for Administrative Liability, was arrested for 15 days, and released after 8 days.

8. D.B. (At the request of the petitioner, I am not indicating his name). Citizen of Uzbekistan. Permanent resident of Tashkent.

Under administrative arrest from 29 through 30 January 2014. By decree of the Khamzin Court for Criminal Cases, on 30 January under Art. 201 Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan for Administrative Liability, was fined 4,805,250 sums ($2,165). At the trial, the amount announced was twice as less as what was indicated in the decree.

On 17 February 2014, Bakhritdinova filed an appeal to the city court. There is no official notice yet of the date of the trial and its decision.

The participants in the action were sent court summons. They stated that on 4 April 2014 they must appear

before the judicial executor A.A. Tilavov. In the event they fail to appear without a valid reason, a fine of 961,050 sums will be imposed on them in accordance with Art. 198 (Non-fulfilment of the lawful demands or obstruction of the fulfillment of official duties of a representative of the government) of the Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan on Administrative Liability and Art. 82 (Liability for non-fulfillment of an executive document and obstruction of its executor) of the Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan (“On the execution of judicial acts and other bodies). The decision of the court regarding the participants in the action went into force on 17 February 2014, but none of them have received an official notice of this yet.

• System

As has been proven by practice, in Uzbekistan, administrative punishment becomes a formal basis for restricting the rights of the active part of the population. They are arrested for a period of up to 15 days; the amount of the fine can exceed activists’ annual salary. Often, criminal prosecution will follow administrative punishment. Human rights defender Fakhriddin Tillayev has found himself in this situation. In September 2013, he was arrested for 15 days and fined, and then sentenced to imprisonment for more than 8 years.

The situation of Sergei Naumov, a freelance correspondent for the online publication Fergana.ru is also alarming. The city court in Urgench issued a decision on 21 September 2013 at an open court session regarding actions he had supposedly committed, characterized as “petty hooliganism and violation of public order” (Art. 183 of the Administrative Code of Uzbekistan). Sergei Naumov spent 12 days of arrest in inhumane conditions. His attempts to appeal the court decree were unsuccessful due to pressure placed on his attorney and Naumov himself. From several indications, at the present time the interest on the part of government agencies in him is growing, which is leading to a restriction of his rights and mean that conditions may exist for a new provocation.

Association for Human Rights in Central Asia believes that regarding the participants in the public action “For Free Ukraine,” the following are violated:

Constitution of Uzbekistan, in particular:

- Art. 29 – “Every citizen has the right to freely express his opinion”;

-Art. 33 – “Citizens have the right to exercise their civic activity in the form of rallies, assemblies and demonstrations in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan.”

International Covent on Civil and Political Rights, in particular:

- Art. 19

1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.

2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.

- Art. 21

1. The right of peaceful assembly shall be recognized

Association for Human Rights in Central Asia has sent the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, the European Union special Rapporteur on Human Rights, and the European Union Special Rapporteur on Central Asia, international human rights organizations and diplomats of democratic countries a statement on the non-observance of obligations under international human rights agreements.

See also:  Press Release “Uzbekistan: 6 picketers arrested, their whereabouts remain unknown” from 30 January 2014.

Statement on the Poisoning of Malohat Eshankulova

The Association for Human Rights in Central Asia received by e-mail a message marked “SOS” stating that Malokhat Eshankulova, head of the Birdamlik movement in Uzbekistan, is seriously ill. Further, the statement said Eshankulova has been poisoned by the Uzbek authorities, has great difficulty moving around and is rapidly losing weight – 15 kg in recent months. Recently, Eshankulova traveled to Samarkand to visit her mother, in order to say goodbye to her before death.

Soon afterward, we were sent an Internet link to a petition addressed to the embassies of the countries of the European Uniondisseminated by Galima Bukharbayeva, the editor of the site Uznews.net:

The author of the petition asks diplomats to provide medical assistance to Eshankulova, and calls on people of good will to show solidarity by signing the petition.

