Uzbekistan0914 ForUpload 0

H U M A N
R I G H T S “Until the Very End”

Politically Motivated Imprisonment in Uzbekistan
W A T C H
“Until the Very End”
Copyright © 2014 Human Rights Watch
All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
ISBN: 978-1-62313-1951
Cover design by Rafael Jimenez
Human Rights Watch defends the rights of people worldwide. We scrupulously investigate
abuses, expose the facts widely, and pressure those with power to respect rights and
secure justice. Human Rights Watch is an independent, international organization that
works as part of a vibrant movement to uphold human dignity and advance the cause of
human rights for all.
Human Rights Watch is an international organization with staff in more than 40 countries,
and offices in Amsterdam, Beirut, Berlin, Brussels, Chicago, Geneva, Goma, Johannesburg,
London, Los Angeles, Moscow, Nairobi, New York, Paris, San Francisco, Sydney, Tokyo,
Toronto, Tunis, Washington DC, and Zurich.
For more information, please visit our website: http://www.hrw.org

SEPTEMBER 2014 ISBN: 978-1-62313-1951

Map of Prisons in Uzbekistan .............................................................................................. i
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 1
Key Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 9

To the Government of Uzbekistan ............................................................................................ 9
To the European Union, the United States, the United Nations Human Rights Council, and Other
International Partners of Uzbekistan ....................................................................................... 10
Methodology.................................................................................................................... 12
I. Politically Motivated Imprisonment in Context: 25 Years of Repression ..........................14

Dismantling the Political Opposition (1992-1997) .................................................................... 14
Persecution of Independent Muslims (1997-present) ............................................................... 16
Andijan and its Aftermath ....................................................................................................... 17
Searching for New Enemies..................................................................................................... 18
How Many People Are Imprisoned on Politically Motivated Charges? ....................................... 19
II. Profiles of Individuals Imprisoned on Politically Motivated Charges.............................. 22

Human Rights Activists ...........................................................................................................22
International Standards on the Protection of Human Rights Defenders ....................................23
Azam Farmonov................................................................................................................ 25
Mehriniso and Zulhumor Hamdamova .............................................................................. 27
Isroiljon Kholdorov ......................................................................................................... 29
Nosim Isakov ................................................................................................................... 31
Gaybullo Jalilov ................................................................................................................32
Matluba Kamilova ............................................................................................................ 34
Ganikhon Mamatkhanov .................................................................................................. 35
Chuyan Mamatkulov......................................................................................................... 37
Zafarjon Rahimov .............................................................................................................39
Yuldash Rasulov...............................................................................................................39
Bobomurod Razzokov ..................................................................................................... 40
Fahriddin Tillaev...............................................................................................................42
Nuraddin Jumaniyazov .....................................................................................................42
Akzam Turgunov............................................................................................................... 43
Journalists .............................................................................................................................. 45
Uzbekistan’s International Obligations on Freedom of Expression .......................................... 46
Solijon Abdurakhmanov ................................................................................................... 47
Muhammad Bekjanov and Yusuf Ruzimuradov .................................................................50
Gayrat Mikhliboev ............................................................................................................ 53
Dilmurod Saidov .............................................................................................................. 55
Political Opposition Activists .................................................................................................. 57
Murod Juraev....................................................................................................................58
Samandar Kukanov .......................................................................................................... 59
Kudratbek Rasulov ........................................................................................................... 61
Rustam Usmanov .............................................................................................................63
Independent Religious Figures ................................................................................................ 65
Uzbekistan’s International Obligations to Ensure Freedom of Religion .................................... 66
Ruhiddin Fahriddinov .......................................................................................................67
Hayrullo Hamidov ............................................................................................................. 70
Akram Yuldashev ............................................................................................................. 72
Andijan and Other “Internal Enemies” ....................................................................................76
Dilorom Abdukodirova ..................................................................................................... 77
Botirbek Eshkuziev, Bahrom Ibragimov, Davron Kabilov, Davron Tojiev, and Ravshanbek
Vafoev .............................................................................................................................79
Erkin Musaev ................................................................................................................... 81
III. Prison Abuses and the Arbitrary Extension of Sentences ............................................. 84

Due Process Violations ...........................................................................................................85
Denial of Access to Counsel..............................................................................................85
Incommunicado Detention ...............................................................................................87
Torture ...................................................................................................................................87
Torture in Pretrial Detention............................................................................................. 88
Torture Following Conviction ........................................................................................... 90
Solitary Confinement .............................................................................................................. 91
Health Problems and Inadequate Medical Treatment...............................................................93
Denying Early Release, Prolonging Prison Time ........................................................................97
Arbitrary Denial of Amnesty ..............................................................................................97
Sentence Extensions for “Violations of Prison Rules” ....................................................... 99
Lack of Adequate Monitoring and Complaint Mechanisms .............................................. 102
IV. International Responses to Uzbekistan’s Policy of Politically Motivated Imprisonment

.......................................................................................................................................104
United Nations ..................................................................................................................... 105
European Union .................................................................................................................... 107
United States ....................................................................................................................... 110
Recommendations........................................................................................................... 113
To the Government of Uzbekistan ..........................................................................................113
To the European Union and EU Member States ...................................................................... 114
Specifically, EU Member States and Institutions Should ..................................................115
Other Specific Measures the EU Should Take ...................................................................115
To the United States ............................................................................................................. 116
Other Specific Measures the US Should Take .................................................................. 116
To the United Nations ............................................................................................................117
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... 119

Map of Prisons in Uzbekistan
© 2014 Human Rights Watch
I HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | SEPTEMBER 2014

Summary
Agents of Uzbekistan’s feared National Security Services, the “SNB,” kidnapped

Muhammad Bekjanov from his apartment in Kiev, Ukraine in 1999. A prominent member of
the peaceful political opposition party Erk (Freedom) and editor of one of Uzbekistan’s
leading independent newspapers, Bekjanov had fled Tashkent two years earlier in
response to a wide-ranging crackdown on Uzbekistan’s political opposition led by the
country’s authoritarian president, Islam Karimov. Forcibly returned to Uzbekistan without a
hearing, Bekjanov was tried in a closed courtroom amidst allegations that Uzbek
authorities had subjected him to electric shocks, beatings with batons, and temporary
suffocation. A Tashkent court sentenced him to thirteen years on various charges,
including for “threatening the constitutional order.”
At the end of January 2012, just days before Bekjanov’s prison sentence was set to expire,
he was given an additional five-year sentence for alleged and unspecified “violations of
prison rules.” Along with another jailed Uzbek journalist and opposition activist, Bekjanov
has been imprisoned longer than any other reporter in the world. Bekjanov’s alleged crime,
like so many other individuals imprisoned on politically motivated charges in Uzbekistan,
was his peaceful exercise of fundamental rights, including freedom of speech, association,
and assembly. Like other such prisoners, there is no evidence that he has ever committed
any act of violence.
Bekjanov is just one of thousands of actual or perceived government opponents and critics
the Uzbek government has imprisoned on politically motivated charges to enforce its
repressive rule since the early 1990s. The victims span broad categories, including human
rights activists, journalists, political opposition activists, religious leaders and believers,
cultural figures, artists, entrepreneurs, and others, imprisoned for no other reason than
their peaceful exercise of the right to freedom of expression and the government’s
identification of them as “enemies of the state.”
Based on more than 150 in-depth interviews with the relatives of such prisoners, their lawyers,
human rights activists, scholars, and former Uzbek government officials, this report examines
the cases of 34 of Uzbekistan’s most prominent individuals imprisoned on politically
motivated charges. The interviewees also included individuals previously imprisoned on such
1 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | SEPTEMBER 2014

charges. Human Rights Watch documents the egregious abuses they face in custody and
calls on the Uzbek government for their immediate and unconditional release.
Fifteen of those whose cases this report documents are rights activists: Azam Farmonov,
Mehriniso Hamdamova, Zulhumor Hamdamova, Isroiljon Kholdorov, Nosim Isakov,
Gaybullo Jalilov, Nuraddin Jumaniyazov, Matluba Kamilova, Ganikhon Mamatkhanov,
Chuyan Mamatkulov, Zafarjon Rahimov, Yuldash Rasulov, Bobomurod Razzokov, Fahriddin
Tillaev, and Akzam Turgunov. Five are journalists: Solijon Abdurakhmanov, Muhammad
Bekjanov, Gayrat Mikhliboev, Yusuf Ruzimuradov, and Dilmurod Saidov. Four are
opposition activists: Murod Juraev, Samandar Kukanov, Kudratbek Rasulov, and Rustam
Usmanov. Three are independent religious figures: Ruhiddin Fahriddinov, Hayrullo
Hamidov, and Akram Yuldashev. Seven others are various perceived critics of the
government or witnesses to the May 13, 2005 Andijan massacre, when Uzbek government
forces shot and killed hundreds of mainly peaceful protesters: Dilorom Abdukodirova,
Botirbek Eshkuziev, Bahrom Ibragimov, Davron Kabilov, Erkin Musaev, Davron Tojiev, and
Ravshanbek Vafoev.
The cases here do not constitute an exhaustive list of all persons convicted on politically
motivated charges in Uzbekistan, nor is their selection meant to privilege some cases over
others. Instead, these 34 prisoners, who come from every region of the country, shed light
on larger trends of political repression in Uzbekistan and on the government’s attempt to
suppress a wide range of independent activity that occurs beyond strict state control. At
the same time, many cases illustrate the remarkable talent, creativity, and contributions of
Uzbekistan’s independent civil society to the country’s civic development, as well as the
immense loss that is caused by their continuing imprisonment.
Human Rights Watch research demonstrates that individuals imprisoned on politically

motivated charges experience a wide range of human rights abuses. Of the 34 prisoners
whose cases this report documents:
• At least 29 have made credible allegations of torture or ill-treatment during their

pretrial custody or in prison;
• At least 18 have been denied access to counsel at critical stages of the

investigation or trial, including following conviction when additional prison terms
have been added to their original sentences;
“UNTIL THE VERY END” 2

• At least eight have been held in incommunicado detention for at least some period
of time longer than allowed by Uzbek and international law;
• At least 6 have been imprisoned for 15 years or longer, with 2 of them, Murod
Juraev and Samandar Kukanov, behind bars for more than 20 years, and 22
receiving sentences that are at least 10 years or longer;
• At least 9 are over 60 years old and 4 are women, making these 13 eligible by law
for an annual government amnesty, but all have been repeatedly denied amnesty,
often on pretexts of committing minor infractions of prison rules;
• At least 11 have had their prison terms arbitrarily extended while in prison on the
basis of unpublished, vague, and overly broad “violations of prison rules,” with
some prison sentences extended multiple times, including one case where the
sentence has been extended on four separate occasions;
• At least 15 have suffered or are currently suffering from critical health problems
such as tuberculosis, nerve damage, broken bones, hypertension, heart attacks,
and ulcers;
• At least nine allege they have been denied access to urgently needed medical care;
• At least 12 say they have been subjected to cruel, inhuman, and degrading
punishment through extended exposure to hot and cold elements or held in
isolation cells in solitary confinement for long periods;
• At least four are either serving or have served periods of their sentence at
Uzbekistan’s “Jaslyk” prison, well-known for more than a decade for high-profile
reports of torture and ill-treatment over a decade and for the calls by various
governments and international bodies for its closure;
• Five were kidnapped from the territory of other countries, including Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, and Ukraine, and forcibly returned to Uzbekistan either in the absence
of legal proceedings or in proceedings that did not conform to international human
rights norms, and;
• In at least one case, authorities have forcibly disappeared a prisoner, failing to

reveal the whereabouts or condition of the prisoner for such a lengthy period of
time that it is unclear whether the person is dead or alive.

This report presents an individual profile of each of the 34 individuals currently imprisoned
on politically motivated charges. It highlights the most up-to-date information available on
the nature of their work prior to imprisonment, the charges brought against them, reports
of torture or ill-treatment in pretrial custody and after conviction, their current whereabouts,
and the state of their health.
In a separate section, the report also analyzes by category the extent to which specific
abuses that persons imprisoned on politically motivated charges in Uzbekistan experience
violate legally binding international standards. This section draws both on the experiences
of the 34 prisoners profiled in the report and on interviews with 10 additional individuals
who were formerly imprisoned on politically motivated charges, several of whom were
released in the last year.
The abuses suffered by those imprisoned on politically motivated charges in Uzbekistan

include denial of access to counsel, incommunicado detention, pretrial and post-
conviction torture, solitary confinement, the denial of appropriate medical care, and the
arbitrary denial of amnesty and extension of prison sentences. These are all serious
violations of Uzbekistan’s domestic and international human rights obligations.
Information gathered by Human Rights Watch shows that in many cases the conditions in
which persons imprisoned on politically motivated charges are held—overcrowded cells,
poor quality and insufficient food and water, and inadequate medical treatment—do not
meet international prison standards. Authorities have routinely denied these prisoners
treatment for serious medical problems, many of which emerged over the course of
prolonged imprisonment. Authorities neither monitor nor remedy the poor prison
conditions that may have caused and then exacerbated such health problems in violation
of Uzbekistan’s core international human rights obligations. Failure to provide adequate
health care or medical treatment to a detainee in prison may contribute to conditions
amounting to inhuman or degrading treatment.
Human Rights Watch research indicates that prison officials have wide discretion over who
to release under amnesty and sometimes receive instructions from government officials to
find justifications to keep persons imprisoned on politically motivated charges
incarcerated despite their ostensible eligibility for amnesty.

We also found that prison authorities regularly extend the sentences of those imprisoned on
politically motivated charges for so-called “violations of prison rules.” Of 34 current
prisoners and 10 former prisoners profiled in this report, at least 14 have had their sentences
arbitrarily extended in prison, many more than once—four times in the case of political
opposition figure Murod Juraev—often in proceedings that occur without due process.
Uzbekistan’s Criminal Code creates the offense of “disobedience to legitimate orders of

administration of institution of execution of penalty” (article 221), often referred to as
“violations of prison rules,” on which authorities base the extensions of prisoners’
sentences. However, while the general regulations on the administration of prisons, issued
by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, set out a range of behaviors that prisoners are both
required to and prohibited from engaging in, they leave wide scope for determining what
constitutes a “legitimate order” that should not be disobeyed. The guidelines also are not
comprehensive as to what would constitute “violations” for the purpose of article 221.
Human Rights Watch is not aware of any publicly available source that alerts prisoners to
what all these “violations” might be. The government did not reply to a request for such
information and none of the former prisoners, family members of prisoners, or their
lawyers could provide Human Rights Watch with any source that sets out or defines the full
scope of potential “violations”.
Human Rights Watch’s research indicates that authorities have based multi-year
extensions of sentences on minor, insignificant, or absurd alleged infractions, such as
“failure to lift a heavy object,” “wearing a white shirt,” “failing to properly place one’s
shoes in the corner,” and “failing to properly sweep the cell.” Our interviews with
numerous former prisoners, their lawyers, civil society activists, and a senior prison official
demonstrate that prison officials interpret broad regulations arbitrarily and in an entirely
ad hoc fashion, as a pretext to extend sentences or deny amnesty eligibility and thereby
punish those imprisoned on politically motivated charges.
Compounding the above abuses, there is no adequate monitoring of places of detention in

Uzbekistan and all individuals imprisoned on politically motivated charges lack access to
meaningful complaint mechanisms. These problems have only grown worse since the
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) was forced to end its visits to detainees
and prisoners in April 2013 due to Uzbek government interference in its standard operating
procedures. Deplorable incarceration conditions include beatings and torture, solitary

confinement, sexual humiliation, exposure to harsh climactic conditions, tuberculosis,
and other infectious diseases that cause psychological and physical damage to inmates.
Despite the commitments Uzbekistan has made relating to the protection of human rights,
including the freedoms of expression, assembly, association, and religion guaranteed in
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the prohibition on torture
enshrined in the Convention against Torture, it has faced virtually no consequences for its
persistent refusal to acknowledge the existence of any individuals imprisoned on
politically motivated charges, release them from prison, improve their treatment in custody,
or end the cycle of crackdown, arrests, and convictions. Nor has the government paid any
real cost for its systematic failure to cooperate with international institutions, including
eleven special procedures of the United Nations Human Rights Council, various UN treaty
bodies such as the Human Rights Committee and Committee against Torture, or the ICRC.
The governments traditionally viewed as champions of the cause of human rights in

Uzbekistan—the United States, the European Union, and several EU member states—have
publicly criticized Uzbekistan’s atrocious rights record in past years, most strongly in the
immediate aftermath of the Andijan massacre by placing sanctions and restrictions on the
Uzbek government. EU and US officials have raised the cases of some of the current and
former prisoners described in this report; however, in the past five years they have muted
their criticisms and softened their human rights policies with respect to politically motivated
imprisonment. Unfortunately, the Uzbek government’s continued failure to release persons
convicted on politically motivated grounds has not had a substantial impact on these
international actors’ relations with Uzbekistan, on which they continue to rely for its
geostrategic importance as a transit route in the context of the war in Afghanistan.
Significantly, when the Uzbek government has faced sustained external pressure,
including sanctions, restrictions on military assistance, and other robust, public, specific
criticism from its international partners, it has responded by taking incremental steps to
improve human rights, including by releasing some individuals imprisoned on politically
motivated charges on the eve of key bilateral summits or high-level visits. But in the
absence of such pressure, the Uzbek government has defied international calls for human
rights improvements, even denying that any problems exist.

In September 2013, for example, during the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Uzbekistan—
an examination of Uzbekistan’s human rights record before the UN Human Rights Council—
Akmal Saidov, head of the Uzbek delegation, ignored the chorus of recommendations from
governments and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to release immediately and
unconditionally Uzbekistan’s political prisoners, even declaring that “there are no political
prisoners in Uzbekistan.” Refusing to acknowledge the existence of even a single wrongfully
imprisoned individual, Saidov instead pounded his fists on the table, defiantly dismissing
the recommendations as based on “misinformation and lies” designed by “politically
motivated” NGOs solely to tarnish Uzbekistan’s reputation.
Despite the Uzbek government’s resistance to acknowledge the problem, international

pressure can be extremely effective in securing the release of persons imprisoned on
politically motivated charges. The findings of this report should remind Uzbekistan’s
international partners, including members of the UN Human Rights Council, the US and the
EU, and other concerned governments, regional bodies, and international financial
institutions of the urgent need to focus on the crisis of politically motivated imprisonment
in Uzbekistan and to redouble efforts to secure these and other wrongfully detained
individuals’ immediate and unconditional release.
Human Rights Watch strongly believes that the Uzbek government’s continued refusal to
release wrongfully imprisoned individuals and lack of any meaningful progress on human
rights for more than a decade should trigger in key capitals such as Washington, Brussels,
Berlin, and London and at the UN Human Rights Council an assessment of their current
strategies for pursuing improvements in Uzbekistan. Given president Islam Karimov’s long
record of defying calls to implement meaningful reform, years after Western governments
had eased sanctions on the country as a way to encourage reform, Uzbekistan’s
international partners should convey a clear and consistent message to Tashkent, both in
public and in private, about the urgent need for measureable, concrete steps, including
the release of all those imprisoned on politically motivated charges, in addition to steps to
address other serious human rights violations. They should also publicly acknowledge
Tashkent’s systematic retrenchment on rights and be ready to follow through with
meaningful policy consequences, some which Human Rights Watch outlines below, should
the Uzbek government continue to commit widespread human rights abuses.

