Tajikistan Bans “Negative” Films on Migrants

While many Tajiks support a recent ban on a Russian film making fun of Central Asian immigrants, critics of the move say the authorities should do more to help migrant workers improve their lot.

Analysts and filmmakers are also concerned that several locally-made documentaries raising serious questions about the plight of Tajiks working abroad were included in the ban.

In March, Tajikkino, the state film and video agency, refused to grant a license for local distribution of the Russian-made comedy “Our Russia: Balls of Fate”. The ban did not become public knowledge until a month later, when local journalists got wind of it.

The head of Tajikkino’s film licensing department, Akbar Sharipov, told IWPR that a commission of experts had ruled that the film’s portrayal of Tajik migrants in Russia was offensive.

The film’s makers insist the main characters, two illegal immigrants taken on as builders in Moscow, are not Tajiks at all. They are supposed to be from a fictional Central Asian state called Nubarashen.

Nevertheless, people in Tajikistan are convinced they are the butt of the joke. The characters’ names, Rafshan and Jumjud, are invented, but sound more Tajik than, for example, Georgian or Kyrgyz.

Up to 1.5 million of Tajikistan’s seven million population work abroad, mainly in Russia. They also go to Kazakstan, the United Arab Emirates and Turkey. The money they send home is a major source of income for households, and is believed to be equivalent to twice the Tajik government’s annual budget.

The film provoked an outcry in Tajikistan, and the media was soon full of condemnation of its portrayal of migrants. At the end of March, the Moscow-based Tajik Labour Migrants’ Movement wrote to Russia’s prosecution service and media oversight agency asking them to stop sales of DVDs of the film.

People whom IWPR interviewed on the streets of Dushanbe were angry at the depiction of Tajiks as backward yokels, and fearful that such negative images would only deepen Russian prejudices.

“The main characters are shown putting up a radiator outside rather than inside a room. They drink water out of the toilet,” said a local resident who gave her first name as Venera.

Rahmon Ulmasov, an expert on migration issues, said negative stereotypes ignored the role of successful Tajiks in Russia, such as numerous businessmen and one member of the Federation Council, the upper house of parliament.

“Why do they only show scenes where our migrants are mocked and made fun of because of their bad knowledge of Russian?” he asked. “Why don’t they show that around 40 per cent of doctors in the Volgograd region are Tajiks?”

Other analysts note however, that the Russian film is already a hit in Tajikistan, ban or no ban. IWPR enquiries at shops and kiosks selling CDs and DVDs revealed that the film was widely available, albeit sometimes under the counter.

“It’s just a comedy,” said one trader in justification. “The nation that can’t laugh at itself cannot make progress.”

More controversial is the decision to ban documentaries about migrant workers on grounds of public taste.

When “Migrants Abroad” and “Migrants in Dubai” were refused distribution licenses at the same time as the Russian feature film, Tajikkino ruled that their depiction of how Tajik seasonal workers perform the most menial tasks and are treated with contempt abroad was offensive.

Sharipov said the film agency’s commission of experts was reviewing several other documentaries with similar content, adding, “If they are found to contain scenes insulting to the Tajik people and labour migrants, they will be banned as well.”

This has now happened. Two films made by Muzaffar Zaripov, head of the Migration and Development group, have not been passed, and he has been told he must “correct” certain sections before they can be released.

Zaripov told IWPR his films, “They Need to Know” and “Migration and the Global Financial Crisis”, were entirely educational in focus.

Critics of the restrictions on documentaries suspect the real reason for preventing such films from being seen is that the authorities do not want to deter potential migrants from travelling abroad. Labour migration helps curb unemployment and associated social problems within Tajikistan, as well as injecting large sums of money into the economy.

Film director Ozod Malikov opposes any ban on depicting the harsh realities of life as a migrant. His own documentary, “Going to Russia”, has been released, but only after being checked by several government agencies including the foreign ministry.

“Future migrant workers need to know the truth about migration,” he said. “The majority of Tajik migrant workers go off to work abroad after they leave school. They think they’ll be welcomed with open arms in Russia. The reality is different.”

He said factual films show how “some migrants become homeless or do the dirtiest work in Russian cities. And all this while being insulted and denigrated by their employers and the police”.

Others say film portrayals, whether offensive or not, are hardly the point, and the Tajik government should be doing more to equip its citizens with the education and skills they need to avoid mistreatment abroad.

Masud Sobirov, head of the opposition Democratic Party, says the education system should be improved so that school-leavers come out with better skills and a decent grasp of Russian

“Banning films about labour migration is hardly the right way to do this,” he added.

Jahongir Boboev is a pseudonym for a journalist in Tajikistan.

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.