Such alarming news has provoked serious concern, therefore our representative in Uzbekistan visited Malokhat Eshankulova. The meeting took place in the Birdamlik Movement office. Eshankulova was there with her daughter. Indeed she did look thin and explained this as due to a liver ailment. She admitted that she had not gone to Uzbek doctors and prefers care from a physician living in Turkey. Eshankulova did not state that the Uzbek authorities had poisoned her, and did not present any documented conclusions from doctors about poisoning.

Experts of our Association have not found persuasive the claims of Eshankulova in her statement that she was poisoned in revenge for her political activity, and have found it inappropriate and pointless to accuse someone of a crime. Eshankulova has long been undergoing stress, which might provoke her emotional reaction or even panic. Therefore, we do not believe that she is deliberately lying.

The Association for Human Rights in Central Asia is an independent organization and reserves the right to verify information received, to provide a legal evaluation and freely express its opinion.

We do not believe it is necessary to comment on emotional evaluations. We remind our opponents that  intolerance to criticism and heightened self-regard lower trust in their statements.

Uzbekistan: political prisoner Murad Djuraev appeals for help

A political prisoner Murad Djuraev is exempted from working at the brick production plant because of his age. His health is worsening. He is exhausted. According to his wife, Holbeka Djuraeva, he suffers from constant headaches physical weakness. He has been waiting to see a dentist for over 6 months. The dentist was paid to make dentures for him because Djuraev lost his teeth in while in custody. Funds for denture were given by «Freedom now » a human rights organisation. 

Murad Djuraev

Murad Djuraev was born in 1952 in the town of Mubarak of Kashkadarya region of Uzbekistan. He is married and has three children. He graduated from the Tashkent Polytechnic Institute. Between 1989 and 1992 he worked as the Chairman of the Executive Committee of the City Council of the town of Mubarek. Between 1991-1992 he was a member of Parliament of Uzbekistan. He was accused of conspiring with the leader of the opposition political party "Erk" Muhammad Salih. According to the authorities, they wanted to organise a violent seizure of power. Murad Djuraev has been in prison since 18 September 1994. 

On 31 May 1995 Djuraev was sentenced to 12 years of imprisonment to be served in high security prison and confiscation of his property. In accordance with an Act of Amnesty his sentence was reduced by 3 years.

Shortly before the end of his sentence term on 27 July 2004, Djuarev was convicted on trumped-up charges under Article 221 of the Criminal Code of Uzbekistan « Disobedience to Legitimate Orders of Administration of Institution of Execution of Penalty» for yet another three years of imprisonment. The same happened on 27 July 2006 when his, then, last sentence term was coming to the end; the prisoner was given an additional three years of imprisonment under Article 221 of the Criminal code of Uzbekistan. On 31 May 2009, using the same Article, his prison term was again extended by three years and four months. Among other reasons given – the punishment was given because he “improperly peeled carrots,” while working in the kitchen. On 13 November 2012, he completed his fourth sentence. On 4 December 2012, Murad Djuraev was sentenced again to three years and 24 days, once again under the Article 221 of the Criminal Code of Republic of Uzbekistan. 

The Association for Human Rights in Central Asia – AHRCA appeals to representatives of governments, international and inter-state organisations to call upon Uzbekistan to grant access to medical, as well as dental care urgently for Murad Djuraev. Uzbekistan pledged to implement ratified international agreements on human rights, including the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This report was sent to: 

• United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights;
• UN Special Rapporteur on Torture;
• EU special rapporteur on Central Asia;
• EU special rapporteur on human rights;
• The governments of democratic countries;
• International human rights organizations 

You can sign on-goint petition to free Murad Djuraev via the link:
https://secure.avaaz.org/ru/petition/Verhovnomu_Komissaru_OON_po_pravam_cheloveka_Navanethem_Pilley_Za_svobodu_uzbekskogo_politzaklyuchennogo_Murada_Dzhuraev/?pv=11 