Without a fundamental shift in approach in Tashkent and with absent sustained, robust,
and public international pressure, the atrocious situation in Uzbekistan will continue and
the suffering of Muhammad Bekjanov, Yusuf Ruzimuradov, Murod Juraev, Samandar
Kukanov, Dilorom Abdukodirova, their families, the others profiled in this report, and
countless others, is sure to get worse.

Key Recommendations
To the Government of Uzbekistan

• Immediately and unconditionally release all persons whose cases are detailed in
this report and all other prisoners held for peaceful expression of their political
views, civil society activism, journalistic activity, or religious views. To the extent
that any such individuals are also alleged to have engaged in acts of violence, they
should be granted a new and fair trial according to international standards.
• Take immediate steps to eliminate torture and ill-treatment in pretrial detention

and penal facilities, including by ensuring unhindered access to counsel at all
stages of investigations, ensuring prompt access to appropriate medical care and
re-establishing the independent monitoring of prisons.
• Provide families of all prisoners with full information regarding the location and
current health conditions of their relatives. Rigorously investigate all allegations
of intimidation or reprisals against family members and prisoners who
communicate with journalists, human rights defenders, and nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs).
• Investigate and hold to account all officials, security service personnel, and
penal system staff alleged to have tortured or ill-treated prisoners and detainees or
denied requests for medical care.
• Comply with the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and ratify the Optional Protocol
to the Convention against Torture, which requires Uzbekistan to permit visits by
the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (SPT) and to establish an independent national
preventive mechanism for the prevention of torture at the domestic level.
• Immediately and fully implement the November 2013 recommendations of the UN

Committee against Torture and the February 2003 recommendations issued by
the UN special rapporteur on torture following his visit to Uzbekistan in 2002,
including the immediate closure of Jaslyk prison 64/71.
• Approve the pending requests by 11 UN special procedures to visit Uzbekistan,

including the UN special rapporteur on torture; allow unimpeded independent

monitoring of prisons by the International Committee of the Red Cross and other
independent monitors.
• Cease the practice of arbitrarily exempting prisoners held on politically

motivated charges who qualify for amnesty from annual amnesty declarations and
of arbitrarily lengthening prison sentences for minor offences or “violations of
prison rules” under article 221 of the criminal code on “disobedience to the terms
of punishment.”
• Clarify and bring into line with international standards overbroad criminal
articles, such as article 158 on “threatening the president,” article 159 on
“threatening the constitutional order,” and article 244 on “forming, leading, or
membership in an extremist, fundamentalist, or otherwise banned organization,”
which are frequently manipulated to target people expressing their legitimate
rights to the freedoms of expression, speech, or religion.
To the European Union, the United States, the United Nations Human Rights
Council, and Other International Partners of Uzbekistan
• In the capitals of Uzbekistan’s international partners, given Uzbekistan’s persistent
failure to meet the human rights demands articulated in various pieces of US
legislation and in joint statements by EU foreign ministers, the US, EU, and EU
member states should urgently take up the human rights situation in
Uzbekistan with a view to devising an appropriate policy response.
• Set a timeline for the Uzbek government to address longstanding human

rights violations, including by releasing persons imprisoned on politically
motivated charges, and consider the specific policy consequences that would
follow should it not, such as instituting targeted restrictive measures against
Uzbek government entities and individuals responsible for grave human rights
violations in the country. Such measures should include imposing visa bans and
asset freezes with respect to individuals responsible for the use of politically
motivated imprisonment, the torture or ill-treatment of prisoners, including the
denial of appropriate medical care and arbitrary extension of sentences, and the
repression and harassment of independent civil society.
• At the UN Human Rights Council, given the Uzbek government’s longstanding and
systematic failure to cooperate with UN human rights bodies, including non-

implementation of recommendations by treaty bodies and special procedures and
refusal of access despite the latters’ repeated requests, members of the council
should support the establishment of a country-specific mechanism in the form
of a special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Uzbekistan.
• When visiting Uzbekistan, foreign officials should insist on meeting individually

in prison with imprisoned rights activists, journalists, political opposition
figures, religious figures, and other persons imprisoned on politically motivated
charges and with their relatives to solicit their views and show support for their
freedom and courageous and important work.
• Convey in public diplomacy and in private settings that the Uzbek government
should demonstrate a commitment to human rights by allowing civil society to
function without undue interference.
• In pursuing any dialogue with the Uzbek authorities, whether on economic

development, trade, or human rights, concerned governments, regional bodies,
and international institutions should consult with civil society activists,
particularly with Uzbek human rights activists, on an ongoing basis in order to
ensure that policies reflect and address their concerns.
• The release of persons imprisoned on politically motivated charges and other

human rights abuses should be explicitly tied to any engagement with the
Uzbek government over the sale or provision of military assistance.

Methodology
Human Rights Watch has continuously monitored the human rights situation in Uzbekistan,
including the situation for human rights activists, journalists, peaceful opposition activists,
independent Muslims, and others imprisoned on politically motivated charges since
Uzbekistan gained its independence in 1991. This report is based on more than 150 in-depth
interviews with human rights activists, journalists, lawyers, former political prisoners, family
members of current prisoners, members of unregistered political and religious groups, and
other Uzbek citizens between October 2010 and July 2014. The report also draws on some
Human Rights Watch interviews and publications from earlier periods. Some interviews were
conducted in person during a mission to Uzbekistan from October to December 2010. Others
were conducted subsequently by phone with individuals inside Uzbekistan. Interviews were
also conducted in person and by phone with individuals in other countries, including in
Kyrgyzstan, Ukraine, Ireland, France, and the United States, where formerly imprisoned
activists, relatives of current prisoners, their lawyers, and other activists now reside.
Human Rights Watch was able to obtain copies of dozens of documents, including
indictments of persons convicted on politically motivated charges and court judgments.
Human Rights Watch acquired these from family members, unofficial civil society groups,
and local rights defenders. The documents, which help to corroborate the patterns of abuse
established by the accounts of abuse presented in this report, are on file with Human Rights
Watch. In addition, we conducted an in-depth review of Uzbekistan’s laws, which provide the
legal underpinnings for criminalizing dissent. Finally, we researched press accounts— both
from the state-sponsored media and from independent (and thus illegal) media—as well as
reports produced by local groups and international bodies such as the United Nations.
Human Rights Watch has researched the cases of some of the individuals profiled in this
report for many years. That research included interviewing victims and witnesses to
abuses, speaking with the prisoners’ lawyers, and monitoring other media reports about
their conditions in prison. Other cases were identified by our close colleague human rights
organizations in and outside of Uzbekistan, including the Association for Human Rights in
Central Asia, Memorial, the Fiery Hearts Club, the Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan, the
Human Rights Alliance, the Initiative Group of Independent Human Rights Defenders,
Frontline, the Committee to Protect Journalists, the International Federation for Human

Rights, and Amnesty International. The contribution of these groups to this research has
been invaluable.
Interviews were conducted in English and in Russian by researchers who are fluent in both
languages. Some interviews were conducted in Uzbek, during which a translator for Human
Rights Watch (a native speaker of Uzbek) translated into English and Russian. Researchers
explained to each interviewee the purpose of the interview and how the information
gathered would be used. No compensation was offered or paid for any interview.
Human Rights Watch carried out the research for this report in the face of the Uzbek
government’s aggressive efforts to prevent Uzbeks and others from documenting rights
abuses in the country or sharing information with the outside world. Nearly all prisoners’
trials are closed to independent observers and foreign diplomats, and individuals
prosecuted or imprisoned are consistently denied documentation of their cases.
In July 2014 Human Rights Watch requested meetings with the Uzbek government to
discuss and obtain their response to the findings documented in this report, directing
information requests to Uzbekistan’s minister of internal affairs, prosecutor general,
minister of justice, minister of foreign affairs, ombudsperson for human rights, and the
National Human Rights Center, a government institution. We also requested permission to
visit Uzbekistan, in hopes that the government would break with its practice of denying
international human rights delegations access to the country. At the time this report went
to press, Uzbek officials had not responded to any of these requests.
To protect their security, all individuals with whom Human Rights Watch spoke were given
the option to remain anonymous in the report, to exclude information that might reveal
their identities, or to leave their stories out of the report altogether. Where in-person or
telephone interviews in Uzbekistan are cited in the report, some names, dates, and
locations of sources have been omitted. While most interviewees’ real names are used,
others’ identities have been withheld due to concern for their security or at their own
request. These interviewees have been assigned a pseudonym consisting of a randomly
chosen first name and a last initial that is the same as the first letter of the first name (for
example, “Alisher A.”). There is no continuity between pseudonyms used in this report and
those used in other Human Rights Watch reports on Uzbekistan.

I. Politically Motivated Imprisonment in Context:
25 Years of Repression
Political repression, including the arrest, torture, and imprisonment of actual or perceived
government opponents, has been a constant feature of life in Uzbekistan since Islam
Karimov first became the Communist Party secretary of the Uzbek Soviet Socialist Republic
in 1989 and following independence when he became the country’s president.1 While the
denial of fundamental freedoms over the past two decades has been unrelenting, the
government has pursued campaigns of persecution in waves.
These campaigns of repression can be broken down into roughly four periods: the
crackdown on the political opposition (1992-1997); the persecution of independent
Muslims (1997-present); the May 13, 2005 Andijan massacre and its aftermath (2005-
2007); and the period since 2008, when authorities continued to persecute earlier targets
but also focused on new perceived critics, including followers of the late Turkish
theologian Said Nursi and those suspected of affiliations with Western and other
governments. The campaigns have not been mutually exclusive but have overlapped with
and reinforced one another.
Dismantling the Political Opposition (1992-1997)

Beginning in 1992, authorities waged a campaign to eradicate political opposition. The
campaign took the form of politically motivated arrests, beatings, and harassment,
primarily targeting leading members of the secular political groups opposed to President
Karimov’s party, the Uzbekistan Liberal Democratic Party. These groups included the
Popular Movement Birlik (Unity), the Birlik Party, the Democratic Party Erk (Freedom/Will),
the Islamic Renaissance Party, Adolat (Justice), and the Human Rights Society of
Uzbekistan (HRSU), which first operated as a political party and later grew to become a
human rights group.2
1 Human Rights Watch, Human Rights in Uzbekistan, May 1993, http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/05/01/human-rights-
uzbekistan.
2 Human Rights Watch, Uzbekistan: Persistent Human Rights Violations and Prospects for Improvement, vol. 8, no.5 (D), May
1996, http://www.hrw.org/reports/1996/UZBEK.htm.

Some opposition figures were jailed or blacklisted; others disappeared, were beaten, or
were forced to flee the country.3 Members of the Uzbek parliament who spoke out against
Karimov’s consolidation of power, such as Samandar Kukanov, Murod Juraev, and Shohruh
Ruzimuradov, faced prosecution and imprisonment.4 Uzbekistan’s former vice president,
Shukhrullo Mirsaidov, who resigned in September 1992 after warning in an open letter that
“democracy and a policy of openness [were] being replaced by an authoritarian regime,”
survived a car bombing in 1992 and then was severely beaten along with his son several
weeks later. Mirsaidov claimed officers of the National Security Service (SNB) followed him
for several days before beating him up.5
Opposition
activist and
parliamentary
deputy Meli
Kobilov
photographed
while being
detained by
Uzbekistan’s
secret police in
Tashkent in 1993.
© 1993 Bahtiyor
Hamraev
3 In 1992, the government banned the IRP, presaging its wider campaign against religious believers a few years later. The
IRP’s leader, Imam Abdulla Utaev, disappeared in late 1992, prompting some observers to suspect foul play on the part of
the authorities. 1994: Uzbekistan, (New York: Human Rights Watch, 1994),
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1994/WR94/Helsinki-24.htm. Birlik co-chairman Abdurahim Pulatov suffered a similar attack in
June 1992. Erk’s general secretary, Samad Murad, was badly beaten in Karshi within days of his election.
4 Shohruh Ruzimuradov died after being tortured in custody in 2002. Human Rights Watch telephone interview with
Tashpulat Yuldashev, St. Louis, September 26, 2013 and email correspondence with Tolib Yakubov, France, August 27, 2013.
In 1993 at least 10 individuals, all of whom had publicly criticized Karimov, were prosecuted and convicted for criminal
offenses, ranging from violating the president’s “honor and dignity” to narcotics possession. In all cases, the defendants
were given prison sentences; all but one case ended in immediate release (in August 1993, Pulatjon Okhunov, a teacher and
local opposition movement leader, was sentenced to three years in a prison labor camp on narcotics and assault charges,
which were likely to have been fabricated). Human Rights Watch, World Report 1994: Uzbekistan, (New York: Human Rights
Watch, 1994), http://www.hrw.org/reports/1994/WR94/Helsinki-24.htm
5 Human Rights Watch, World Report 1994 (New York: Human Rights Watch, 1994), Uzbekistan chapter,
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1994/WR94/Helsinki-24.htm.

Under extreme pressure, opposition party structures largely disintegrated and organized
political activity lapsed.6 In January 1993 Uzbekistan’s Supreme Court ordered Birlik
closed for three months. Authorities sealed Erk’s headquarters and confiscated its
property in 1992, suspending its activities in early 1993. By April that year, authorities
opened a criminal case against Erk’s chairman, the poet Muhammad Solih, who
subsequently fled into exile.7 The persecution and imprisonment of individuals affiliated
with these now banned parties and movements continues through the present.8
Persecution of Independent Muslims (1997-present)

In the mid-1990 Karimov’s repression quickly spread to the suppression of independent
religious expression.9 The government justified the tightening of control on independent
Islam as an effort to prevent the chaos that was gripping neighboring Tajikistan, which was
in the midst of a civil war.10 In 1998, in the name of preventing extremism, Uzbekistan
adopted the region’s most restrictive religion laws. Following the events of September 11,
2001, the government framed its persecution of religious Muslims in the context of the
global campaign against terrorism.11
The government aimed to eliminate a perceived threat of Islamic fundamentalism and

extremism by arbitrarily detaining and imprisoning thousands of Muslims and key
6 Human Rights Watch, Uzbekistan: Leaving No Witnesses: Uzbekistan’s Campaign Against Rights Defenders, vol.12, no. 4(D),
March 2000, http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/2000/uzbekistan/Uzbek003-02.htm#P108_9310.
7 Human Rights Watch, Human Rights in Uzbekistan, p.14.Three of Solih’s brothers who remained in Uzbekistan were jailed
and tortured repeatedly in the ensuing years. One of them, Muhammad Bekjanov, is still incarcerated.
8 Inaddition to Muhammad Bekjanov, at least seven other Erk-affiliated individuals remain in prison, including Murod Juraev,
Akzam Turgunov, Yusuf Ruzimuradov, Samandar Kukanov, Fahriddin Tillaev, Nuraddin Jumaniyazov, and Bobomurod
Razzokov. Businessman Rustam Usmanov, who voiced support for Erk, has also been imprisoned since 1998.
9 In 1993 the government empowered two institutions, the Muslim Spiritual Board and the Cabinet of Ministers’ Committee
on Religious Affairs, with defining acceptable Islamic practices and weeding out Islamic leaders who refused to conform to
them. The Muslim Spiritual Board retained much of its Soviet predecessor’s authority. It could register mosques and
medressehs, appoint and dismiss individual imams, dictate the content of sermons, and issue religious edicts. Human
Rights Watch, Creating Enemies of the State: Religious Persecution in Uzbekistan, March 2004,
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2004/03/29/creating-enemies-state.
10 Even after the Tajik civil war ended, Karimov continued to refer to Islamic fundamentalist activity in Tajikistan in justifying
draconian controls on religion. Human Rights Watch, Creating Enemies of the State, p.20
11 Ibid, p.1. By fall 2000, officials routinely justified the campaign to arrest independent Muslims as necessary to protect the
country from violent attack by the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU). An armed, militant organization, the IMU sought the
overthrow of the Karimov government through violent means. In August 2000, the US government designated the IMU a terrorist
organization. A little more than a year later, following the attacks on the US on September 11, 2001, President George W. Bush
and other world leaders revealed the IMU’s close cooperation with the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden’s al-Qaeda organization.
The Uzbek government has frequently claimed that the IMU, and Hizb ut-Tahrir together with those it refers to as Wahhabis, form
a united movement, though it has never presented any material evidence to prove this is the case.

independent religious leaders who practiced their religion outside strict state control.12
Independent religious leaders’ acts of what the government called insubordination
included a failure to heed the government’s ban on loudspeakers to call people to prayer,
failure to praise the president during sermons, open discussion of the benefits of an
Islamic state, and refusal to inform on congregation members to the SNB.
Inappropriately labeling many religious leaders as Wahhabis, authorities arrested
anyone with close or even casual connection to them. 13 Those arrested included
members of congregations, including those who had occasionally attended services, the
imams’ students, mosque employees, and their relatives.14 Any observant Muslim who
engaged in private prayer, studied or proselytized Islam, shunned alcohol, prayed five
times per day, observed religious holidays, learned Arabic to study the Koran, or wore
beards or headscarves could be labelled as an extremist.15 By the end of 2003, according
to Memorial, the government had already imprisoned at least 5,900 persons on political
or religious grounds, many of whom were adherents of Hizb ut-Tahrir (Party of Liberation).
The government labels Hizb ut-Tahrir’s teachings in favor of an Islamic state as extremist
but has not produced credible evidence that its members have engaged in or espoused
violence.16 The government’s campaign against independent Muslims and various
Islamic groups continues with hundreds of new arrests each year.
Andijan and its Aftermath

On May 13, 2005, government forces shot and killed hundreds of largely unarmed
protesters in Andijan to suppress mass demonstrations on the city’s main square that
included up to 10,000 people.17 Authorities sought to justify the violent response to the
12 For a detailed analysis of the Uzbek government’s multi-year campaign against independent Muslims through 2004, see
Human Rights Watch, Creating Enemies of the State.

