Fears For Independence of Tajik Ombudsman

Politicians, lawyers and rights activists in Tajikistan have hailed moves to introduce the post of ombudsman as a step towards improving the human rights situation. But some are asking whether the new institution will really be able to operate independently of government.



Since January, Tajik parliamentarians have been reviewing a bill setting out the ombudsman’s functions. Sources in parliament say the law will be passed this spring.



Despite being appointed by the president and approved by parliament, the human rights watchdog will theoretically not answer to any state official for the duration of his or her five-year term



Richard Lapper, Tajikistan representative for the UN refugee agency UNHCR, said the new ombudsman could play an important role in strengthening the legal process and reforming the judicial and penal system.



Lapper said the role of ombudsman varies from country to country, but generally involves oversight of key human rights issues such as torture, arbitrary detention, gender discrimination, human trafficking, and protecting human rights activists.



Tajik president Imomali Rahmon announced the creation of an ombudsman position in his annual address to parliament in April last year. He was effectively acting on a recommendation made by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Louise Arbour, during a visit to Dushanbe shortly beforehand.



Few would dispute that the human rights situation in Tajikistan is in need of improvement.



In its annual report for 2007, the Republican Bureau for Human Rights, a national agency, noted an increase in complaints about new laws that violated people’s constitutional rights, and about flaws in the judicial process.



Among the more controversial pieces of legislation it referred to were the May 2007 law on public associations, which tightened controls over civil society groups, and laws passed in June restricting the way weddings, funerals and other rites are conducted.



Subsequent changes to the criminal code limited freedom of speech by making internet publications subject to criminal law on libel in the same way as traditional forms of media are.



After the government signalled its intention of tightening up on religious practice, the education ministry banned the wearing of Islamic dress or “hijab” by women at schools and colleges, and one Christian group was banned from operating.



In addition to these recent concerns, Tajiks still face problems getting a fair trial, according to Nurmahmad Khalilov of the non-government Centre for Human Rights.



Rights activists routinely face problems in gaining access to the courtroom, he said, because many judges demand that they obtain written permission to do so.



Khalikov said too many trials also blatantly disregarded the presumption of innocence.



Assuming the post of ombudsman comes into being, the question is whether it will bring about any improvement.



The head of the opposition Communist Party, Shodi Shabdolov, welcomed the move, saying it would bring Tajikistan into line with other countries that already have such an institution and would strengthen democracy and the rule of law.



Supreme Court judge Yusuf Salimov is equally enthusiastic, saying, “Although civic organisations already monitor human rights violations, we need a state-level structure that can speak to the UN on equal terms.”



But while there is general enthusiasm in Tajikistan about the new institution, experts are uncertain about whether the principle of independence will work in this country. Some analysts fear the ombudsman is only being set up to create a façade of democracy and legitimacy.



Shokirjon Hakimov, deputy head of the opposition Social Democratic party and a lawyer by profession, said he suspected the government would nominate one of its own to the post, so that the ombudsman lacked any independence, as is the case on some of Tajikistan’s Central Asian neighbours.



Hakimov said the OSCE and other international organisations had proposed this idea ten years ago, but the parliament and government declined it at the time.



“This institution will only be of value to Tajikistan if it proves to be effective in influencing decisions made by the authorities, especially in the area of human rights,” said Hakimov.



Political analyst Rashid Abdullo was similarly cautious about the prospects for the ombudsman proving successful.



“It would be unrealistic to think [the institution] will immediately become as effective as it is in the developed countries or that it will carry as much weight in society,” he said.



Other experts agreed that genuine independence was the main precondition for the ombudsman becoming an effective force.



“I welcome the establishment of this institution and hope Tajikistan will adopt the structure of the ombudsman institution as applied in western countries,” said Rahmatullo Valiev, deputy head of the Democratic Party, another opposition group.



“But if the government controls it, it will just become another unnecessary body that is of no use to anyone,” he told IWPR.