Our previous publications about Murad Djuraev:
         – Petition «On the Day of the 65th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights please support a petition for freedom of Uzbek political prisoner Murad Djuraev!» dated 9 December 2013;
         – Press release «Uzbekistan: There is a red band on the file of a political prisoner Murad Djuraev» dated 29 April 2013;
         – Press release «Uzbekistan: An appeal against the sentence in the case of Murat Juraev is rejected» dated 1 January 2013;
         – Press release «Uzbekistan: Murad Djuraev is sentenced to another term of imprisonment of three years 24 days» dated 16 December  2012;;
         – Press release «Uzbekistan: Free Political Prisoners on Constitution Day. Use Anniversary to Advance Real Reform» dated 6 December 2012;
         – Press release «Uzbekistan: Ailing political prisoner Murad Djuraev is again placed in solitary confinement» dated 14 October 2012;
         – Press release «It is not possible to find out the location of political prisoner Murad Djuraev for the last four months» dated 17 September 2009.

Uzbekistan: Two Human Rights Defenders Imprisoned for 8 Years, 3 Months

A trial took place in Tashkent of human rights advocates Fakhriddin Tillaev and Nuraddin Djumaniyazov. They were falsely accused of “trafficking in persons” and sentenced to 8 years and three months.

On 6 March 2014, in Tashkent in the Shayhantaur District Court for Criminal Cases, the trial of two members of the Mazlum Human Rights Center took place: Fakhriddin Tillaev and Nuriddin Jumaniyazov. They were charged under Art. 135 of the Criminal Code (“trafficking in persons”). The prosecutor asked for 12 years of imprisonment. The court sentenced both the human rights advocates to 10 years and 8 months of imprisonment and applied the amnesty act passed by the Senate of Uzbekistan. The final term of punishment was thus 8 years and 3 months of imprisonment. 

Fakhriddin Tillaev

Fakhriddin Khabibulloevich Tillaev was born on 15 August 1971 in the city of Baysun of the Surkhandarya Region of Uzbekistan. Citizen of Uzbekistan. Married. Two children. Since 2003, he has been a member of the Maslum Human Rights Center. Since 2005, he has been involved in the defense of labor rights in Surkhandarya Region. In 2012, he was one of the founders of the Union of Independent Trade Unions for support of labor migrants (the director is Abdulla Todjiboy- ugly).

Nuraddin
Djumaniyazov

Nuraddin Reimbergenovich Djumaniyazov, born 8 October 1948, in the city of Turtkul, Karakalpak ASSR, Uzbekistan. Citizen of Uzbekistan. Divorced. Two children. Since 2003, has been a member of the Maslum Human Rights Center. In 2012, took part in the creation of the Union of Independence Trade Unions for support of labor migrants and headed its Tashkent chapter.

• Investigation

On 14 February 2014, the face-to-face interrogation of Fakhriddin Tillaev and Nuraddin Djumaniyazov took place. On the same day, they were charged, the preliminary inquiry was begun and completed, and the case was transferred to the prosecutor’s office. The accused and their attorneys were not given time to familiarize themselves with the criminal case. The excessive speed of the investigative measures grossly violated the code of criminal procedures of Uzbekistan.

On 2 January 2014, Tillaev and Djumaniyazov were arrested with the sanction of the court, but the materials of the arrest case were dated 4 January. This is not the first case of falsification of the date of arrest in the practice of Uzbekistan.

• Torture

On 21 January 2014, during a meeting with his attorney Polina Braunerg, Tillaev said that he could not hear out of his right ear and that it was bleeding periodically. Then he reported that he had been forced to stand for hours under a faucet from which water dripped on his head. This caused a severe headache. The torturers also stuck needles between his fingers and toes.

When she learned of the torture, the lawyer appealed the same day to the investigator with a petition for forensic medical examination. Yet not until 5 March did she receive a reply from the investigator. He reported that he had sent her petition to Tashkent Prison, where Tillaev was being held, but only the prison administration could review it. In the event of a refusal, the attorney could send an inquiry to the head of the investigative division of the Interior Ministry of Uzbekistan. Likely, in this way, the investigator was trying to delay the assignment of a forensic medical examination.