13 There is a common misconception, encouraged by Uzbek authorities, that within Islam there are three schools: Sunni, Shi’a,
and Wahhabi. In fact, Wahhabism, a revivalist movement that grew out of the Hanbali school, is a Sunni Muslim movement
practiced in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere. The name derives from its eighteenth century founder, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab
(1703-1792). Wahhabism advocates a purification of Islam, rejects Islamic theology and philosophy developed after the death of
the Prophet Muhammad, and calls for strict adherence to the letter of the Koran and hadith (the recorded sayings and practices
of the Prophet). In promoting what its adherents view as the precepts of early Islam, Wahhabism maintains a strict and
puritanical view of religious rites. Mehrdad Haghayeghi, Islam and Politics in Central Asia, (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1995).
14 Human Rights Watch, Creating Enemies, p.6
15 Human Rights Watch, Creating Enemies, p.22
16 Vitaly Ponomarev, “List of Persons Arrested on Political or Religious Motives in Uzbekistan (January 2004-December
2008),” Memorial Human Rights Center, (Moscow: 2009), p. 10.

17 Mike Yardley, “Thousands of Uzbeks Fleeing,” CNN, May 15, 2005,
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/05/14/uzbekistan/index.html?eref=sitesearch (accessed September 11, 2014).

protests by casting the events in the context of terrorism and claimed that all of the dead
were killed by gunmen among the protesters. The government propagated the view that
the protest’s organizers were Islamic fanatics and militants who sought to overthrow the
government.18 Extensive Human Rights Watch research found no evidence that the
protesters or the gunmen had an Islamist agenda.19
The tragedy marked a further turning point in government repression, which resulted in the
European Union and the United States imposing sanctions on Uzbekistan and calling on
Tashkent to allow an international independent investigation, demands that President
Karimov proudly defied. In the wake of the Andijan massacre the Uzbek government
unleashed an unprecedented crackdown on civil society, pursuing and prosecuting anyone
believed to have either participated in or witnessed the events. The string of criminal cases
against witnesses and victims of the events included numerous human rights activists and
journalists, including Azam Farmonov, Isroiljon Kholdorov, and Nosim Isakov, all of whom
remain imprisoned.
Searching for New Enemies

In the years since the Andijan massacre, authorities have continued to persecute human
rights groups, activists, journalists, independent lawyers, and independent Muslims,
dismantling Uzbekistan’s civil society and perpetuating a climate of fear for the few that
continue to work in the country. But authorities have also added new targets among
various segments of the population, increasingly relying on a narrative that Western or
foreign powers and their internal agents are attempting to import alien social, cultural, or
religious phenomena or destabilize the country.
For example, in 2009, amid worsening relations with Turkey over Ankara’s unwillingness to
extradite opposition leader Muhammad Solih, authorities launched a round of arrests
against followers of Turkish-Kurdish theologian Said Nursi (Nurchilar in Uzbek) and former
students of prestigious Turkish lycées that had been founded by Fethullah Gulen in the
early 1990s across Central Asia. The government also imprisoned alleged spies among
18 Ibid; Human Rights Watch, Saving Its Secrets: Government Repression in Andijan, May 2008,
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2008/uzbekistan0508/4.htm, p.42.
19 Interviews with numerous witnesses revealed that protesters spoke about economic conditions in Andijan, government
repression, and unfair trials—and not the creation of an Islamic state. Human Rights Watch, Saving Its Secrets, p. 4.

Uzbek citizens working in international organizations or for foreign embassies.20 The
authorities imprisoned other journalists, activists, and ordinary citizens for raising other
politically sensitive topics such as corruption, ecological problems, and the legal status of
the autonomous republic of Karakalpakstan.21
A poster in Nukus,
Karakalpakstan in
northwestern Uzbekistan
in 2014 shows dozens of
persons wanted on
charges of “threatening
the constitutional order.”
© 2014 Private
How Many People Are Imprisoned on Politically Motivated Charges?

This report uses the term “politically motivated” to describe the charges, prosecution, and
imprisonment of a variety of human rights activists, political opposition figures, journalists,
religious believers and leaders, ethnic minority activists, perceived government critics,
and others. As the evidence presented in this report shows, these individuals’ nonviolent
20 The cases of Erkin Musaev and Kayum Ortikov, discussed below, are two leading examples. OHCHR, “Joint letter of the of the
Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment to the government of Uzbekistan” (“Joint letter on Erkin Musaev”), UA G/SO 218/2 G/SO 214
(53-24) UZB 5/2012, May 3, 2012, https://spdb.ohchr.org/hrdb/21st/UA_Uzbekistan_03.05.12_(5.2012).pdf (accessed
September 11, 2014); “Third Strike for Former Defense Official Erkin Musaev,” Wikileaks, January 15, 2008,
http://cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=08TASHKENT49&q=erkin%20musaev (accessed September 11, 2014); “Human Rights
Watch Submission to the United Nations Committee Against Torture on Uzbekistan,” October 2013.
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/10/28/human-rights-watch-submission-united-nations-committee-against-torture-uzbekistan.
21 Rights activist Akzam Turgunov and journalist Solijon Abdurakhmanov were both arrested in connection with their work on
cases in Karakalpakstan. Furthermore, Human Rights Watch has learned from Karakalpak activists that authorities also
began a campaign in 2011 to arrest and imprison dozens of peaceful political activists in Karakalpakstan whom the
government accuses of separatism.

expression of political opinion, or opinion on politically sensitive issues, in various
formats was the catalyst for their prosecution by government authorities.
In addition to rights activists, political opposition figures, journalists, religious figures,

and other perceived government critics, there are many individuals prosecuted for the
legitimate exercise of civil and political rights (such as freedoms of thought, expression,
and assembly) using provisions in Uzbekistan’s criminal code such as “anti-
constitutional activity” (article 159), participation in “banned religious, extremist”
groups, or possession of “banned literature” (articles 216, 242, and 244), statutes which
contain provisions so vague and overbroad that they are wholly incompatible with
international human rights norms.
The 34 current and 10 former prisoners whose cases are documented in this report
therefore represent only a fraction of the thousands of persons in Uzbekistan whose
imprisonment is politically motivated. Establishing the total number of such prisoners in
the country is challenging for many reasons, including the fact that Uzbekistan has
become virtually closed to independent scrutiny since the Andijan massacre of 2005,
does not allow local or international rights groups to operate in the country, and does
not make publicly available any information on the overall number or location of
prisoners convicted on various charges.
A prisoner at an unidentified
prison in Uzbekistan. © date
unknown, Fiery Hearts Club

Another barrier to determining a total number is the fact that the government’s campaign
to imprison hundreds of individuals, mostly Muslims but also some Christians, on vague,
overbroad, and ill-defined charges of so-called “religious extremism” each year is ongoing.
In fact, during the writing of this report between September 2013 and July 2014, authorities
arrested and convicted at least 6 additional rights activists and political activists and
imprisoned well over 100 religious believers from across Uzbekistan.22
In 2004 Human Rights Watch found that the government’s campaign of religious
persecution had already resulted in the arrest, torture, and incarceration of an
estimated 7,000 people.23 Memorial, a leading Russian human rights organization,
which has monitored politically motivated imprisonment in Uzbekistan for many years,
estimates that there are now approximately 10,000 “political prisoners” in the country
currently imprisoned on charges of religious extremism and other related so-called
“anti-state” crimes.24 In July 2014 the Tashkent-based Initiative Group of Independent
Human Rights Defenders, led by rights activist Surat Ikramov, estimated the total
number to be closer to 12,000 persons imprisoned on such charges, with over 200
newly convicted in 2013 alone.25 Ikramov noted the length of sentences handed to
prisoners convicted on such crimes and the authorities’ practice, especially since the
Andijan massacre, of finding various pretexts to prolong such prisoners’ incarceration
by substantial numbers of years.
22 In 2013, authorities imprisoned at least three activists: Bobomurod Razzokov, a representative of the human rights
organization Ezgulik (“Compassion”) in Bukhara; Nematjon Siddikov, a member of the Human Rights Alliance in the Fergana
Valley; and Turaboi Juraboev, a Jizzakh-based rights defender and a frequent contributor to Ozodlik, the Uzbek service of
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Another activist, Kudratbek Rasulov, a member of the political opposition movement, the
People’s Movement of Uzbekistan, was detained in October 2013 on unspecified charges and remains in detention. None are
involved in violence.
23 Human Rights Watch, Creating Enemies of the State, p. 1.
24 Interview with Vitaly Ponomarev, Memorial Human Rights Center, Brussels, March 20, 2014; Vitaly Ponomarev, “List of
Persons Arrested and Convicted on Political or Religious Motives in Uzbekistan (January 2004-December 2008),” Memorial
Human Rights Center, (Moscow: 2009), on file with Human Rights Watch, p.10. Combining Memorial compilations of “Lists of
Persons” imprisoned on political or religious grounds in Uzbekistan from 1997-2003, 2004-2008, 2009-2010, and the as of
yet unpublished compilation for 2011-2014, it is probable that the number of persons imprisoned on such charges is likely
within the range estimated by Memorial and Ikramov.
25 Human Rights Watch interviews with Surat Ikramov, Bishkek and Tashkent, July 18 and January 22, 2014.

II. Profiles of Individuals Imprisoned on Politically
Motivated Charges
I am at peace with the life I have lived. The life I still have left holds no
interest for me any longer! If by chance or by destiny I die in this place,
please do as I asked. Do not bury my body in Tashkent, but in Bulungur,
next to my beloved Barno and Ruhshona!!!
—Imprisoned journalist Dilmurod Saidov, who suffers from tuberculosis,
speaking of his late wife and daughter during a prison visit with his brother
in 2014
This section profiles 34 of Uzbekistan’s most prominent individuals currently in prison on

politically motivated charges and sets out the urgent need for their immediate and
unconditional release. The profiles contain the most up-to-date information known about
the prisoners’ activities prior to imprisonment, the nature of the charges brought against
them, reports of due process violations and torture in pretrial custody and after conviction,
and their current whereabouts and conditions in prison.
The various, sometimes overlapping, categories of prisoners illustrate that the government
does not only imprison opposition activists, rights defenders, or journalists but will target
anyone they perceive as government critics from any sphere of Uzbekistan’s society,
including religious communities, entrepreneurs, cultural figures, or even professionals
who work in international organizations. At the same time, the profiles of these individuals
show the remarkable contributions, talent, and creativity of Uzbekistan’s diverse civil
society despite constant pressure and intimidation by authorities.
Human Rights Activists
Dear Mr. Minister Inoyatov,

Is it really that difficult to find justice in this country?! … I thought the
Stalinist period had long passed, no?! If one of your [prison] officials struck
my husband, who will answer for this? Or does the law not apply to
prisoners in this country?

—Public letter of Dilorom Mamanova, wife of imprisoned rights activist
Chuyan Mamatkulov, to the head of Uzbekistan’s National Security Services,
Rustam Inoyatov, after learning her husband had been beaten in prison
after complaining about the lack of adequate medical care, July 2, 2014
Uzbekistan’s rights activists face the constant threat of severe government reprisal,
including imprisonment, torture, harassment, and other forms of pressure. The
government routinely interferes in the activities of both domestic and international rights
groups, making it nearly impossible for them to carry out their work. This includes:
preventing groups from gaining registration, making it illegal for them to accept any kind
of grants or other assistance of funding; denying activists exit visas to prevent them from
participating in trainings or international conferences; placing activists under
surveillance; and frequently subjecting activists to beatings, arbitrary detention and
house arrest. Authorities also block international rights groups, including Human Rights
Watch, from operating in Uzbekistan and have aggressively pursued rights activists
living in exile.
International Standards on the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

The international community has recognized the importance of protecting human rights
defenders and has established a set of standards for doing so. The UN Declaration on
the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and
Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms explicitly
recognizes the rights of human rights defenders to associate, disseminate information,
and seek the realization of human rights through criticizing governments and advocating
for change.26 Moreover, the declaration requires states to protect human rights
defenders from retaliation and violence related to their work and to promote human
rights through enacting legislation. A UN special rapporteur has a mandate to help states
give effect to the declaration and investigate alleged violations by governments and non-
state actors.27
26 UN General Assembly, Resolution 53/144, A/RES/53/144, March 8, 1999,
http://olddoc.ishr.ch/hrdo/documents/DeclarationHRD.pdf (accessed September 11, 2014)

27 UN General Assembly, “Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote
and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,” A/RES/53/144, March 8, 1999, http://daccess-
dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N99/770/89/PDF/N9977089.pdf?OpenElement (accessed September 11, 2014).

While not directly binding on Uzbekistan, the Council of Europe has also emphasized its
commitment to protecting the work of human rights defenders by issuing a 2008
declaration calling for the commissioner for human rights to intervene when necessary to
protect human rights defenders and calling on such institutions as the European Court of
Human Rights to pay close attention to their plight.28 More recently, in June 2014, the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), of which Uzbekistan is a
member, adopted “Guidelines on the Protection of Human Rights Defenders,” which,
among other areas, emphasizes,
States should not subject human rights defenders to arbitrary deprivation

of liberty because of their engagement in human rights activity.… Human
rights defenders arbitrarily detained should be immediately released.…
Human rights defenders deprived of their liberty must always be treated
with respect for and in accordance with international standards … [and]
should not be singled out for selective treatment to punish them for or
discourage them from their human rights work.29
Taken together, these standards express the strong interest of regional and international
bodies in ensuring that human rights defenders are able to carry out their work safely and
without interference, which is not the case in Uzbekistan. At time of writing, the Uzbek
government holds in prison at least 15 human rights activists on wrongful charges and has
imprisoned or brought charges against hundreds of others for no reason other than their
legitimate human rights work.
28 Council of Europe, Steering Committee for Human Rights (CDDH), 1017 Meeting, CM(2008)/5, February 6, 2008,
http://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=CM%282008%295&Language=lanEnglish&Ver=add&Site=CM&BackColorInternet=999
9CC&BackColorIntranet=FFBB55&BackColorLogged=FFAC75 (accessed September 11, 2014)
29 OSCE, “Guidelines on the Protection of Human Rights Defenders,” June 10, 2014, http://www.osce.org/cio/119655
(accessed September 11, 2014).

Azam Farmonov, 34, is a father of two children
and was chairperson of the Human Rights Azam Farmonov
Society of Uzbekistan (HRSU) in Gulistan,
Syrdaryo province. He monitored violations of
social and economic rights with a particular
emphasis on the rights of farmers and people
with disabilities.30 He also defended them in
court as a lay public defender. He was arrested
on April 29, 2006 alongside rights activist
Alisher Karamatov on fabricated charges of
extortion.31
Due process violations marred Farmonov’s

pretrial detention and trial. Authorities held both
him and Karamatov incommunicado for the first Born: 1979
few days of their detention and subjected them Arrested: April 29, 2006
to torture. Officers of the National Security Charges: Extortion
Sentenced: June 15, 2006; 9 years
Service (SNB) placed sealed gas masks on their
heads to simulate suffocation and beat their legs © Tolib Yakubov
and feet, pressuring them to “confess.”32

Farmonov told his lawyer that he was beaten on
the head with plastic bottles filled with water and that SNB officers threatened to drive
nails into his toes and to harm his loved ones.33 During a search of his home on the day of
his arrest, police beat Farmonov’s then-pregnant wife, Ozoda Yakubova.34
Farmonov was not represented by independent counsel at his trial.35 On June 15, 2006, the
Yangiyo’l City Court sentenced him to nine years in prison, sending him to Jaslyk prison colony,
30 “Uzbekistan’s Imprisoned Human Rights Defenders,” Human Rights Watch news release, May 13, 2011,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/05/12/uzbekistans-imprisoned-human-rights-defenders.
31 Human Rights Watch telephone interviews with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik activist, Tashkent, October 21, 2013 and
April 29, 2014.

32 Human Rights Watch interview with Ozoda Yakubova, Tashkent, November 12, 2010; telephone interview with Abdurakhmon
Tashanov, October 21, 2013; email correspondence with the Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan, August 27, 2013.
33 Ibid.
34 Ibid.
35 Human Rights Watch interview with Ozoda Yakubova, Tashkent, November 12, 2010.

in northwestern Uzbekistan, which enforces what is termed a “strict” regime even though his
sentence specified he should serve his sentence in a “general” regime prison. According to his
wife, Farmonov said to her at his sentencing, “I will hold out until the very end.”36
Farmonov has reported that authorities

tortured him frequently in the first years
of his sentence, including stripping him
of his overclothing, handcuffing him,
and leaving him in an unheated
punishment cell for 23 days in January
2008, when temperatures reached
approximately -20 C.37 In 2011 prison
guards bound and beat him for refusing
to write that he had never been
Ozoda Yakubova, wife of imprisoned rights activist Azam tortured.38 According to the Association
Farmonov, together with her children, reads a letter from of Christians Against Torture (ACAT)-
her husband in Jaslyk prison. © 2012 Bahtiyor Hamraev
France, authorities repeatedly
transferred him between a prison in
Nukus (a city in a neighboring region)
and back to Jaslyk when they became aware that representatives of the International
Committee of the Red Cross representatives planned to make a prison visit.39
Farmonov’s relatives and rights defenders believe that his lengthy prison term and abuses
he has suffered have caused serious damage to his health.40 In a July 2013 meeting with
his wife, he complained of constant tooth pain and the appearance of a number of hard
lumps in various places on his body.41 Beyond routine check-ups, prison authorities have
denied Farmonov’s repeated requests for medical and dental care.42
36 Human Rights Watch telephone interviews with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, October 21, 2013 and April 29, 2014.
38 International Federation for Human Rights, “Torture in detention of Mr. Azamjon Farmonov - UZB 002 / 1111 / OBS 131,”
November 29, 2011, http://www.fidh.org/en/Eastern-Europe-Central-Asia/Uzbekistan,287/Torture-in-detention-of-Mr-

Azamjon (accessed September 11, 2014).
39 Action by Association of Christians Against Torture – France, “ACAT-France statement – Uzbekistan,” March 7, 2011.
40 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Ozoda Yakubova, Tashkent, August 23, 2013.
41 Ibid.
42 Ibid.

Farmonov’s family told Human Rights Watch that authorities have blocked his eligibility for
an early release by charging him with multiple “violations of prison rules,” including
“helping prisoners write appeals,” often shortly before the government’s Constitution Day
amnesty declaration, at which time eligible prisoners are announced.43
Mehriniso Hamdamova, 45, and

Zulhumor Hamdamova, 54, are sisters
Mehriniso and Zulhumor Hamdamova
from the city of Karshi, in the southern
province of Kashkadarya, and members Born: 1969 and 1960, respectively
Arrested: November 5, 2009
of HRSU. Zulhumor is a mother of four
Charges: “Threatening the President,”
children. Mehriniso received a religious
“threatening the constitutional order,” “forming,
education and worked at Karshi’s Kuk leading, or membership in an extremist,
Gumbaz mosque, where she was fundamentalist, or otherwise banned
responsible for coordinating the organization,” and “holding unsanctioned
religious gatherings”
mosque’s outreach with women and
Sentenced: April 12, 2010; 6.5-7 years
youth.44 According to fellow HRSU
members, she and her sister took an
active role in civil society, participating in demonstrations against the persecution of
independent Muslims. According to an HRSU leader, the sisters were effective because
of their ability to gather testimony on abuses from religious women who would not
communicate with men.45
On November 5, 2009, police arrested them with their relative and fellow HRSU member
Shahlo Rahmonova and around 30 other women for holding “unsanctioned religious
gatherings” in their homes. According to the warrant, the meetings’ purpose was to
organize underground religious congregations (jamoats).46
43 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Ozoda Yakubova, August 23, 2013; email correspondence with Tolib
Yakubov of the Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan, August 27, 2013.

