New Andijan Report Raises Questions

A report produced by an Uzbek human rights group on the Andijan massacre of May 2005 cites similar casualty figures to the official government numbers. Some observers are critical of the report, saying it raises more questions than it answers, Others say it reflects the impossibility of conducting accurate research because of the government’s clampdown on information.



The report, which the Ezgulik group published last week, describes the government repression that followed the violence, and says it has verified 228 cases of people killed during the shootings.



Two years ago, protesters in Andijan stormed over a military garrison and a prison, taking weapons and freeing prisoners, following demonstrations against the trial of 23 businessmen accused of being Islamic extremists. The next day, May 13, government troops opened fire on a large crowd which had gathered in the city centre, leaving many dead.



Official government figures put the number of dead at 187, although most independent sources have cited figures of over 500.



A board member of Ezgulik who was involved in preparing the report told NBCentralAsia that although the number of dead cited in the report is just 41 more than the official figure, it should not be regarded as final.



“This report was compiled from the research that Ezgulik was able to do. Facts relating to Andijan have been kept hermetically sealed by the government, so it is virtually impossible to gather information,” he said.



Surat Ikramov, who heads a different group, the Initiative Group of Independent Human Rights Activists, believes the Ezgulik report raises many questions as its headcount is so close to the official position.



“Ezgulik does not say it is merely providing the information that it has at its disposal at the moment - it says that this is how things actually were,” said Ikramov. “It fails to encapsulate the true horror of the Andijan tragedy, and confines itself to summarising information that we’ve already heard from officials.”



According to Ikramov, there is a great deal of evidence that many more people were killed than Ezgulik suggests.



A journalist based in Andijan was less critical of the report, arguing that it is understandable that some of the figures it cites are similar to the official line while others are identical.



“I understand Ezgulik very well. Andijan is now closed off when it comes to information about May 2005,” he said. “There are virtually no eyewitnesses left, nor are there people willing to speak out about it. So one is left relying on information that is in the public domain.”



(News Briefing Central Asia draws comment and analysis from a broad range of political observers across the region.)