In the materials of the criminal case, there were inquiries from Tillaev’s attorney on the conducting of the examination. The conclusion is missing from the materials of the case; therefore it was not mentioned in court, and experts did not take part in the proceeding. All of this was done so that the court would not even have the opportunity to take into account the complaints on the use of torture.

• Trial

Tillaev’s attorney Polina Brauberg learned of the date of the trial in the afternoon of 5 March 2014, that is, with less than a day’s notice. In fact, she learned this accidently, when she went to the Shaykhantaur Court for Criminal Cases for another case. The trial was scheduled for 11:00 a.m., but it began after 13:00 and lasted until 17:00. The court proceeding took about five hours, and was taped by a cameraman from UzTV Channel One.

The prosecutor came to the trial with a triumphant expression, and apparently knew about the videotaping. According to witnesses, she was not familiar with the criminal case and looked through it from the hands of Judge Sanjar Muhammadov.

The “victims” took part in the trial. They informed the court that they had not seen Tillaev and had no relationship to him whatsoever. They confirmed that they had asked Djumaniyazovto give them the address of a southern Kazakhstani firm where they could ask about placement for temporary work. Without compensation, he connected them to a job placement agent in Chimkent (Kazakhstan).  In the case file, there is information that the “victims” Erkin Erdanov and Farhod Pardayev had freedom of movement, and access to international telephone communication. At their request, part of their wages was transferred from Kazakhstan to the account of relatives in Uzbekistan. Erdanov and Pardayev were offered free housing and meals. They were paid a salary for 25 days.

Their colleague Abdulla Tojiboy-ugly spoke particularly actively at the trial, and essentially took the side of the prosecution. He shouted and hurled insults at the defendants. Even the judge noted that Todjiboy-ugly was obliged to answer the questions of the court and not give an appraisal of the actions of the defendants.

On that same day, the prosecutor read the indictment and the court opened the pleadings.

At the end of the court session, the sentence was read out.

The Association for Human Rights in Central Asia (AHRCA) notes that the trial of the human rights defenders Fakhriddin Tillaev and Nuraddin Djumaniyazov was not independent or impartial. The sides were not equal in the trial and the tilt toward the prosecution predominated, that is, the court essentially supported the prosecution. Under such circumstances, the evidence cannot be examined.
   - The defense had the opportunity to be present during the investigation and 5 hours in court;
   - Tillaev and Djumaniyazov did not have time to familiarize themselves with the materials of the case, which violated their right to defense;
   - The court reviewed the case extremely fast. It accepted groundless evidence from the prosecution, which relied not only on the testimonies of the “vicims”; the latter could not prove that they had been subject to force during their work for a southern Kazakhstani firm. In the materials of the case, there was no information about inquiries from the investigation to Kazakhstan, no information about how the victims had not been paid for their labor, that the employers restrained them or deprived them of their freedom of movement, or any other qualifying signs for such a crime as trafficking in persons.

The Association of Human Rights of Central Asia (AHRCA) has sent a report:

          - to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

          - to the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders

          - to the UN Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers

          - to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture

          - to the EU Special Representative on Central Asia

          - to the EU Special Representative on Human Rights

          - to the governments of democratic countries

We urge you to call on the government of Uzbekistan to fulfill the international agreements it has ratified in the area of human rights, including the UN Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhumane or Degrading Forms of Treatment and Punishment and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Previously we had written about this case in the press release “Uzbekistan: Fakhriddin Tillaev, a human rights activist is under threat of long term imprisonment” on 17 February 2014.

Over the Last Year, the Situation in the Kazakh Service of RFE/RL Has Not Improved

Interim Managers of the Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

John Giambalvo and Nenad Pejic

(Appeal №2)

Copied to:

Broadcasting Board of Governors Chairman Jeff Shell 

www.bbg.gov

Inspector General for the U.S. Department of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors Steve Linick

http://oig.state.gov

                                                                                                                          

Dear John Giambalvo and Nenad Pejic,

In recent days we have been planning to release our second open letter to your predecessor, Mr. Kevin Klose, President of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, expressing our disappointment. For the whole year, he didnot responded to our first letter, however, the issues which we wrote about inour letter of 15 May 2013, are getting worse. 