44 Vitaly Ponomarev, “Political Repression in Uzbekistan in 2009-2010,” Memorial Human Rights Center, Moscow, March
2011, on file with Human Rights Watch, p.53.

45 Human Rights Watch telephone interviews with Tulkin Karaev, Sweden, October 28, 2013, Gulshan Karaeva, Karshi,
September 5, 2013, and Abdujalil Boymatov, Dublin, August 29, 2013.

46 “Interview with Latofat Orzikulova, daughter of Zulhumor Hamdamova” (in Uzbek), Ozodlik, April 14, 2010, translated by
Human Rights Watch. Broadcast available at www.ozodlik.org/schedule/20100414.html, text summary available at

www.ozodlik.org/content/article/2012224.html. Purported members of groups the government consider as banned
fundamentalist Islamic movements have been jailed and persecuted since the mid-1990s in Uzbekistan. The Hizb-ut-Tahrir
movement faced particular repression often because of its radical opposition to secularism and its stated ideal of forming a

According to rights activists, SNB officers ill-treated the sisters and Shahlo Rahmonova
in pretrial detention, stripping them naked and threatening them with rape.47 They were
charged with “threatening the President,” “threatening the constitutional order,” and
“forming, leading, or membership in an extremist, fundamentalist, or otherwise banned
organization.” A relative who attended the trial reported that the accusations were based
on the testimony of two witnesses who alleged that the defendants said, “We are
returning to the true form of Islam,” and that they were “building a Caliphate.”48 The
defendants, including the sisters, denied the accusations, stating that the case was
entirely fabricated.
On April 12, 2010, the Kashkadarya Criminal Court sentenced the sisters and Rahmonova
to terms ranging from six and a half to seven years of incarceration.49
HRSU leaders, rights defender Surat Ikramov, and other observers suggested that the
charges and the severe sentences were in retaliation for the women’s independent
religious practice and active rights work, in particular their monitoring of cases brought
against people on grounds of religious extremism.50
In 2012 Rahmonova was released pursuant to an amnesty, but the Hamdamova sisters
remain in prison.51 Rights activists report that SNB officers have intimidated the sisters’
relatives, warning them not to speak with anyone about their plight.52 In February 2014
Mehriniso’s relatives told Human Rights Watch and Forum 18, an independent
international religious freedom group, that she is gravely ill and in urgent need of an
pan-Islamic caliphate in Central Asia, even though the organization expressly rejected the use of violence towards that goal.
Human Rights Watch, Creating Enemies of the State.
47 European Court of Human Rights, Umirov v. Russia, (Application no. 17455/11), Judgment of 18 September 2012, available
at www.echr.coe.int; para. 85; “Interview with Latofat Orzikulova, daughter of Zulhumor Hamdamova” (in Uzbek), Ozodlik,
April 14, 2010.
48 European Court of Human Rights, Umirov v. Russia, (Application no. 17455/11), judgment of 18 September 2012; available
at www.echr.coe.int; para. 85..

49 Ibid.
50 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdujalil Boymatov, Dublin, August 29, 2013; Human Rights Watch email
correspondence with Tolib Yakubov, Dublin, August 29, 2013; Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Surat Ikramov,
January 28, 2014.
51 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Nadejda Atayeva, Paris, September 12, 2013.
52 Human Rights Watch telephone interviews with Gulshan Karaeva, Karshi, September 5, 2013, and Abdujalil Boymatov,
Dublin, August 29, 2013.

operation to remove an apparent myoma.53 Both Mehriniso and her sister Zulhumor are
currently being held at Zangiota prison 64/1 in Tashkent province.
Isroiljon Kholdorov, 63, is the former

chairperson of the Andijan branch of Isroiljon Kholdorov
Ezgulik, the only registered human
rights organization in Uzbekistan. He is
also a regional Erk party leader and an
independent journalist. He is known for
exposing police abuse, assisting
victims in filing appeals with the
authorities and representing them in
court, and publishing articles critical of
the government.54
Following the May 2005 Andijan

massacre, Kholdorov spoke to
international media about mass graves Born: August 23, 1951
in and around Andijan, including in the Kidnapped from Kyrgyzstan: June 10, 2006
Bogishamol district, which, according Charges: “Threatening the constitutional
order,” “unlawful entry or exit into
to eyewitnesses, authorities had
Uzbekistan,” and “preparing or distributing
secretly organized.55 documents that threaten the public order”
Sentenced: February 2007; 6 years; extended
On October 18, 2005, police searched by 3 years
Kholdorov’s home in Andijan,

© Association for Human Rights in Central Asia
confiscating books, documents, and
letters. The authorities subsequently
issued an order forbidding him to leave Uzbekistan. He fled to neighboring Kyrgyzstan,
where he applied for refugee status with the office of the UN High Commissioner for
53 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with (name withheld), February 3, 2014; Human Rights Watch telephone
interview with Gulshan Karaeva, Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan, Karshi, September 5, 2013.
54 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Musajon Babajonov, Andijan, September 13, 2013.
55 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Musajon Babajonov, September 13, 2013.

Refugees (UNHCR).56 On November 2, 2005, SNB officers opened a criminal case against
him for “threatening the constitutional order,” “unlawful entry into or exit from Uzbekistan,”
and “preparing or distributing documents that threaten the public order.”57
On June 10, 2006, Uzbek security services kidnapped Kholdorov in the city of Osh,
Kyrgyzstan on his way home from the UNHCR office and forcibly returned him to
Uzbekistan.58 The circumstances of his kidnapping and treatment in the first months of his
detention are unclear; officials claim that Kholdorov came of his own free will to the police
station in Andijan on September 7, 2006 with a statement admitting his guilt.59 According
to Ezgulik, SNB officers held Kholdorov under guard for six months at an undisclosed,
unofficial place of detention with boarded windows. He was allowed to exit only to use the
outhouse, led by a handler and with his head covered with a sack.60 In February 2007 the
Andijan Criminal Court convicted him on all counts, sentencing him to six years in prison,
not including time served in pretrial detention.61
Kholdorov has long suffered from serious health problems, including a severe spinal
hernia. According to his family, his health has deteriorated significantly in prison.62 On July
15, 2012, with less than a year left on his prison term, prison authorities sentenced
Kholdorov to an additional three years for “violations of prison rules” for such infractions
as “not getting up when called” and refusing to lift a heavy object when asked to by a
prison guard.63 Because such hearings are closed, little is known about the trial on the
additional charges, including whether he had access to a lawyer or a meaningful
opportunity to appeal. Kholdorov’s family fears the authorities will add more time to his
sentence before it expires in 2016.64
56 Human Rights Watch interview with Vitaliy Ponomarev, Bishkek, September 17, 2013; Vitaliy Ponomarev’s monograph
addressing this question, “Refugees from Uzbekistan in CIS Countries: The Risk of Extradition (May 2005-August 2007)
[Bezhentsy iz Uzbekistana v stranakh SNG: ugroza ekstraditsii (mai 2005 g. – avgust 2007 g.)],” Memorial Human Rights
Center, September 2007, http://www.memo.ru/2007/09/26/2609071.htm (accessed September 11, 2014).
57 Human Rights Watch interview with Vitaliy Ponomarev, Bishkek, September 17, 2013; Vitaliy Ponomarev, “Refugees from
Uzbekistan in CIS Countries: The Risk of Extradition (May 2005-August 2007).”

58 Ibid.
59 Ibid.
60 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Musajon Babajonov, Ezgulik, Andijan, September 13, 2013.
61 Vitaliy Ponomarev, “Refugees from Uzbekistan in CIS Countries: The Risk of Extradition (May 2005-August 2007).”
63 Ibid.

Nosim Isakov, 47, is a father of three children
and a member of HRSU in Jizzakh, central
Nosim Isakov
Uzbekistan.65 He wrote public letters and
Born: November 12, 1966
complaints to officials, including President
Arrested: October 27, 2005
Karimov, regarding the official abuse of power Charges: “Hooliganism” and extortion
and corruption in Jizzakh province. In January Sentenced: December 2005; 8 years;
2005 Isakov took up the case of Askhad sentence extended for unspecified period
Yakubov, who died allegedly from being

tortured in custody by the Jizzakh police.66
On October 27, 2005, the head of the SNB branch in Jizzakh summoned Isakov and his wife
to the police station, ostensibly to discuss a letter Isakov had written to the president.
After separating him from his wife, an investigator asked Isakov if he had come with a
lawyer and immediately arrested him without showing a warrant.
Prosecutors charged him with “hooliganism” and extortion, charges that appeared
fabricated. His trial was marred by due process violations.67 The prosecution based the
hooliganism charge on the allegation of Isakov’s neighbor, a fifth-grade girl, that he had
made a lewd gesture toward her. According to Isakov’s Ezgulik colleague, the extortion
charge was based on the testimony of a former classmate who claimed Isakov demanded a
television set in exchange for agreeing not to expose corruption on the part of the owners
of a local flour mill.
At his trial, which began on December 15, 2005, Isakov maintained his innocence and told
the judge that police beat him on the head with a bottle filled with water, causing
headaches and hearing loss during pretrial detention, but the judge refused to investigate
his allegations.68
66 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, October 21, 2013.
67 Ibid; “Uzbekistan’s Imprisoned Human Rights Defenders,” Human Rights Watch news release, May 13, 2011,
68 Human Rights Watch telephone interviews with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik activist, Tashkent, October 21, 2013 and
April 29, 2014.

The court sentenced Isakov to eight years in prison. He was to have been released last
year, but authorities extended his sentence for unspecified “violations of prison rules” and
he continues to serve a prison term in Tavaksay, Tashkent province. According to rights
activists, authorities have intimidated his family members over the years, warning them
not to make any complaints about Isakov’s imprisonment.69
Gaybullo Jalilov, 50, is a human rights

Gaybullo Jalilov activist from Karshi in the southern province
of Kashkadarya and the father of two
children. A member of HRSU since 2003, he
focused on the crackdown on independent
Muslims. By the time he was taken into
custody on June 8, 2009, he had collected
information on over 200 arrests of
independent Muslims in the region.70 Jalilov
had severe medical problems prior to
prison; he is missing one of his lungs and
requires constant medical supervision. His
health has worsened since he has been in
detention.71
Born: August 24, 1964
Arrested: June 8, 2009
On January 18, 2010, the Kashkadarya
Charges: “Anti-constitutional activity”
and “membership in a banned religious Criminal Court sentenced Jalilov to nine
organization” years in prison on charges of “anti-
Sentenced: August 4, 2010; 11 years, 1 constitutional activity,” “production and
month, 5 days distribution of banned material,” and
“membership in a banned religious
© Association for Human Rights in Central Asia
organization.” Jalilov’s trial violated fair trial
standards and he was allegedly tortured in
pretrial detention. The prosecution’s case
69 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik, September 11, 2013; Human Rights Watch
email correspondence with Tolib Yakubov, Dublin, August 29, 2013.

71 Ibid.

against Jalilov centered on his alleged involvement in an extremist religious group and the
preparation of terrorist attacks on a military base. However, it did not introduce any
evidence in support of these allegations. The authorities’ search of Jalilov’s home
produced no religious literature and no witnesses could recall him ever belonging to an
extremist group or calling for violent action against the state.72 On March 9, 2010, Jalilov’s
nine-year sentence was upheld on appeal. Guards brought him to the hearing with a
swollen eye, raising the possibility that he had been ill-treated in custody.73
Seven months after his original conviction, on August 4, 2010, a court convicted Jalilov
again and sentenced him to 11 years, one month, and five days on new charges of
“attempting to overthrow the constitutional order of the state.”74 Authorities never notified
his family of the investigation into his case and repeatedly denied their requests to visit
him in detention. Upon sentencing, Jalilov was transferred to a prison in Zangiota.75
After a two-day visit in January 2011, Jalilov’s relatives told Human Rights Watch that Jalilov
had been tortured, including by being beaten with a nightstick to such a degree that he
has nearly total hearing loss. They also reported that Jalilov’s lung causes him pain and
that he is suffering from a vertebral hernia.76
In late 2013 relatives and rights activists reported that Jalilov was in urgent need of
medical care.77 In 2012, without notifying his family, authorities moved him 450 kilometers
from Zangiota prison in the northeast to a prison in Navoi, in central Uzbekistan.78 Since
2013, in spite of his very poor health, prison authorities have made Jalilov work in a prison
brick factory. It is also reported that he is not receiving enough food.79
72 Human Rights Watch telephone interviews with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, October 21, 2013 and April 29, 2014, and
Gulshan Karaeva, Karshi, March 15, 2014.

74 “Uzbekistan: Activist Hit With New Sentence: Stop Persecuting Human Rights Defenders,” Human Rights Watch news
release August 13, 2010, http://www.hrw.org/news/2010/08/13/uzbekistan-activist-hit-new-sentence.

75 Ibid.
76 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Mukaddas Temirova, Karshi, February 2, 2011.
77 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Gulshan Karaeva, Karshi, October 16, 2013.
78 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Mukaddas Temirova, Karshi, October 14, 2013.
79 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Gulshan Karaeva, Karshi, September 5, 2013.

Matluba Kamilova, 54, is a mother, human rights
Matluba Kamilova activist, lawyer, and the former director of a technical
college in Angren, Tashkent province. She was known
Born: 1960
for tackling corruption and assisting citizens to
Arrested: September 6, 2010
Charges: Narcotics
advocate for their rights. Her work led to the opening of
possession two corruption cases against local officials.80 On
Sentenced: 11 years September 6, 2010, plainclothes officers who identified
themselves as belonging to the SNB arrested her during
a traffic stop on her way to work. Shohruhon,
Kamilova’s 21-year-old son who was in the vehicle, told an activist that the officers said they
found a five-gram bag of heroin, after which they took Kamilova and him into custody,
beating them in the process.81 Police subsequently searched Kamilova’s office where they
said they uncovered another four grams of unspecified narcotics.
A few days later officers transferred Kamilova to the Tashkent city jail. A rights activist
present at Kamilova’s trial told Human Rights Watch that Kamilova testified that SNB
officers took her out of her cell at the jail, where she was forced to listen to the screams of
other prisoners being beaten to convince her to confess.82
A rights activist who observed Kamilova’s trial and interviewed her son told Human Rights
Watch that SNB officers planted the drugs on Kamilova’s person. In addition, officers
provided contradictory testimony about the sequence of events during the search of the
vehicle, including how and when the drugs were allegedly discovered.83
A Tashkent regional court convicted Kamilova on narcotics possession, sentencing her to

eleven years in prison. The ruling was upheld on appeal.84 Few details are known about
Kamilova’s current condition or whereabouts in prison, but the narcotics conviction
renders her ineligible for amnesty. Kamilova’s relatives said SNB officers have repeatedly
threatened them not to speak about the case.85
80 Human Rights Watch interviews with “Umid U.,” Angren and Bishkek , September 19 and October 16, 2013.
81 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Elena Urlaeva, Tashkent, October 10, 2013.
82 Human Rights Watch interview with “Umid U.,” September 19 and October 16, 2013.
83 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Elena Urlaeva, September 19, 2013; Human Rights Watch telephone
interview with “Bakhodir B.,” January 21, 2014.

84 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Elena Urlaeva, September 19, 2013.
85 Ibid.

Ganikhon Mamatkhanov, 63, the father of five
children, was the leader of the local chapter of the Ganikhon Mamatkhanov
International Society for Human Rights of Uzbekistan
in his native Fergana province, in eastern
Uzbekistan. He advocated for social and economic
rights, especially those of farmers subjected to
unlawful land confiscation as well as for adults and
children forced to harvest cotton by government
officials.86 Before his arrest, Mamatkhanov regularly
commented on rights abuses in his native region to
the Uzbek service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
and criticized the government’s failed socio- Born: 1951
economic policies on BBC radio.87 Several days Arrested: October 12, 2009
Charges: Fraud and attempted
before his arrest, Mamatkhanov sent an open letter
bribery
to President Karimov criticizing his agricultural Sentenced: November 25, 2009;
reform program immediately before Karimov was to 5 years; sentence extended for
make a visit to Fergana province.88 an unspecified period
© Abdujalil Boymatov/Human
Police arrested Mamatkhanov on October 12, 2009, Rights Society of Uzbekistan
under circumstances that appear to have been staged

to frame him for fraud and attempted bribery. He later
told his son that he suffered two heart attacks in pretrial detention but that his request to the
investigator for medical attention was denied.89 His case was marred by severe procedural
violations and witnesses claimed that the investigator instructed them what to say before and
after Mamatkhanov’s arrest.90 On November 25, 2009, a court sentenced him to five years
imprisonment and the authorities sent him to a penal colony in the Pskent district of Tashkent
province. He suffered a third heart attack during trial.91
87 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik activist, Tashkent, October 21, 2013, and
in-person interview, Washington, DC, April 29, 2014.

88 Ibid.
89 Ibid.
90 “Imprisoned Human Rights Defenders in Uzbekistan,” Human Rights Watch news release, February 5, 2010,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2009/12/18/imprisoned-human-rights-defenders-uzbekistan.

In January 2010 a court reduced Mamatkhanov’s five-year prison sentence to four and a
half years on appeal.92 Mamatkhanov’s lawyer reported that SNB officers obstructed an
appeal by refusing to supply necessary documents and denied him opportunities to meet
with Mamatkhanov. Authorities granted him just one meeting with Mamatkhanov
throughout the appeal.93
In spring 2010, after allegedly violating prison rules at his penal colony, authorities
transferred Mamatkhanov to Kyzyltepa prison in Navoi, in central Uzbekistan, more than
700 kilometers from his Fergana home. During a January 2011 family visit, Mamatkhanov
complained of heart pain and high blood pressure.94 Visiting him in July 2013, his wife
reported that his condition had further deteriorated, including increased hypertension and
difficulty walking. Mamatkhanov requested that she urge rights groups and diplomats to
advocate for his release as he fears he will die in prison due to his poor health.95
Mamatkhanov was due to have been released on March 10, 2014, but authorities extended
his sentence in the same month for unspecified “violations of prison rules” following a
closed hearing.96 According to Mamatkhanov’s son, Jalolidin, and rights activists,
authorities informed the family even prior to the hearing that Mamatkhanov’s sentence
would be inevitably lengthened and that they should “prepare for him to be moved to a
prison in another region.”97 When Mamatkhanov’s family attempted to visit him, prison
officials denied them access. After returning home, they received a letter that he had been
tried on March 4, two days before their arrival. The letter stated that a Navoi court had
sentenced him to an additional term for “violation of prison rules” but did not state by how
many years. “I called the court of the city of Navoi,” said Jalolidin, to obtain information,
in-person interview Washington, DC April 29, 2014.
95 Human Rights Watch telephone Interview with Abdusalom Ergashev, Fergana, August 29, 2013.
96 “Uzbek Rights Activist Remains in Jail, Even After Prison Term Ends,” RFE/RL, March 24, 2014,
http://www.rferl.org/content/uzbekistan-activist-mamatkhanov-prison/25307888.html (accessed September 11, 2014).

