Central Asian Rights Activists Seek OSCE Action
Local groups back international calls for new post dedicated to protecting human rights defenders.
Central Asian Rights Activists Seek OSCE Action
Local groups back international calls for new post dedicated to protecting human rights defenders.
Central Asian human rights defenders have welcomed attempts by international watchdog groups to make human rights a priority at a forthcoming OSCE summit in the Kazak capital Astana. In particular, they are keen on a proposal for the OSCE to introduce a special post responsible for protecting human rights activists.
At the same time, human rights defenders interviewed by IWPR doubted the initiative would be successful, given regional governments’ policy of silencing critics and the fact that the OSCE chair is currently held by Kazakstan, which itself has a questionable human rights record.
An appeal to prioritise human rights at the December 1-2 OSCE summit was issued jointly by the International Partnership for Human Rights based in Brussels, the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee, the Stockholm-based Civil Rights Defenders, the Moscow Helsinki Group, the Netherlands Helsinki Committee, the Norwegian Helsinki Committee and the Polish Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, during a Human Dimension Implementation Meeting hosted by the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, ODIHR, in the Polish capital Warsaw between September 30 and October 8.
The statement contained specific recommendations addressed to each of the five Central Asian governments and said the OSCE summit should produce “concrete measures to enhance protections for human rights defenders who are at at risk in the region”.
These included creating the new post of OSCE special representative for human rights defenders, developing the organisation’s ability to step in and offer swift assistance to activists under threat, and greater cooperation among member states to promote the independence of judges, prosecutors and police.
The joint statement highlighted the challenges facing human rights defenders across Central Asia by citing a number of specific cases.
In November 2009, for example, Ganikhon Mamatkhanov, a human rights defender in Fergana in eastern Uzbekistan was sentenced to five years in prison for bribery and fraud. Criminal charges of this kind are routinely used to smear and convict rights activists. Mamatkhanov’s real crime is more likely to have been his work to promote the rights of farmers.
Surat Ikramov, leader of the Initiative Group of Independent Human Rights Defenders in Uzbekistan, was accused of libel, and duly lost the court case in September.
Government pressure in Turkmenistan has forced most civil society groups there out of existence. Of the handful who remain, environmental activist Andrey Zatoka was expelled from the country in November 2009.
In Tajikistan, lawyer Solijon Juraev was charged with defamation in February for remarks he is alleged to have made about members of the judiciary.
Similar questions about political interference in trials were raised when Yevgeny Zhovtis, head of the Kazakstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law, was jailed last year for causing a death in a traffic accident.
Human rights defenders who reported on the widespread ethnic violence in southern Kyrgyzstan this June found themselves accused of spreading false information and even promoting the disturbances.
In September, Azimjan Askarov, director of the Jalalabad-based human rights group Vozdukh was given a life sentence for alleged participation in the unrest. Once again, his colleagues in the human rights community say he was punished for trying to uncover abuses.
Tolekan Ismailova, head of the Citizens Against Corruption, left Kyrgyzstan in July after receiving death threats following her reporting on abuses committed during the ethnic violence.
Human rights activists in Central Asia said the international effort to push OSCE members to do more to support them could be helpful, although real change would have to come from within the five states, with the growth of strong civil societies, independent ombudsmen, free media and independent judiciaries.
They said international organisations like the OSCE could exert influence by directly supporting local rights groups or pressuring regional governments when cases of persecution arose. They were generally supportive of their international colleagues’ call for “a special OSCE representative to address and visibly raise issues relative to the situation of human rights defenders”. ODIHR already has a Focal Point for Human Rights Defenders and National Human Rights Institutions, but the proposed post would mean a senior official was dedicated to this key area.
A human rights activist from Uzbekistan said the proposed post would hold out the hope of swift action whenever individuals were targeted.
“The lack of a special representative [to date] means that rights activists are thrown on their own resources, which are generally limited,” he said.
Abdumalik Sharipov, programme coordinator of the human rights group Spravedlost based in Jalalabad, Kyrgyzstan, was similarly positive about the proposed post.
“We have become more vulnerable,” he said, adding that it was not human rights activists who were at risk because of their activities, but their family members too.
“I think the time has come for international donors to tie their assistance to countries in this region to human rights.”
Ikramov said a human rights special representative should focus attention on those OSCE members where the situation was worst.
“In advanced countries which have established democratic procedures, rights activists don’t face major risks, whereas in Central Asia, particularly in Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and more recently Kyrgyzstan, the risks are obvious,” he said.
Another area where the international community could usefully be active, Ikramov said, was in supporting and funding human rights groups that have been refused registration by the authorities.
“The position that international organisations cannot support unregistered NGOs must be changed,” he said.
Farid Tukhbatullin, head of the Vienna-based Turkmen Human Rights Initiative, was among those who remained sceptical that the statement would lead to anything, even if it got as far as being aired at the OSCE summit.
“The OSCE doesnt have any mechanisms to force its members to honour the obligations they have undertaken,” he said.
An official at the Kazak foreign ministry, who did not want to be named, agreed that the chances of creating a special post to protect human rights defenders within the OSCE were slim. But he said this was not because Kazakstan as chairman would block it.
“The complicated procedure for taking decisions within the OSCE offers little hope of a positive outcome in the foreseeable future,” he said.
Noting that all 56 OSCE member would have to vote in favour of the new post, he said, “The Turkmen and Uzbek foreign ministries will put forward their standard argument that there are enough European human rights institutions already, and that it makes no sense to set up a separate post.”
Alisher Kholdarov and Kamilla Abdullaeva are pseudonyms for journalists from Uzbekistan. Inga Sikorskaya is IWPR senior editor for Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.
This article was produced jointly under two IWPR projects: Building Central Asian Human Rights Protection & Education Through the Media, funded by the European Commission; and the Human Rights Reporting, Confidence Building and Conflict Information Programme, funded by the Foreign Ministry of Norway.
The contents of this article are the sole responsibility of IWPR and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of either the European Union or the Foreign Ministry of Norway.