We call on you to investigate, without delay, the numerous appeals and complaints regarding the work style of the directors of the Kazakh, Tajik and Turkmen Services of RFE/RL. These services are systematically violating the labour rights of correspondents and journalists who have dared to protest against violations of the principles of editorial policy. They have suffered harassment and dismissals.

The U.S. administration considers Central Asian countries as strategic partners. Perhaps, therefore, the crimes against humanity committed by the dictators in the region have gone unnoticed.

The lack of response on your part is puzzling. We have already noted facts that require a legal assessment:

1) The Kazakh Service of RFE/RL is white-washing the image of dictator Nursultan Nazarbayev, and actively takes part in actions of state propaganda.

2) Materials broadcast by the Kazakh and Turkmen Services of the RFE/RL replicate the lies and official information of the government press.

3) The Kazakh Service of RFE/RL actively and openly cooperates with the NGO WikiBilim in Astana. This is a state-funded organisation which produces the Kazakh-language section of Wikipedia.  Articles produced by the organisation are of pro-government nature, find the details in the announcement published on May 15th, 2013.

4) The site of the Kazakh Service of RFE/RL continues to operate the notorious entertainment sections “Wifi-25" and "Chat Aitys" which propagates outright vulgarity. There are other vulgar and obscene materials also found in the social networks pages of the Kazakh service.

5) The section titled "Nowruz Aitys" [Наурыз Айтыс] , started in 2013, is filled with racism, chauvinism, homophobia and vulgarity. It disseminates recordings of the competition held by the Government of Kazakhstan. The materials contained in this section call for the re-drawing of the border of Kazakhstan, and contain incitement of hatred towards foreigners and the neighboring nations, for example:

 - Begarys Shoybekov, a poet, tells his rival in the competition that she has become as ugly as a "Sart". (In the original Kazakh: «Сүйкімсіз болып кеттің ғой сарттай болып». The word "Sart" in Central Asia is a pejorative reference to ethnic Uzbeks.

 - The poet Birzhan Baytuov expresses his dislike for the Chinese, who, according to him, are invading Kazakhstan under the guise of oil investors, and the number of "slit-eyed" has grown in Almaty, in the West and the South of Kazakhstan. He compares the Chinese to midges that sit on the collars of the Kazakhs. (In the original Kazakh: «Батысымда мұнайды себеп қылып»

         Шіркедей қонып алды жағамызға

Міне енді оңтүстікке қадам басты
Бұған қарсы бір айла табамыз ба?»)

         (translation from the Kazakh:

 «The Midges have settled on our collars

Under the pretext of oil exploration in my  West.

Now here they come to the South,

Will we be able to oppose this?»

-  According to the authors of "Nowruz Aitys", Tashkent and Orenburg are supposedly Kazakh cities "unfairly given to Uzbekistan and Russia"; Nazarbayev is a "good guy,” and the "bad people around him" or "internal enemies" - leaders of the Kazakh opposition Vladimir Kozlov and Mukhtar Ablyazov – are to blame for the difficulties of Kazakhstan.

6) The Kazakh service of RFE /RL started promoting the ideas of fascism and xenophobia through an online conference with representatives of Kazakh nationalist movements that call themselves natspaty - that is, "national-patriots.”

 - On 26 November 2013, Serikzhan Mambetalin, a natspat stated: “It is time to consolidate all the Kazakh nationalists and be prepared for snap elections; as it stands right now, the Kazakh nationalists do not have their own political party”.  At the same time, he stated that all Kazakhs should be nationalists.

 -  Natspat  Mukhtar Tayzhan known for his fascist, anti-Russian slogans, has also been a frequent guest of the Kazakh editors. On 20 November 2013, he stated that he estimated the number of Kazakhs in Kazakhstan had increased significantly and reached 73% of the population. He added that politics in Kazakhstan, in his opinion, should correspond to demographics.