97 Human Rights Watch interview with Mutabar Tadjibaeva, Brussels, March 20, 2014; “Ganikhon Mamatkhanov Was Thrown
Into a Punishment Cell for Going to the Toilet Three Times Without Permission,” Fiery Hearts Club news release, March 4,
2014, http://jarayon.com/en/index.php/human-rights/item/231-ganikhon-mamatkhonov-was-thrown-into-a-punishment-
cell-for-going-to-toilet-three-times-without-permission (accessed September 11, 2014).

“but they told me that they do not give information over the phone and asked to visit him
in person!”
Mamatkhanov earlier warned authorities would find a justification to lengthen his

sentence, as has occurred with others imprisoned on politically motivated charges. Prison
officials placed Mamatkhanov in solitary confinement for several days in March 2014
ostensibly for “going to the bathroom on three occasions without asking permission.”98
Chuyan Mamatkulov, 44, is a

father, former sergeant in the Chuyan Mamatkulov
army, and member of HRSU in
Kashkadarya province and has
represented citizens in court
cases.99 He has also assisted
victims of fraud and written
petitions to government
bodies.100 He rose to
prominence in the early 2000s
after filing several suits against
President Karimov alleging his
Born: 1970
unlawful dismissal from active Arrested: August 2012
military service in 2000.101 He Charges: 12 different charges, including narcotics sale,
claimed that Karimov, as extortion, kidnapping, religious extremism, and
racketeering
commander-in-chief, bore
Sentenced: March 12, 2013; 10 years
responsibility for his wrongful
dismissal. Following the Imprisoned rights activist Chuyan Mamatkulov photographed
dismissal of his lawsuit three with his two children in Kashkadarya province. © 2012 Private
times, a Tashkent city court

finally accepted the case in
98 Human Rights Watch interview with Mutabar Tadjibaeva, Brussels, March 20, 2014.
99 Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan news release, “Regular victims of ‘justice’ in Kashkadar’inskiy oblast [Ocherednaya
zhertva ‘pravosudiya’ v Kashkadar’inskoy oblasti],” March 13, 2013, http://ru.hrsu.org/archives/4339 (accessed August 1, 2014).
100 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdujalil Boymatov, Dublin, August 28, 2013.
101Karaev, Tulkin, “Discharged service members are suing the president of Uzbekistan [Uvolenniy voyenniy suditsya c
presidentom Uzbekistana],” Institute for War and Peace Reporting News Release, February 21, 2005,
http://iwpr.net/ru/report-news/уволенный-военный-судится-с-президентом-узбекистана (accessed September 11, 2014).

2004, but no trial date was ever set. Mamatkulov’s fearlessness and willingness to
criticize President Karimov directly earned him respect among many in civil society and
beyond.102
Following the 2005 Andijan massacre, authorities pressured Mamatkulov to abandon his
public criticism. In December 2012, rights defenders learned that authorities had
arrested Mamatkulov in August of that year on 12 different charges, including narcotics
sale, extortion, kidnapping, religious extremism, and racketeering.103 A court convicted
Mamatkulov on all counts on March 12, 2013 and sentenced him to 10 years in prison. No
observers were allowed to be present at the trial.104 The number of charges, nature of the
accusations, and the fact that the religious organization Mamatkulov was accused of
being a member of, Jihodchilar, does not appear to exist, contribute to the appearance of
a politically motivated prosecution of a government critic and is consistent with other
similar cases.105
Mamatkulov is serving his sentence in Navoi.106 In July 2014 Mamatkulov’s wife told
Human Rights Watch that on April 20 a prison captain named Sherali had repeatedly
struck Mamatkulov on the head with a rubber truncheon in his office after Mamatkulov
had asked to see a dentist.107 Following the beating, prison authorities placed
Mamatkulov in solitary confinement for 24 hours. His wife learned about the beating
during a visit with her husband on June 19. At that time she also discovered that
Mamatkulov has lost the majority of his teeth and has had problems with his vision
since the April 2014 beating.108
102 Ibid.
103 Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan news release, “Regular victims of ‘justice’ in Kashkadar’inskiy oblast.”
(“Ocherednaya zhertva ‘pravosudiya’ v Kashkadar’inskoy oblasti”) March 13, 2013, http://ru.hrsu.org/archives/4339

104 Human Rights Watch telephone interviews with Gulshan Karaeva, Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan, Karshi, September
5, 2013, April 25, 2013, and May 2, 2014.

105 Human Rights Watch telephone interviews with Gulshan Karaeva, September 5, 2013, April 25, 2013, and May 2, 2014.
106Ibid.
107 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Dilorom Mamanova, Kasan district, village Obron, July 2, 2014.
108 Ibid.

Karshi-based human rights
activists Yuldash Rasulov, 46, Zafarjon Rahimov Yuldash Rasulov
and Zafarjon Rahimov, 45,
are childhood friends,
colleagues, and members of
the Kashkadarya province
branch of HRSU. Rahimov
was a policeman until the
early 1990s, when the
government purged religious
individuals from the Ministry
of Internal Affairs and he was Born: 1969 and 1968, respectively
forced to leave his position. Arrested: April 2007
He then began working with Charges: “Threatening the constitutional order” and
“membership in a banned religious organization”
Yuldash Rasulov as a
Sentenced: 2007; 6 and 10 years, respectively; Rahimov’s
mechanic at an auto shop, sentence was extended for an unspecified period
when both became involved
© Association for Human © Tolib Yakubov
with HRSU around 2001.109 Rights in Central Asia
In the early 2000s, similar to

Shahlo Rahmonova and Mehriniso and Zulhumor Hamdamova, Rasulov and Rahimov
served as a link between religious Muslims and the secular HRSU. They gathered
information about abuses against independent Muslims, focusing on freedom of belief
and worship and ill-treatment in custody. Rasulov and Rahimov also expanded the scope
of HRSU’s work in Kashkadarya province, arranging meetings with pious Muslims and
farmers.110
On May 24, 2002, authorities arrested Rasulov on charges of “threatening the

constitutional order,” “distributing extremist literature,” and “membership in a criminal
organization.” He was held incommunicado for a month after his arrest and stated in court
that he had been beaten in pretrial detention.111 The court convicted Rasulov and
109 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Tulkin Karaev, Sweden, September 18, 2013.
110 Ibid; Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdujalil Boymatov, Dublin, September 17, 2013.
111 “Uzbek Rights Defender Sentenced to Imprisonment,” Human Rights Watch news release, September 18, 2002,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2002/09/17/uzbek-rights-defender-sentenced-imprisonment.

sentenced him to seven years in prison, but following sustained pressure from human
rights organizations and diplomats, authorities released him seven months later.112
After Rasulov’s release in early 2003, he and Rahimov continued their work. In late April
2007, security forces arrested the pair in Karshi on charges that included “threatening the
constitutional order” and “membership in a banned religious organization.”113 Rahimov
received a six-year sentence and Rasulov was sentenced to ten years.114 Human Rights
Watch received reports from the Uzbek human rights organization Fiery Hearts Club, who
interviewed the men’s families, and rights activists who monitored the trial that both men
were tortured during the investigation and after they were convicted.115
Rahimov’s sentence was set to expire in October

Bobomurod Razzokov 2013, but he remains in prison colony 64/25 in
Karavulbazar in the southern province of Bukhara,
leading his colleagues to assume that his
sentence has been extended on undisclosed
grounds.116 Rasulov also remains incarcerated.
Bobomurod Razzokov, 61, is a father of six

children, a farmer, a member of the Erk party, and
was the head of Ezgulik in Bukhara province.117 He
© Fiery Hearts Club also worked as a correspondent for foreign media,
including Deutsche Welle. With Ezgulik, Razzokov
Born: March 19, 1953 wrote complaints on corruption to the regional
Arrested: July 10, 2013 administration (hokimiyat), the prosecutor’s office,
Charges: human trafficking
and the president. In the month before his arrest,
Sentenced: September 24, 2013; 4 years
Razzokov told media and rights groups that he
112 Davidson Douglass, US Mission to the OSCE Statement to the OSCE Permanent Council, “Human Rights in Uzbekistan,”
March 13, 2003, http://2001-2009.state.gov/p/eur/rls/rm/2003/19888.htm (accessed September 11, 2014).

114 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Tulkin Karaev, Sweden, September 18, 2013.
115 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Nadejda Atayeva, President, Association for Human Rights in Central Asia,
Le Mans, September 16, 2013.

117 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik activist, Tashkent, September 9-10, 2013.

came under increased pressure from the SNB over his work.
On June 10, 2013, the head of Bukhara’s counterterrorism unit, Alisher Andaev, summoned
him for a two-hour interrogation and ordered him to resign from Ezgulik and cease all
contact with foreign media. Razzokov said that Andaev told him harm would come to him
and his family if he did not stop his work.118
Authorities detained Razzokov on July 10, 2013 on human trafficking charges.119 The charge
stemmed from the written complaint of a woman who accused Razzokov of forcing her into
the custody of another individual, who pressed her into prostitution. According to
Razzokov, the alleged victim approached him several days before his arrest requesting
assistance in finding a relative who had gone missing in Russia. Razzokov’s relative claims
that the SNB pressured the woman to testify against him.120 A rights activist who monitored
the proceedings and the authorities’ threats against Razzokov prior to his arrest told
Human Rights Watch that he believes Razzakov’s prosecution was retaliation for his long
record of civil society activism. He observed that the case fits a pattern of pressure against
representatives of the Ezgulik human rights group in other regions of Uzbekistan.121
On September 24, 2013, the Bukhara Province Criminal Court sentenced Razzokov to four
years’ imprisonment.122 Soon after the conviction, authorities transferred him to a
Tavaksay labor colony, more than 600 kilometers to the northeast of his home, to serve out
his sentence, where he remains.123
118 “Uzbekistan: Trial of Activist on Trumped-Up Charges,” Human Rights Watch news release, September 24, 2013,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/09/24/uzbekistan-trial-activist-trumped-charges.
119 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, September 9-10, 2013. Art. 135 of the Uzbek
Criminal Code (“purchase or sale of persons, or their recruitment, transport, transfer, concealment, or receipt for the purpose
of exploitation”).
120 “Uzbekistan: Trial of Activist on Trumped-Up Charges,” Human Rights Watch news release, September 24, 2013,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/09/24/uzbekistan-trial-activist-trumped-charges. More details at “Leader of Bukhara

chapter of Ezgulik detained,” UzNews.net, July 12, 2013,
http://www.uznews.net/news_single.php?lng=en&cid=3&nid=23360 (accessed September 11, 2014).

122 Ibid.
123 Human Rights Watch telephone interviews with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik, Tashkent, October 25, 2013, and in-
person interview, Washington, DC, April 29, 2014.

Fahriddin Tillaev, 43, and
Fahriddin Tillaev Nuraddin Jumaniyazov Nuraddin Jumaniyazov, 66,
human rights activists and
members of the Erk party, were
sentenced in March 2014 to eight
years and three months in prison
on human trafficking charges.124
Both Tillaev and Jumaniyazov
also became members of Mazlum
(“the oppressed”) Human Rights
© Association for Human Rights in Central Asia Center in 2003.125 Since 2005
Tillaev has advocated for workers’
Born: August 15, 1971 and October 8, 1948, respectively
rights in Surkhandarya province
Arrested: January 2, 2014
in southeastern Uzbekistan.126 In
Charges: human trafficking
2012 he helped found the Union
Sentenced: March 2014; 8 years, 3 months
of Independent Trade Unions that
protects the rights of labor
migrants (mardikorlar), while Jumaniyazov headed its Tashkent chapter.127
On December 28, 2013, Tashkent police interrogated Jumaniyazov because two Uzbek
citizens, Farhod Pardaev and Erkin Erdanov, apparently alleged that Jumaniyazov and
Tillaev arranged their employment in Kazakhstan, where they were mistreated.
Tillaev’s lawyer, Polina Braunberg, told Human Rights Watch that the investigation against
the two was marred by serious procedural violations. Police arrested them both on January 2,
2014 and took them to a Tashkent prison but falsified materials to indicate January 4 as the
date of arrest.128 Investigators did not provide Tillaev’s or Jumaniyazov’s lawyers sufficient
time to review the evidence in the case, conducting all interrogations, including of the
124 “Two Erk members sentenced for human trafficking in Tashkent,” Uznews.net, March 7, 2014,
http://www.uznews.net/news_single.php?lng=en&sub=&cid=3&nid=25399 (accessed September 1, 2014).

125 Human Rights Watch email correspondence with Nadejda Atayeva, Paris, February 18, 2014.
126 Nadejda Atayeva, “Uzbekistan: Two Human Rights Defenders Imprisoned for 8 Years, 3 Months,” post to Nadejda Atayeva
blog, March 8, 2014, http://nadejda-atayeva-en.blogspot.com/2014/03/uzbekistan-two-human-rights-defenders.html

127 Ibid.
128 Human Rights Watch email correspondence with Nadejda Atayeva, Paris, March 10, 2014.

defendants, in a single day before advancing the case to trial.129 The court completed the
trial in just two hours, basing the conviction solely on the testimonies of two witnesses who
admitted that they had never seen Tillaev nor had any relationship with him whatsoever.130
According to their lawyer, police tortured both Tillaev and Jumaniyazov in pretrial custody.131
They stuck needles between Tillaev’s fingers and toes, for example, and forced him to stand for
hours under a faucet from which water dripped on his head, causing a severe headache. On
January 21, 2014, during a meeting with her client Tillaev, Braunberg became convinced that
Tillaev had been tortured and petitioned the investigator for a forensic medical examination.
The investigator refused to answer her petition until just one day before the next court hearing,
at which time the court denied the defense’s request to open an investigation into the
torture allegations on the basis that the petition was still being “processed.”132To date, no
judicial or prison authorities have meaningfully investigated Tillaev’s allegations of torture.
Akzam Turgunov On August 1, 2014, Uzbekistan’s Supreme Court

rejected the appeal to overturn their convictions.
Both Tillaev and Jumaniyazov remain in prison in
Navoi.
Akzam Turgunov, 62, is the father of four children,

the founder of Mazlum Human Rights Center in
Tashkent and was a trial monitor and member of
the Erk party.133 Turgunov was well-known for
© Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan taking on politically sensitive cases, including
religious extremism cases, and also defended
Born: January 1, 1952
Tursinbai Etamuratov, head of HRSU’s office in the
Arrested: July 8, 2008
Charges: extortion autonomous republic of Karakalpakstan in
Sentenced: October 23, 2008; 10 years northwestern Uzbekistan.134 Turgunov earlier
served a prison sentence from 1998 to 2000 for
129 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Polina Braunberg, Tashkent, April 10, 2014.
131 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Polina Braunberg, Tashkent, April 6, 2014.

134 Human Rights Watch email correspondence with Tolib Yakubov, London, August 29, 2013.

his involvement in the Erk party and experienced frequent intimidation and harassment
from the authorities in the years after his release.135 He was arrested again in Tashkent on
July 8, 2008 on trumped-up charges of extortion after travelling to Karakalpakstan to
assist in the settlement of a child support case.136
Serious due process violations plagued Turgunov’s trial, and security officials allegedly
tortured him in custody.137 On July 14, 2008, while he was in the Tashkent office of police
investigator Salomat Ibragimov writing a statement, someone poured boiling water down his
neck and back, causing him to lose consciousness and burning him severely.138 Leaked
United States State Department documents, which corroborate earlier interviews by Human
Rights Watch regarding Turgunov’s torture, suggest that he was tortured in an attempt to
extract a confession.139 Authorities ordered an investigation into Turgunov's torture only after
he removed his shirt during a court hearing in Tashkent on September 16, 2008 to show the
scars from the burns, which covered a large portion of his back and neck, extending past his
waist.140 A subsequent court-appointed forensic medical examiner concluded that
Turgunov’s burns were minor and did not warrant further investigation.141
During Turgunov’s trial, a court clerk told observers that “even if BBC would come to this
trial, Akzam Turgunov will get a long prison sentence,” suggesting that the outcome of his
trial was predetermined.142 The court sentenced him to 10 years’ imprisonment on October
23, 2008, and authorities transferred him to a location that remained unknown to his
family for several months.143 He is currently at prison colony 64/49 near Karshi.144
135 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik, Tashkent, October 21, 2013; as well as
“Akzam Turgunov, Uzbekistan,” Freedom Now Campaigns, http://www.freedom-now.org/campaign/akzam-turgunov/

136Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik activist, Tashkent, October 21, 2013, and

137 “Free Uzbekistan: Free Human Rights Activist, Government Critic Held on Fabricated Charges, Ill-Treated in Custody,” Human
Rights Watch news release, September 16, 2008, http://www.hrw.org/news/2008/09/15/uzbekistan-free-human-rights-activist.

138 Ibid.
139 “Uzbekistan: Ex-Police Officers Jailed For Kidnapping,” Wikileaks, November 13, 2008,
http://www.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08TASHKENT1305_a.html (accessed September 11, 2014).

140 “Uzbekistan: Free Human Rights Activist, Government Critic Held on Fabricated Charges, Ill-Treated in Custody,” Human
Rights Watch news release, September 16, 2008, http://www.hrw.org/news/2008/09/15/uzbekistan-free-human-rights-activist.

141 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik, Tashkent, October 21, 2013.
142“Uzbekistan: Free Human Rights Activist,” Human Rights Watch news release, September 16, 2008,
http://www.hrw.org/de/news/2008/09/15/uzbekistan-free-human-rights-activist.
143 “The family of Azam Turgunov can’t find out where he is,” Voice of Freedom, Regional Human Rights Portal, January 24,
2009, http://vof.kg/?p=495 (accessed September 11, 2014).

Turgunov’s family told Human Rights Watch that he has lost significant weight and is in
bad health. According to a Tashkent-based rights activist, his condition continues to
worsen: he has limited mobility and suffers from a chronic cough, difficulty breathing, and
a heart condition.145 He is forced to work at a prison brick factory and has complained of
severe leg pain as a result of this work, for which prison authorities have denied him
treatment.146 In November 2011 the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
issued an opinion calling for Turgunov’s release and stating that his detention by the
Uzbek government is arbitrary and in violation of international norms.147
Journalists
We fully support our citizens’ desire to freely use the Internet.… I would like
to repeat this: we absolutely do not accept the erection of walls and
restrictions around the world of information, leading to isolation.
—President Islam Karimov, addressing citizens on Media Workers Day,
June 27, 2011148
He is not just deprived of his freedom; they are slowly killing him in prison.
—Galima Bukharbaeva, a colleague of imprisoned journalist Solijon
Abdurakhmanov, June 22, 2013
Despite legislation ostensibly protecting freedom of speech, in practice, censorship is the

norm and freedom of expression in Uzbekistan is severely limited. Foreign correspondents
and Uzbek citizens working for independent or foreign media are not allowed to operate
without accreditation, which since the Andijan massacre in 2005, has been impossible to

145 Human Rights Watch email correspondence with Nadejda Atayeva, August 21, 2013; Human Rights Watch telephone
interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik, Tashkent, October 21, 2013; Human Rights Watch interview with
Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik, Washington, DC, April 29, 2014.
147 UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Chair-Rapporteur: El Hadji Malick Sow,
A/HRC/19/57, December 26, 2011, http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session19/A-

HRC-19-57_en.pdf (accessed September 11, 2014), p.9.
148 “Propaganda, Islam Karimov, President, Uzbekistan,” Reporters Without Borders news release,
http://en.rsf.org/predator-islam-karimov-president-uzbekistan,44537.html (accessed September 11, 2014).

obtain in practice. The few independent journalists who continue to work in the country do
so at great risk and are forced to self-censor due to harassment, detention, and threats of
imprisonment for their work.149
Uzbek websites providing critical information are blocked, including Fergananews.com,

Uznews.net, and Muslimuzbekistan.org. News agencies such as the New York Times, the
BBC, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Voice of America, and Deutsche Welle are unable or
forbidden to operate in Uzbekistan. Websites of international human rights organizations
like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are blocked.
Uzbekistan’s International Obligations on Freedom of Expression

International human rights law recognizes freedom of expression as a fundamental human
right, essential both to the effective functioning of a democratic society and to individual
human dignity. Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR),
ratified by Uzbekistan in 1995, provides, “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.”150
The ICCPR permits states to restrict freedom of expression for the purpose of protecting the
reputations of others, but there are strict conditions for such limitations. According to
article 19(3), restrictions “shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary: (a)
For respect of the rights or reputations of others; (b) For the protection of national security
or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.”151
As the UN Human Rights Committee has noted, restrictions on the right to freedom of
expression “may not put in jeopardy the right itself” and must satisfy three conditions:
they must be clearly provided by law; designed to pursue one of the legitimate aims
149 Human Rights Watch, World Report 2013, (New York: Human Rights Watch, 2013), Uzbekistan chapter,
http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/wr2013_web.pdf, p. 507.
150 ICCPR, adopted December 16, 1966, G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), 21 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 52, U.N. Doc. A/6316 (1966),
999 U.N.T.S. 171, entered into force March 23, 1976, ratified by Uzbekistan on September 28, 1995, art. 19(2).
151 Ibid, art. 19(3).

articulated in article 19(3); and be both proportional to the accomplishment of that
objective and necessary for its accomplishment.152
Credible information on developments in Uzbekistan, including on rights abuses and

corruption, comes at extreme risk for those who attempt to report on them. At least five
journalists are currently in prison in apparent retaliation for their independent reporting. At
least another seven journalists profiled in other sections of this report are imprisoned on
politically motivated grounds.
Solijon Abdurakhmanov, 64,

is the father of six children, an Solijon Abdurakhmanov
outspoken journalist and
rights activist with the
organization, the Committee
for the Protection of Individual
Rights. Based in
Karakalpakstan, an
autonomous republic in
northwestern Uzbekistan, he
reported for the independent
© Uznews.net
news portal Uznews.net,
Ozodlik (the Uzbek service of Born: May 28, 1950
Radio Free Europe/Radio Arrested: June 7, 2008
Liberty), Amerika Ovozi (Voice Charges: narcotics possession
of America), and the Institute Sentenced: October 10, 2008; 10 years
for War and Peace
Reporting.153 He covered sensitive issues such as social and economic justice,
environmental problems of the Aral Sea, corruption, and the legal status of Karakalpakstan
within Uzbekistan.154
152 UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 10, Freedom of Expression (Art. 19), Nineteenth session (1983), U.N.
Doc. HRI/GEN/Rev.1 at 11 (1994), http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Opinion/CCPRGeneralCommentNo10.pdf

153 “Uzbekistan: Journalist Sentenced to 10 Years,” Human Rights Watch news release, October 20, 2008,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2008/10/20/uzbekistan-journalist-sentenced-10-years.

SNB officers arrested Abdurakhmanov on June 7, 2008 for possession and use of narcotics
after they stopped him in traffic and allegedly found a small bag of an unknown substance in
the trunk of his car. Abdurakhmanov’s lawyer claims that the SNB officers themselves
planted the drugs.155 When Abdurakhmanov tested negative for drugs, the prosecution
dropped the use of narcotics charge, and instead charged him with narcotics possession.156
Even though the charges brought against him were drug-related, Abdurakhmanov told his
lawyers that the investigator mostly questioned him about his journalistic work.157 During
pretrial detention, authorities denied Abdurakhmanov access to his legal team.158
On October 10, 2008, a court sentenced Abdurakhmanov to 10 years in prison following a

trial that did not meet fair trial standards.159 After his conviction, both of Abdurakhmanov’s
defense lawyers, his brother Bahrom Abdurakhmanov and Rustam Tyuleganov, were
disbarred by the government-controlled bar association following a re-attestation process
that violated international norms on the independence of lawyers and appeared to be in
retaliation for their work.160
Abdurakhmanov is serving his sentence in Karshi, more than 700 kilometers from his
home. Farkhodkhon Mukhtarov, a rights activist who served prison time with
Abdurakhmanov, told Human Rights Watch that prison authorities have charged
Abdurakhmanov with numerous “violations of prison rules” that render him ineligible for
amnesty or early release. These alleged violations include “not marching correctly” and “not
sweeping up his cell,” even though prison guards have never provided him with a broom.161
157 Ibid.
158 “Uzbekistan: Release Independent Journalist,” Human Rights Watch news release, September 12, 2008,
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/09/11/uzbekistan-release-independent-journalist.
159 Uzbekistan’s Imprisoned Human Rights Defenders” Human Rights Watch news release, May 13, 2011,
160 Human Rights Watch, No One Left to Witness: Torture, Habeas Corpus and the Silencing of Lawyers in Uzbekistan, December
2011, http://www.hrw.org/reports/2011/12/13/no-one-left-witness-0, p. 92. The reforms resulted in the abolition of Uzbekistan’s

independent legal profession and the disbarment of numerous lawyers who had taken on politically sensitive cases.

In June 2013, condemning Abdurakhmanov’s continued imprisonment, Reporters Without
Borders (RSF) expressed grave concern about his worsening health.162 According to RSF,
Abdurakhmanov has a severely aggravated stomach ulcer that has led to his repeated
transfer between the Kashkadarya labor colony and a Tashkent prison hospital.163 By 2013
he had developed an intestinal ulcer.164 Abdurakhmanov’s family, rights groups, and
independent media reported that prison authorities have also prevented International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) representatives from meeting him in prison. In fall 2012,
prison officials attempted to pass off another prisoner as Abdurakhmanov when ICRC
representatives visited the facility, a ruse quickly recognized by observers.165
Imprisoned journalist Solijon Abdurakhmanov’s family lives in Karakalpakstan, an autonomous republic

in northwestern Uzbekistan. Colleagues believe authorities targeted him because he wrote critical
articles about Karakalpakstan. © Human Rights Alliance of Uzbekistan
In 2013 Tashkent-based rights activists submitted a list of Uzbek officials involved in his
unlawful imprisonment to the US State Department seeking the application of travel
sanctions against them, drawing inspiration from the Magnitsky Act, a bill passed by the
162 “Journalist in Great Danger in Uzbek Prison System,” Reporters Without Borders, June 27, 2013,
http://en.rsf.org/uzbekistan-journalist-in-great-danger-in-26-06-2013,44858.html (accessed September 11, 2014).

163 Ibid.
164 “Prisoner Solijon Abdurakhmanov is Critically Ill,” Uznews.net, October 14, 2013,
http://www.uznews.net/news_single.php?lng=ru&cid=3&nid=24038 (accessed September 11, 2014).

165 “Uzbekistan Hides Jailed Journalist from the Red Cross,” Uznews.net, November 19, 2012,
http://www.uznews.net/news_single.php?lng=en&cid=3&nid=21331 (accessed September 11, 2014).

US Congress that applies a visa ban and asset freeze against Russian officials allegedly
responsible for the death in custody of whistleblower and tax lawyer Sergei Magnitsky.
In December 2013, despite his age and poor health, authorities refused to release
Abdurakhmanov under an annual
amnesty that specifically applies to
Muhammad Bekjanov and Yusuf prisoners over 60 years old.166 In June
Ruzimuradov
2013 one of Abdurakhmanov’s close
colleagues said that Abdurakhmanov “is
not just deprived of his freedom; they are
slowly killing him in prison.”167
Muhammad Bekjanov, 60, and Yusuf

Ruzimuradov, 56, are two of the world’s
longest-imprisoned journalists.168
Bekjanov was a prominent member of the
Erk party when he was kidnapped by
Uzbek security services along with his
© Private party colleague Yusuf Ruzimuradov in
March 1999 in Kyiv, Ukraine, where they
Born: October 1, 1954 and 1958, respectively had fled to live in exile and publish the
Kidnapped from Ukraine: March 1999
banned party’s newspaper. Bekjanov’s
Charges: Various, including “threatening the
older brother, Muhammad Solih, is Erk’s
life of the president,” “threatening the
constitutional order,” and “organization of leader, the head of the People’s
banned civil groups and religious Movement of Uzbekistan (PMU), and a
organizations” high-profile political rival of President
Sentenced: March 15, 1999; 15 years; Karimov. Driven into exile in 1994, Solih
sentences extended for an unspecified period
was the only person to oppose Karimov
166 “Journalist Salijon Abdurakhmanov transferred back to prison colony,” Uznews.net, January 17, 2014,
http://www.uznews.net/en/human-rights/24816-journalist-salijon-abdurahmanov-transferred-back-to-prison-colony
167 “Imprisoned journalist Abdurakhmanov is gravely ill,” Uznews.net, June 22, 2013, http://www.uznews.net/en/human-
rights/23118-imprisoned-journalist-abdurahmanov-is-gravely-ill (accessed September 11, 2014).

168 ”Uzbek editor sentenced to jail while still in prison,” Committee to Protect Journalists, January 25, 2012,
http://cpj.org/2012/01/days-before-his-release-jailed-uzbek-editor-given.php (accessed September 11, 2014).

in the 1991 presidential elections.169 Authorities pursued the two men against the
backdrop of bombings in Tashkent in February 1999 that the Uzbek authorities linked to
Solih and the Erk party.170
The authorities charged Bekjanov with nine offenses including article 158 (“threatening the
life of the president of Uzbekistan”), article 159 (“threatening the constitutional order of
Uzbekistan”), article 216 (“organization of banned civil groups and religious
organizations”), article 223(2) (“unlawful exit from or entry to the Republic of Uzbekistan”),
article 227(2) (“possession of, destruction of, damage to, or concealment of documents,
stamps, seals, or letterhead”), and article 228(2)(3) (“preparation and use of counterfeit
documents, stamps, seals, and official letterhead”). Ruzimuradov was charged with
articles 158, 159, and 216.171
Authorities barred observers from attending the trial in Tashkent, which violated fair trial
standards. Their lawyer reported that all six defendants were held incommunicado and
tortured in pretrial detention to extract confessions. The defendants signed a statement
reporting that they had been subjected to electric shocks, beatings with batons and plastic
bottles filled with water, and temporary suffocation, called the “bag of death.” They also
reported that authorities threatened to rape their wives.172
On March 15, 1999, both men were sentenced to 15-year prison terms.173 Authorities
transferred Bekjanov to Jaslyk prison in the far northwest of Uzbekistan. Following
Ruzimuradov’s sentencing, authorities made virtually no information publicly available
regarding his location, health condition, or treatment in custody.174
In 2003 an amnesty declaration was applied to Bekjanov’s sentence, and it was reduced
by three years and eight months. His release would have come in February 2012, but just
days before his sentence was set to expire, a court convicted him on a new charge of
169 “Uzbek Opposition Leader's Brother Disappears in Custody,” Human Rights Watch news release, November 18, 1999,
http://www.hrw.org/news/1999/11/17/uzbek-opposition-leaders-brother-disappears-custody.
170 “Uzbek Torture Victims Sentenced to Prison Terms,” Human Rights Watch news release, August 18, 1999,
https://www.hrw.org/news/1999/08/17/uzbek-torture-victims-sentenced-prison-terms.
171 Human Rights Watch email correspondence with Nadejda Atayeva, Paris, August 21, 2013.
172 Ibid.
173 Ibid.
174Human Rights Watch interview with Vitaliy Ponomarev, Bishkek, September 18, 2013.

“violations of prison rules” and sentenced him to a further five years, drawing widespread
condemnation from international organizations and governments.175
Prison guards have repeatedly tortured Bekjanov in prison, according to his relatives and
human rights activists. 176 He has also contracted tuberculosis.177 During a 2003 interview
from prison with the Institute for War and Peace Reporting, Bekjanov described being denied
medical attention after suffering a broken leg during a beating. He has also suffered severe
hearing loss as the result of sustained ill-treatment.178 In 2006 his wife, Nina Bekjanova,
visited him and reported that he had lost most of his teeth from repeated beatings.179
Bekjanov was later transferred to a prison in Navoi province. Following a meeting with her
husband in prison in spring 2013, Bekjanova reported that he urgently needs medical
attention. Bekjanov has a severe hernia and continues to suffer from tuberculosis.180
On November 27 2013, Reporters Without Borders awarded Bekjanov its 2013 Press
Freedom Prize.181 Bekjanov’s daughter, Aygul, told Human Rights Watch, “My dad turns 60
this year [2014]. But instead of celebrating this occasion with us, his family, he is in prison,
where he has been rotting and tortured for more than 15 years. Does my father have to die
behind bars, or will something finally be done to set him free?”182
175 “EU statement [to OSCE Permanent Council Nr901] on the sentence of the Uzbek editor Muhammad Bekjanov,”
PC.DEL/108/12, February 9, 2012,

http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/vienna/documents/eu_osce/permanent_council/2012/20120209_901_sentence_of_th
e_uzbek_en.pdf (accessed September 11, 2014); “United States Mission to the OSCE Statement on Muhammed Bekjanov’s
Appeal of Conviction,” delivered by Ian Kelly, March 29, 2013,
http://photos.state.gov/libraries/osce/242783/mar2012/MAR_29_12_Uzbekistan.pdf (accessed September 11, 2014).
176 Human Rights Watch interview with Aygul Bekjanova, Washington, DC, April 29, 2014.
177 Ibid.
178 Bukharbaeva, Galima, “Jailed Uzbek Dissident Defiant,” Institute for War and Peace Reporting, November 14, 2013,
http://iwpr.net/report-news/jailed-uzbek-dissident-defiant (accessed September 11, 2014).

179 “Uzbek editor sentenced to jail while still in prison,” Committee to Protect Journalists, January 25, 2012,
http://cpj.org/2012/01/days-before-his-release-jailed-uzbek-editor-given.php (accessed September 11, 2014).

180 “Radio interview with Nina Bekjanova” (in Uzbek), Ozodlik, April 2, 2013, audio available at
www.ozodlik.org/schedule/20130402.html, text summary available at www.ozodlik.org/content/article/24944985.html

(accessed August 1, 2014).
181 “Press Freedom Prize Goes to Uzbek Journalist and Sri Lankan Daily,” Reporters Without Borders, November 27, 2013,
https://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-prize-goes-to-uzbek-27-11-2013,45522.html (accessed September 11, 2014). His daughters

accepted the award in person on May 2, 2014, when Muhammad Bekjanov was honored by a coalition of groups, including
the Association for Human Rights in Central Asia, the Cotton Campaign, and Human Rights Watch.
182 Human Rights Watch interview with Aygul Bekjanova, Washington, DC, April 29, 2014.

In August 2014, shortly before this report went to press, Human Rights Watch learned that
Yusuf Ruzimuradov is currently being held at a prison in Tavaksay prison colony in
Tashkent province and is still suffering from tuberculosis. Similar to the case of
Muhammad Bekjanov, although he was supposed to have been released in May 2014,
authorities have extended his sentence for an undisclosed period of time on unspecified
“violations of prison rules.”183
Gayrat Mikhliboev, 35, is a prominent

journalist who wrote for the newspapers Gayrat Mikhliboev
Respublika, Hurriyat, and Vatanparvar until Born: September 27, 1979
his arrest on July 24, 2002 at the age of 22. 184
Arrested: July 24, 2002
On that day he was reporting on a protest at Charges: Various, including “inciting
Tashkent’s Chorsu market by religious national, racial, ethnic, or religious
tension,” “threatening the
women advocating for the release of their
constitutional order,” and “founding,
imprisoned children. He approached a man
leading, or membership in a religious
filming the protest and asked him what extremist, separatist, fundamentalist
media organization he worked for. When the or other banned religious group”
protest dispersed, the man identified himself Sentenced: February 18, 2003; 6
years; sentence extended for 5 years
as an SNB officer and searched Mikhliboev.
He allegedly found recordings of convicted
members of the banned group Hizb ut-Tahrir, as well as the Internet address of the
Wahhabi movement-affiliated Internet journal Al-B’ai and other religious materials.185
Mikhliboev admitted in court that he had studied the ideas of Hizb-ut-Tahrir but denied
that he was in possession of their materials. 186
Hizb-ut-Tahrir is a religious organization that advocates for the establishment of a pan-

Islamic caliphate, as well as the observance of its interpretation of pious Islamic practice.
The group’s doctrine renounces violence in the achievement of this goal. It is currently
banned in Uzbekistan and thousands of people have been jailed for belonging to the
183 Human Rights Watch Telephone interview with Dilorom Iskhakova, Tashkent, August 21, 2014.
184 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik, Tashkent, October 21, 2013, and in-

185 Sentence of Gayrat Mikhliboev, Shayhantaur district criminal court, decision of February 18, 2003, on file with Human
Rights Watch.
186 “Uzbekistan Silencing Critical Voices,” Human Rights Watch news release, February 26, 2003,
http://www.hrw.org/fr/news/2003/02/25/uzbekistan-silencing-critical-voices.

group since the early 2000s. At the heart of the government’s persecution of Hizb ut-Tahrir
is the contention that the group’s support for an alternative form of Islamic government is
a direct call to overthrow the state.187
Mikhliboev’s investigation and trial in a Tashkent court included several procedural

violations. Authorities charged him with four offenses, including “inciting national, racial,
ethnic, or religious tension,” “threatening the constitutional order,” “unlawful organization
of social groups or religious organizations,” and “founding, leading, or membership in a
religious extremist, separatist, fundamentalist or other banned religious group.”
Mikhliboev’s brother, Asliddin, told a local activist that SNB officers tortured his brother
during pretrial custody, including by beating him on the feet with bottles filled with water.188
During his trial, which was attended by a Human Rights Watch representative, Mikhliboev
stated that he was beaten in pretrial detention.189 The prosecution focused on his alleged
membership in Hizb-ut-Tahrir and work as a journalist including an April 2001 article he
published in the newspaper Hurriyat that the prosecution alleged constituted Hizb-ut-
Tahrir propaganda.190 Human Rights Watch has reviewed the article and confirmed that it
does not constitute extremist propaganda or include any calls to violence. On February 18,
2003, the Shayhantaur District Court sentenced him to seven years’ imprisonment. In
March 2003 an appeals court reduced his sentence to six years.
On September 25, 2007, prison authorities at his Navoi prison colony added another five
years to Mikhliboev’s sentence. He was sentenced for allegedly promoting the ideas of
Hizb-ut-Tahrir among the inmates of the prison colony.191 Mikhliboev’s relatives reported to
Ezgulik that prison guards have repeatedly subjected him to torture in prison and that they
believe his life is in danger.
187 Human Rights Watch, Creating Enemies of the State, p.141.