7) The Kazakhservice of RFE/RL violates the requirements of Western journalism and showslack of principle or even betrays the interests of the corporation. On 8 February 2014, Dina Baydildayeva, the Social Networking Editor of the RFE/RL Kazakh Service, held a protest in central Almaty against the arrest of a few activist-bloggers, publicly acknowledging them as her friends. Baydildayeva also demanded the resignation of Yesimov, the head of the city administration or mayor. This action was taken despite the rule that RFE/RL employees should not participate in political activities. On 20 February of this year, Baydildayevapersonally and openly participated in another protest in the center of Almaty according to another video report published by theKazakh service of RFE/RL.  

Dina Baydildayeva often makes ribald comments on Facebook – both in her capacity as an editor of RFE/ RL for Social Networking in Kazakhstan and as a private individual. For example, on 9 September 2013, she posted an article about the wife of the dictator Bashar Assad, and commented, "Beautiful bitch."

8) Various forces within the ruling elite of Kazakhstan create manageable nationalist movements for introduction into the public consciousness of the ideas of fascism and xenophobia in society and in order to maintain "controlled tension.” It is very unfortunate that the RFE/RL Kazakh Service is involved in such dirty political games, because these materials can be perceived by the audience as the official U.S. position . Former RFE/RL employees and opposition activists say that such things became possible after the hiring (under mysterious circumstances) of the former deputy head of the city administration of Almaty, Galym Bokasha in 2010, who also turned out to belong to the same tribe as Edige Magauin, the Director of the RFE/RL Kazakh Service. But the journalists who dared to criticize the practice of tribalism, nepotism and corruption in the editorial office – Saida Kalkulova, Nazir Darimbet, Sagat Batyrkhan and Ukulyay Bestayev – were dismissed in 2012. The social circles of Kazakhstan continue to criticize abuses in the Kazakh Service, but the top management of RFE/RL continues to ignore it.

9) Messrs Edige Magauin and Galim Bokash are making peculiar findings themselves. If any material on the  website of the Kazakh Service attracts criticism, it gets quietly removed or "erased". It happened, for example, with the article "«Өзбекстанда қамалған қазақ сотталып кетті" (translated as "Kazakh Arrested in Uzbekistan Convicted"). Reader Comments on this item contained explicit insults of Uzbeks, but after our previous Open Letter these comments were rewritten, which is unacceptable from an ethical perspective. The same thing happened with the poetic periodical "ChatAitys" and comments on it; in early 2013, editors of the RFE/RL Kazakh cleanedout the word "sperm" and "sauna" following criticism in thepress.

For the last 12 months, Galym Bokash, editor-in-chief of the RFE/RL Kazakh Service, has been receiving praise in a series ofmaterials published in pro-government media. His publications are advertise in the social network Facebook by activists of nationalist organisations such as Mukhtar Tayzhan, Ajdos Syry and Yerlan Karin, the highest functionary of the central apparatus of Nazarbayev's party Nur Otan.

Dear John Giambalvo and Nenad Pejic,

Upon assuming the duties of President or RFE/RL with more than 60 years of experience in the promotion of democratic values ​​in the former communist bloc, we wish you success in restoring its reputation and audience. We hope you will let us know the results of your investigation into the facts set out in this statement.

Yours faithfully,

Nadejda Atayeva, President of the Association for Human Rights in Central Asia

Arif Yunusov, PhD in History, Head of the Department of Conflicts and Immigration of the Institute for Peace and Democracy, Expert of International Network of Ethnic Monitoring  and Prevention of Conflicts, Expert of Independent Research Council on Migration from CIS and Baltic Countries, Expert for the Association for Human Rights in Central Asia.

Leyla Yunus, Ph.D. (History), Director of the Institute for Peace and Democracy in Azerbaijan, member of the French Legion of Honour, winner of the Theodore Hacker International Award For Political Courage and Honesty.

Sergey Ignatyev, Representative in the USA, Association for Human Rights in Central Asia;

Dmitry Belomestnov, Representative in Russia, Association for Human Rights in Central Asia;

Alisher Abidov, Representative in Norway, Association for Human Rights in Central Asia;