188 Human Rights Watch interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik, Washington, DC, April 29, 2014.
189 “Uzbekistan Silencing Critical Voices,” Human Rights Watch news release, February 26, 2003,
http://www.hrw.org/fr/news/2003/02/25/uzbekistan-silencing-critical-voices.
190 Sentence of Gayrat Mikhliboev, Shayhantaur districtcriminal court, decision of February 18, 2003, on file with Human
Rights Watch; Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik, Tashkent, October 21, 2013,
and in-person interview, Washington, DC, April 29, 2014.

Dilmurod Saidov, 52, is an independent
journalist and was a member of the Dilmurod Saidov
Tashkent province branch of Ezgulik. Well-
known for his investigative journalism and
defense of farmers’ rights in the province
of Samarkand, Saidov exposed the
corruption of local officials. His articles
appeared in many outlets, including the
Voice of Freedom and Uznews.net.192 In
2005 he criticized Uzbekistan’s lack of
political freedom in the newspaper
© Fergana News
Advokat-Press, which led to his immediate
dismissal and the closure of the
Born: April 29, 1962
newspaper.193 He was arrested in Tashkent
Arrested: February 22, 2009
on February 22, 2009 on charges of Charges: Extortion and counterfeiting
extortion and counterfeiting documents, documents
and his case was transferred to the Sentenced: July 30, 2009; 12.5 years
Samarkand Regional Criminal Court. 194
Both the investigation and court proceedings were marred by procedural violations.
According to Saidov’s lawyer, more than half of the witnesses who testified against him
later recanted, stating that they had been pressured to provide false evidence. The court
repeatedly held hearings without notifying Saidov’s lawyer.195
On July 30, 2009, the Tailak District Court convicted Saidov in a closed hearing and
sentenced him to twelve and a half years’ imprisonment.196 Authorities transferred him to
192; “Uzbekistan: Free Journalist Sentenced to over 12 Years ,” Human Rights Watch news release, August 3, 2009,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2009/08/03/uzbekistan-free-journalist-sentenced-12-years.
194 Ibid.
195 For example, on February 25, 2009, the Samarkand City Court held a habeas corpus hearing to determine whether there had
been sufficient evidence for Saidov’s arrest. However, in violation of Uzbek law, Saidov’s lawyer was not even informed of the
hearing and not present when the evidence was reviewed. He appealed the decision, but was not informed of that hearing either.
Additionally, several documents presented as evidence by the defense went missing over the course of the trial.
196 “Imprisoned Human Rights Defenders in Uzbekistan,” Human Rights Watch news release, February 5, 2010,

a prison in Navoi. Saidov was already suffering from an acute form of tuberculosis.197
According to a rights activist in Tashkent, his defense’s requests for alternate forms of
punishment taking his health into consideration were denied. Saidov’s health quickly
deteriorated in pre-trial detention and he became very thin.198 His sentence has been
upheld twice on appeal. Authorities have ignored or rejected repeated applications by his
family for a reconsideration of his sentence or for a humanitarian release.
On November 5, 2009, Saidov’s wife, Barno

Jumanova, and the couple’s six-year-old
daughter, Ruhshona, died in an automobile
accident on the Tashkent-Samarkand
highway. They had been traveling to
Kyzyltepa to deliver Saidov’s passport to
the prison administration.199 In 2010
authorities transferred him back and forth
between a prison hospital in Tashkent and
the prison colony in Navoi. By December
2010, Saidov’s relatives reported grave
concerns about his health, saying that he
“has become a skeleton.” Moreover, he
appeared disoriented in meetings with
family members.200
Prison authorities have punished Saidov

A copy of a letter written in prison by imprisoned
multiple times for alleged “violations of
journalist Dilmurod Saidov to his family describing
prison officials’ efforts to prevent him from filing prison rules,” which resulted in him being
appeals with the court. © Association for Human placed in solitary confinement and
Rights in Central Asia.
rendering him ineligible for amnesty. During
197 Human Rights Watch interview with “Tokhtakhoja T.,” Tashkent, November 27, 2010.

199“Imprisoned Human Rights Defenders in Uzbekistan,” Human Rights Watch news release, February 5, 2010,

a meeting with his lawyer in February 2010, Saidov asked him to submit a statement to the
Supreme Court, but authorities confiscated the document. Saidov told his family that he
was later punished for doing this.201
In early 2013 an independent website published a letter written by Saidov describing his
ill-treatment in custody and how prison authorities have tried to prevent him from
writing.202 On October 11, 2013, prison authorities transferred Saidov to a labor colony near
Karshi (64/41).203 In April 2014 the Fiery Hearts Club reported that Saidov passed a farewell
letter to his brother in a December 2013 meeting in which he wrote, “I have accepted the
life I was able to live. I have lost all interest in my life. If it is my destiny to die in this place
… please bury me next to beloved Barno and Ruhshona,” his late wife and daughter.204
Political Opposition Activists
SOS! 15 years of waiting for a [fair] trial! Try me or kill me!

—Rustam Usmanov, political opposition figure imprisoned since 1998,
writing in his own blood on a prison handkerchief
In the 23 years since Uzbekistan gained independence from the Soviet Union, there has
not been a single election deemed even remotely “free and fair” by international
monitoring bodies. President Karimov, who in 2014 entered his twenty-fifth year of
consecutive rule, uses the dominant executive branch to repress all political opposition.
No opposition parties are allowed to participate in the political process. Karimov’s political
opponents have either been forced to flee the country or are in prison. The government has
aggressively jailed and extended the prison terms of opposition activists, some for over 20
years, making them some of the world’s longest serving political prisoners.
201 Ibid.
202“Imprisoned Journalist Sayid Speaks of Torture and Abuses,” Uznews.net, February 12, 2013,
http://www.uznews.net/news_single.php?lng=ru&cid=3&nid=22027 (accessed September 11, 2014).

203 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Tashkent, October 21, 2013; “Dilmurod Sayid to
be transferred to a labor colony,” Uznews.net, October 16, 2013,

http://www.uznews.net/news_single.php?lng=en&sub=&cid=3&nid=24064 (accessed September 11, 2014).
204 “Well-known Journalist Has Lost Hope of Realizing His Freedom,” Finansonet, January 10, 2014,
http://www.finanso.net/world/7840-izvestnyy-v-uzbekistane-zhurnalist-poteryal-nadezhdu-uvidet-svobodu.html (accessed
September 11, 2014).

Murod Juraev, 62, is a father of three
children, was a member of the Murod Juraev
parliament from 1991 to 1992, was a
prominent member of the Erk
opposition party, and served as the
mayor of Mubarak in Kashkadarya
province. Juraev earned President
Karimov’s personal ire by being the
first official to dissolve a city
committee of the Communist Party
after the fall of the Soviet Union.205 On
September 18, 1994, he was detained
in Kazakhstan and forcibly returned to © Association for Human Rights in Central Asia
Uzbekistan. He was beaten during his
arrest. He suffered multiple Born: September 5, 1952
concussions and a broken rib, but it is Kidnapped from Kazakhstan: September
unclear whether these injuries were 18, 1994
Charges: Various, including “high
from the beating or from a car accident
treason,” “conspiracy with a purpose of
that occurred on the road following his
seizure of power,” and “calls for violent
arrest.206 On May 31, 1995, Juraev was overthrow of constitutional order or
convicted in a case in which a number forcible violation of the unity of the
of members of the banned Erk party territory of the Republic of Uzbekistan”
Sentenced: May 31, 1995; 12 years;
were accused of having arranged
sentence extended on four occasions
military training for young Uzbeks in
Turkey. Authorities alleged that they
planned to overthrow the
government.207 He was sentenced on various charges to 12 years’ imprisonment and is
currently held at prison 64/45 in Almalyk, Tashkent province.208
205 Human Rights Watch email correspondence with Tolib Yakubov, France, August 27, 2013.
206 Human Rights Watch, Republic of Uzbekistan—Crackdown in the Farghona Valley: Arbitrary Arrests and Religious
Discrimination,” Vol.10, No.4 (D), May 1998, http://www.hrw.org/reports/pdfs/u/uzbkistn/uzbek985.pdf.

207 Ibid.
208 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Nadejda Atayeva, Paris, October 10, 2013.

Authorities have extended Juraev’s sentence on four separate occasions in 2004, 2006,
2009, and 2012 for “violations of prison rules.” On each occasion the extension came just
before the end of his sentence or before amnesty declarations that might have been
applied to his case. Juraev’s alleged prison offenses have included “incorrectly peeling
carrots” in the prison kitchen and “non-removal of shoes when entering the barracks.” In
his most recent extension ruling, authorities only informed him of three of the four
charges against him upon his arrival at the hearing, which was not attended by his
attorney or family. During one hearing, he reportedly stated that the only thing that
keeps him going is a sense of gratitude to his wife, who has continuously supported him
throughout his incarceration.209
Juraev is badly in need of medical attention. In 2011 ACAT-France reported that Juraev had
been severely tortured in prison, that he has become extremely thin, and that he has
contracted tuberculosis.210 Juraev’s wife met with him in October 2013 and told a rights
activist that he has lost all of his teeth, has trouble eating, suffers from constant
headaches and stomach pain, and experiences periodic numbness in his right arm. Juraev
also experiences high blood pressure that causes him to lose consciousness.211 Moreover,
in spite of his poor health, he is subjected to daily heavy labor by working in a brick factory
and complains of severe lower-back
pain.212 The prison warden has repeatedly
Samandar Kukanov
told him that his is a “special case,” that
Born: 1945
he has been marked as a repeat offender,
Arrested: June 1992
and that it is dangerous for other inmates
Charges: Economic crimes linked to
even to communicate with him.213
alleged financing of the Erk
opposition party
Samandar Kukanov, 69, is a father of Sentenced: May 1993; 20 years;
three children and was the vice chairman sentence extended for 3 years
of the parliament following independence,
and a successful businessman. In the
209 Ibid.
210 “ACAT-France statement – Uzbekistan,” Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture – France, March 7, 2011, on file
with Human Rights Watch.

211 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Nadejda Atayeva, Paris, October 10, 2013 and September 3, 2014.
212 Ibid.
213 Ibid.

early 1990s he rose to prominence in the oil and gas sector as director of a petroleum
depot and owner of several gas stations. According to several Erk party members, he sat
on Erk’s executive committee and financed its activities.214
In 1992, along with several opposition politicians, Kukanov took to the floor of parliament
to protest President Karimov’s announcement of plans to consolidate all security service
divisions under his direct command. He was joined by other members of parliament,
including Shovruh Ruzimuradov, a rights activist who suffered constant persecution by the
SNB throughout the 1990s and died allegedly as a result of torture in July 2001 after his
arrest a month earlier.215
Security forces arrested Kukanov in June 1992 on charges of economic crimes linked to
his alleged financing of the Erk opposition party. SNB officers held him incommunicado
without access to counsel for an entire year in the basement of an SNB facility in
Tashkent during which they allegedly tortured him before finally bringing him to trial.216
Kukanov’s relatives told Human Rights Watch that SNB officers arbitrarily detained two of
his sons immediately following his arrest and conducted a number of nighttime raids on
his home to instill fear in his family.217 In 1993 he was sentenced to 20 years’
imprisonment.
Kukanov is currently located at Zarafshan prison 64/48 in Navoi.218 His family has been
denied the right to visit him for much of the past 21 years.219 Kukanov’s family had
expected his release in May 2013 but then learned that authorities extended his sentence
through the year 2016.220 If Kukanov completes his current term and is released, he will
have been in prison for 24 years, the longest known case of politically motivated
imprisonment in Uzbekistan.
214 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Muhammad Solih, Turkey, September 23, 2013.
215 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Tashpulat Yuldashev, St. Louis, September 26, 2013.
216 Human Rights Watch interview with “Nargiza N.,” (Kukanov relative), Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, June 17, 2014; Human Rights
Watch email correspondence with Bahodir Namazov, Moscow, September 26, 2013.
217 Human Rights Watch interview with “Ozoda O.,” Bishkek, June 18, 2014.
218 Human Rights Watch email correspondence with Nadejda Atayeva, Paris, August, 21, 2013
219 Human Rights Watch email correspondence with Bahodir Namazov, Moscow, September 26, 2013.
220 Human Rights Watch interview with “Ozoda O.,” Bishkek, June 18, 2014; Human Rights Watch telephone interview with
Nadejda Atayeva, Paris, April 26, 2014.

Kudratbek Rasulov, 44, based in
Namangan, in the Fergana valley, was a Kudratbek Rasulov
jeweler and an active member of the
political opposition group, the People’s
Movement of Uzbekistan (PMU).221 The
PMU was formed by a coalition of exiled
opposition groups in mid-2011 inspired
by the Arab Spring and has openly called
for the ouster of President Karimov.222 In
2013 Rasulov began publishing articles
for the PMU on social and political issues
and also met with members of the local
community, passing out leaflets calling
for greater political freedoms.223 © Fergana News
Born: 1970
On September 6, 2013, six men in black
Arrested: September 6, 2013
masks searched Rasulov’s home on a
Charges: “Threatening the constitutional
warrant from SNB investigator Shonazar order” and “production and dissemination
Ergashev. After allegedly uncovering of materials that contain threat to public
disks with “suspicious” information that safety and public order with foreign
financial support”
Rasulov had allegedly downloaded from
Sentenced: December 27, 2013; 8 years
the Internet, the officers arrested him
and brought him to an SNB facility. On
September 11 he was charged with
possession or dissemination of “banned materials of an extremist nature.” Rasulov’s wife
and mother told a rights activist that after his arrest SNB investigator Ergashev threatened
Rasulov’s wife and mother, warning them not to speak publicly about Rasulov’s arrest.224
221 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Tulkin Karaev, Sweden, October 16, 2013; “Uzbekistan: Free Political
Prisoners, End Torture,” Human Rights Watch news release, December 6, 2013,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/12/06/uzbekistan-free-political-prisoners-end-torture.
222 Human Rights Watch interview with Bakhodir Namazov, Moscow, September 17, 2013. The group was significant for
bringing together members of religious communities with the secular opposition and held two party conferences in Berlin
(2011) and then in Prague (2012). The Uzbek government has taken concrete measures to crack down on activists inside the
country who appear to be cooperating with or sympathetic to the PMU.
223 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Tulkin Karaev, Sweden, October 16, 2013.
224 Human Rights Watch written correspondence with Elena Urlaeva, Tashkent, October 19, 2013.

On December 27, 2013, a Namangan court sentenced Rasulov to eight years’ imprisonment
for “attempts to overthrow the constitutional order” and “production and dissemination of
materials that contain threat to public safety and public order with foreign financial
support.”225 The sentence states that the basis for Rasulov’s conviction were his
correspondence via Skype, Facebook, and the Russian social networking site
Odnoklassniki with “political groups that threaten Uzbekistan’s constitutional order” but
provides no evidence that Rasulov advocated the use of or engaged in violence.226 In
particular, the sentence accuses Rasulov of maintaining contact with two well-known
opposition activists in exile, Tulkin Karaev and Muhammad Solih, with whom he allegedly
discussed how to provoke a “revolution” inside the country.227 Commenting on her
husband’s conviction to the press, Rasulov’s wife stated, “Even if he visited the website of
the NDU [People’s Movement of Uzbekistan], is it justice to sentence a man to eight years
[just for that]?”228
Rasulov is serving his sentence in Karshi, in the southern province of Kashkadarya.

Rasulov’s relatives reported in July 2014 that prison officials have beaten and ill-treated
Rasulov, labeling him a Wahhabi, and have prevented him from any eligibility to seek a
pardon or amnesty from President Karimov. In April Rasulov was placed in solitary
confinement for over a month, after which he declared a hunger strike. Prison guards beat
him harshly in response, forcing him to end his hunger strike.229
225 “Uzbekistan: Namangan Resident Sentenced to 8 Years for Having Contact with Opposition over the Internet,” Fergana
News, January 20, 2014, http://www.fergananews.com/news/21710 (accessed September 11, 2014).
226 Sentence of Kudratbek Rasulov, December 27, 2013, on file with Human Rights Watch.
227 The sentence further states Rasulov allegedly received $420 dollars from Solih, with which he bought a color printer that
he used to distribute and disseminate banned texts and reproduced duplications of the underground film, “The Freedom of
an Unarmed Man.” “Uzbekistan: Namangan Resident Sentenced to 8 Years for Having Contact with Opposition over the
Internet,” Fergana News, January 20, 2014, http://www.fergananews.com/news/21710 (accessed September 11, 2014).
228 “Uzbekistan: Namangan Resident Sentenced to 8 Years for Having Contact with Opposition over the Internet,” Fergana
News, January 20, 2014, http://www.fergananews.com/news/21710 (accessed September 11, 2014).
229 Human Rights Watch email correspondence with Elena Urlaeva, Tashkent, July 19, 2014.

Rustam Usmanov, 66, is a native of
Jalalabad, Kyrgyzstan. He is a father, Rustam Usmanov
economist, successful businessman,
published author, and founder of
Uzbekistan’s first private bank,
Rustambank, in 1992.230 In the early 1990s
he announced his support of the Erk party
and openly criticized police and SNB
abuses. In 1994 he ran for parliament.
According to his son, Usmanov’s name was
removed from the ballot after he refused to
pay a large bribe to an official in charge of
registering candidates. In 1995 security © Fergana News
service officers detained him in Kyrgyzstan
and forcibly returned him to Uzbekistan and Born: 1948
held for several days before being released. Arrested: 1998
Charges: Extortion, unlawful
Authorities detained Usmanov’s son for
transactions of foreign currency,
nearly two weeks apparently to punish
abuse of authority, and forgery
Usmanov for his support for the democratic Sentenced: 1998; 14 years;
opposition. After continued pressure by sentence extended by 5 years
authorities, Usmanov left Uzbekistan and
took up residence in Jalalabad, Kyrgyzstan,
where he founded an economic research institute.231
In 1998, while visiting his wife and three children in Tashkent, police arrested Usmanov on
trumped-up charges of extortion, unlawful transactions of foreign currency, abuse of
authority, and forgery. The Andijan Regional Court sentenced him to 14 years in prison.232
Evidence shows that authorities brought the case in retaliation for his political ambitions.
The case was marred by due process violations. The court allowed no oral argument at
trial, Usmanov was not afforded a final statement, and the sentencing document lacked
230 “Rustam Usmanov: ‘I am sacrificing my health and my life believing in the President,’” Fergana News, April 14, 2010,
http://www.fergananews.com/articles/6535 (accessed September 11, 2014). This is a letter written by Mr. Usmanov’s son,
published in Fergana News, based on an in-person visit to Usmanov on April 3, 2010.
231 Ibid.
232 Ibid; Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Nadejda Atayeva, Paris, October 10, 2013.

the judge’s signature.233 In 2012, mere days before his sentence was due to end, he was
convicted for “violations of prison rules” and sentenced to a further five years in prison.
Authorities informed Usmanov’s relatives and his lawyer about the allegations and
extension only after he was convicted.234
Usmanov told his relatives that he

has been tortured in prison.235 In
January 2009 he announced a
hunger strike to protest his
imprisonment and was beaten
severely as a result. In March 2009,
authorities transferred him from
Karshi to Jaslyk prison, where his
health and treatment by prison
authorities worsened. On one
After authorities added five years to his prison sentence in occasion after his 2009 transfer,
2012, political opposition figure Rustam Usmanov passed a
authorities placed him in solitary
handkerchief to his son on which he had written in blood,
“SOS! 15 years of waiting for the court! Try me or kill me!” confinement in a cell where guards
© Fiery Hearts Club handcuffed him in a crucifixion
position for four straight days.236
Later that year he announced another hunger strike, but prison guards pushed a feeding
tube down his throat and plugged his nostrils until he began to suffocate, ending his
strike. In late 2009 he claimed that he was called in for a meeting with prison officials who
demanded US$100,000, or else his sons would be harmed. When he refused to pay, he
was beaten savagely.237
In an April 2010 meeting with his sons, his body was covered with bruises he claimed he
sustained during beatings by prison guards. Usmanov said that he had been denied
233 “Rustam Usmanov: “I am sacrificing my health and my life believing in the President,’” Fergana News, April 14, 2010,
http://www.fergananews.com/articles/6535 (accessed September 11, 2014).

234 “Son of Ex-banker Rustam Usmanov Asks for Asylum in Russia,” Jarayon.com, December 8, 2012,
http://jarayon.com/ru/index.php/2012-04-04-14-31-53/item/143-syn-eks-bankira-rustama-usmanova-prosit-ubezhishche-v-
rossii (accessed September 11, 2014).
235 “Rustam Usmanov: “I am sacrificing my health and my life believing in the President,’” Fergana News, April 14, 2010,
http://www.fergananews.com/articles/6535 (accessed September 11, 2014).

236 Ibid.
237 Ibid.

medical assistance and that prison guards had confiscated medications brought by his
relatives.238 When his family visited him in November 2012, eight months after the
authorities had added an additional five years to his sentence, he was severely depressed
and passed a handkerchief to his son, on which he had written in blood, “SOS! 15 years of
waiting for the Court! Try me or Kill me!”239
Independent Religious Figures
His [Hayrullo Hamidov’s] life and fate are representative of hundreds of

other young, religiously active Uzbeks caught up in waves of mass trials
and repression. Persecution of popular cultural figures like Hamidov
increases frustration and resentment among a population already
dissatisfied with the pace of economic development and strict limits on the
public expression.
—Independent Central Asia scholar, Noah Tucker, Registan.net
The most numerically significant category of politically motivated arrests and convictions
in Uzbekistan is among the country’s independent Muslims; that is, those who practice
their faith outside strict state controls or who belong to unregistered religious
organizations. The government continues to wage an unrelenting, multi-year campaign of
arbitrary detention, ill-treatment, and torture against them. 240 Since 1999 thousands of
independent Muslims have been incarcerated for nonviolent offenses.241
Many have been sentenced under Criminal Code statutes for “anti-constitutional activity”
(article 159), participation in “banned religious, extremist” groups, or possession of
“banned literature” (articles 216, 242, and 244). These statutes contain provisions which
are so vague and overbroad that they are wholly incompatible with international human
rights norms.242
238 Ibid.
239 “Son of Ex-banker Rustam Usmanov Asks for Asylum in Russia,” Jarayon.com, December 8, 2012,
http://jarayon.com/ru/index.php/2012-04-04-14-31-53/item/143-syn-eks-bankira-rustama-usmanova-prosit-ubezhishche-v-
rossii (accessed September 11, 2014).
240 Human Rights Watch, Creating Enemies of the State.
241 Ibid.
242 The articles of the Criminal Code referred to above contain provisions that are incompatible with the freedoms set out in
the ICCPR. In particular, any religious activity not sanctioned by the government is criminalized. Strict punishment is set out

In addition to imprisoning thousands on such charges, the government mobilizes its
significant security apparatus to prevent any potential contest for influence between
President Karimov and independent-minded Muslim leaders. Since the mid-1990s the
government has imprisoned or driven into exile nearly every independent Muslim leader in
the country, a group which includes clerics, imams, commentators, and philosophers
representing diverse schools of Islamic thought. Significantly, the teachings of these
figures continue to command significant authority and loyalty among the people, even
from behind bars.243
Uzbekistan’s International Obligations to Ensure Freedom of Religion

Uzbekistan’s policies and practices are in direct violation of its international legal
obligations on freedom of religion. The International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR) protects the right of the individual to “have … a religion or belief of his
choice, and [the] freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public
or in private to manifest” it.244 Parties to the ICCPR undertake to ensure freedom of
religion but also commit not to discriminate on the basis of religion.245 Uzbekistan’s
practice of subjecting Muslims to regulation of their religion in severe terms violates
this guarantee.
The covenant does allow exceptions where it is “necessary to protect public safety, order,
health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others,” but the restrictions
Uzbekistan imposes on Muslim religious practice far exceed anything that could
reasonably be justified under the treaty.246
(up to 15 years imprisonment) for “extremism” and participation in “forbidden organizations,” in spite of these two terms
having no basis or definition in national legislation and the absence of any official list of “forbidden organizations.” These
statues allow for arbitrary application of the law. The definition of “terrorism” is unnecessarily wide, expanding almost
without limit the scope of those persons who may be charged. A number of Criminal Code provisions, for example, do not
sufficiently differentiate between the qualification and the punishment of the preparation for or carrying out of a violent act
on the one hand, and the mere expression of an opinion deemed extremist on the other. Nor do the statutes differentiate
between direct and indirect participation in an “extremist” act. Other provisions regarding defamation and insults against
the people and the president of Uzbekistan can be used to punish individuals who express opinions critical of the regime.
243 Human Rights Watch, Creating Enemies, p.5.
244 ICCPR, art. 18(1).
245 ICCPR, arts. 2 and 26 (1976).

246 ICCPR, art. 18(3).

Ruhiddin Fahriddinov, 47, is a father and religious
scholar. Between 1992 and 1996 he was a widely Ruhiddin Fahriddinov
popular, independent imam at several Tashkent
mosques including S. Darbaza, Tohtaboi, and Hoja
Nuriddin.247 A graduate of Tashkent State University
with a degree in Arabic philology, he was a pupil of
the prominent Imam Obidhon-qori Nazarov, who fled
to Sweden in 1998 following persecution and is
currently in a coma after an assassination attempt in
February 2012.248
Fahriddinov fled to Kazakhstan in 1998, fearing for his

safety because of the crackdown on independent
Muslims and his prominence as an independent © Association for Human Rights
in Central Asia
imam. In 2001 his wife was arrested, ill-treated, and
sentenced to seven years in prison. His step-daughter Born: 1967
was repeatedly detained and pressured to provide Kidnapped from Kazakhstan:
information about his whereabouts. 249 November 24, 2005
Charges: 22 charges, among
On November 24, 2005, security service officers them terrorism, sabotage,
organization of illegal
unlawfully detained Fahriddinov and four other men
religious groups, activity
in Shymkent, Kazakhstan and forcibly returned against the constitution, and
them to Uzbekistan. Serious due process violations the dissemination of
marred his trial in Tashkent. Fahriddinov told his materials that threaten state
security
lawyer that SNB officers tortured him in custody,
Sentenced: September 15,
both in Kazakhstan and in Uzbekistan, and that he
2007; 17 years
was pressured to sign an admission of guilt.250 He
also said he was pressured to state that he had
247 Human Rights Watch, Uzbekistan: Persistent Human Rights Violations and Prospects for Improvement, Vol. 8, No.5 (D),
May 1996, http://www.hrw.org/reports/1996/UZBEK.htm.

248 In July 2012 Sweden’s Chief Prosecutor Krister Petersson stated that Uzbekistan's security services were probably behind
the attack. Human Rights Watch, World Report 2013, (New York: Human Rights Watch, 2013), Uzbekistan chapter,
http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2013/country-chapters/uzbekistan?page=2.
249 Human Rights Watch, Creating Enemies of the State; “Kazakhstan: Uzbeks Sent Back at Risk of Torture,” Human Rights
Watch press release, December 3, 2005, http://www.hrw.org/fr/news/2005/12/02/kazakhstan-uzbeks-sent-back-risk-torture.

250 Vitaliy Ponomarev, “Refugees from Uzbekistan in the CIS Countries: Risk of Extradition (May 2005-August 2007),” Memorial
Human Rights Center, September 2007, http://www.memo.ru/2007/09/26/2609071.htm (accessed September 11, 2014).

been arrested in Uzbekistan.251 For two months authorities denied him access to his
attorney of choice. Authorities announced an alternative version of his arrest, stating
that he was detained on December 2, 2005 in the province of Tashkent as a result of an
“anti-terror” operation. 252
Authorities charged Fahriddinov with 22 criminal offenses, among them terrorism,

sabotage, organization of illegal religious groups, activity against the constitution, and the
dissemination of materials that threaten state security. They also accused him of recruiting
and sending young people to “terrorist” training camps in Tajikistan and Pakistan, as well
as controlling the collection and distribution of financial resources for adherents of
Wahhabi extremist religious sects and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan.253 During trial,
Fahriddinov’s wife, who had already been released, reported to several news sources and
the Initiative Group of Independent Human Rights Defenders that a police officer raped the
couple’s six-year old daughter, Oysha, on March 31, 2006.254 Court proceedings were
closed to the public.255 Authorities denied even Fahriddinov’s relatives and lawyer, Rustam
Tyuleganov, entry to the hearings.256
Trial transcripts indicate that Fahriddinov denied involvement in any religious

organizations espousing extremist ideology, and the published sentence lacked any
specific evidence of Fahriddinov’s guilt on any of the charges alleged. Three witnesses for
251 “Uzbekistan: Trial of Imam Highlights Refoulement Concerns, Treatment in Custody,” Human Rights Watch news release, July
28, 2006, http://www.hrw.org/news/2006/07/28/uzbekistan-trial-imam-highlights-refoulement-concerns-treatment-custody.

252 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Surat Ilkramov, Tashkent, July 14, 2014.
253 Sentence of Ruhiddin Fahriddinov (in Uzbek), Chirchik City Criminal Court, Decision of September 15, 2007, document on
file with Human Rights Watch.

254 Surat Ikramov, “Report of the Initiative Group of Independent Human Rights Defenders of Uzbekistan (IGIHRD) on the
Universal Periodic Review (UPR), December 2008 session on Human Rights [Доклад Инициативной Группы
правозащитников Узбекистана (ИГНПУ) по Универсальному периодическому обзору (УПО) для предоставления
Декабрьской Сессии по Правам Человека, декабрь 2008],”
http://lib.ohchr.org/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/Session3/UZ/IGNPU_UZB_UPR_S3_2008_TheInitiativeGroupofIndependent
Human%20RightsDefendersofUzbekistan_RUS_uprsubmission.pdf (accessed September 11, 2014), p.5; “Uzbek Official
Denies Knowledge Of Child-Rape Claim,” RFE/RL, July 4, 2006, http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1069648.html
255 Vitaliy Ponomarev, “Refugees from Uzbekistan in the CIS Countries: Risk of Extradition (May 2005-August 2007),” Memorial
Human Rights Center, September 2007, http://www.memo.ru/2007/09/26/2609071.htm (accessed September 11, 2014).
256 Surat Ikramov, “Report of the Initiative Group of Independent Human Rights Defenders of Uzbekistan (IGIHRD) on the
Universal Periodic Review (UPR), December 2008 session on Human Rights [Доклад Инициативной Группы
правозащитников Узбекистана (ИГНПУ) по Универсальному периодическому обзору (УПО) для предоставления
Декабрьской Сессии по Правам Человека, декабрь 2008],”
http://lib.ohchr.org/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/Session3/UZ/IGNPU_UZB_UPR_S3_2008_TheInitiativeGroupofIndependent
Human%20RightsDefendersofUzbekistan_RUS_uprsubmission.pdf (accessed September 11, 2014)

the prosecution rejected their previous witness statements in court and said that
investigators had intimidated them. Other witnesses on whose testimony the prosecution
relied were not called to testify and could not be cross-examined by the defense. On
September 15, 2007, the Chirchik Criminal Court in Tashkent province convicted
Fahriddinov on 10 counts and sentenced him to 17 years in prison.257
Fahriddinov’s relatives told Human Rights Watch that since his sentence began SNB and
prison officials have tortured him repeatedly in custody and that he has developed serious
health problems.258 According to several rights groups who met with Fahriddinov’s
relatives in 2009, prison authorities held Fahriddinov in an isolation cell for nine months
during which period he contracted tuberculosis.259 ACAT-France and local groups reported
that authorities transferred him to a medical facility on June 7, 2009 after he lost
consciousness while carrying out hard physical labor with a fever.260
Fahriddinov’s wife told Human Rights Watch that during a visit with Fahriddinov in mid-
2010, he reported that other prisoners had ripped out two of his nails at the behest of
prison guards. Fahriddinov said that on at least one occasion when he stated that he was
too tired to work at the brick factory guards beat him unconscious with a shovel, revived
him with water, and then beat him again. Other prisoners disfigured his right arm,
admitting that they were forced to do this by prison guards. Fahriddinov said that the
beatings and torture grew worse following visits to him by the ICRC. He is being held at
Zangiota prison, Tashkent province.261
257 Sentence of Ruhiddin Fahriddinov (in Uzbek), Chirchik City Criminal Court, decision of September 15, 2007, document on
file with Human Rights Watch.

258 Human Rights Watch interview with “Dilafruz D.,” Tashkent, December 7, 2010.
259 Ali Yunusov, “Imprisoned Uzbek Imam Infected with Tuberculosis in Prison and Needs Adequate Medical Care,” Voice of
Freedom Regional Human Rights Portal, July 16, 2009, http://vof.kg/?p=3199 (accessed September 11, 2014).
260 Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture – France, “ACAT-France statement – Uzbekistan,” March 7, 2011, on file
with Human Rights Watch.

261 Human Rights Watch interview with Surat Ikramov, Bishkek, July 18, 2014; Human Rights Watch interview with “Dilafruz
D.,” Tashkent, November 13 and December 7, 2010.

Hayrullo Hamidov, 38, is a father of four
children and was a widely popular Hayrullo Hamidov
journalist, poet, and radio host, known for
his popular religious sermons. Hamidov
was a sports commentator and
correspondent for Uzbekistan Football
and UzTV. Before his arrest in 2010, he
wrote for Interfootball and Champion
sports magazines and was the director of
the socio-political journal Odamlar
© Private
Orasida (Among the People), which was
closed in 2007 by order of the Agency for Born: December 7, 1975
Print Publications and Information. Arrested: January 23, 2010
Alongside his journalistic endeavors, Charges: “Membership in a banned
Hamidov hosted a series of radio religious-extremist organization” and
“possession of materials containing
programs on religious topics that became
ideas of religious extremism and
very popular among Uzbekistan’s youth.262 threatening to public safety”
One Western scholar dubbed him “Central Sentenced: May 2010; 6 years
Asia’s first independent religious
celebrity.”263
In his shows, Hamidov offered advice on Islamic issues and confronted controversial
topics such as public health, corruption, and prostitution.264 His sermons challenged
official views about Uzbek society, dealing with issues of corruption, social decay, and
systemic problems largely ignored in the state-controlled media. His sermons remain
highly popular across Uzbekistan and are listened to on the Internet and circulated on
copied CDs and MP3s.265 As his popularity grew, SNB officers began to intimidate him,

263 Noah Tucker, “Domestic Shapers of Eurasia’s Islamic Futures: Sheikh, Scholar, Society, and the State,” policy paper from
Islam in Eurasia Policy Conference, June 2013, on file with Human Rights Watch, p.24.
264 “Popular radio host arrested on religious extremism charge,” Reporters Without Borders, January 23, 2010,
http://en.rsf.org/uzbekistan-popular-radio-host-arrested-on-23-01-2010,36191.html (accessed September 11, 2014).

265 Noah Tucker, “Domestic Shapers of Eurasia’s Islamic Futures: Sheikh, Scholar, Society, and the State,” policy paper from
Islam in Eurasia Policy Conference, June 2013, on file with Human Rights Watch., p.24.

detaining him at least twice prior to arresting him and warned him he would be imprisoned
if he continued to speak about religion.266
Police arrested Hamidov on January 23, 2010 in Tashkent on charges of “membership in a

banned religious-extremist organization” and “possession of materials containing ideas of
religious extremism and threatening to public safety.” During a search of his home, police
allegedly found audio recordings of a prominent Uzbek Imam, Abduvali-qori Mirzaev, who
disappeared in 1995, and whom the state has accused of spreading radical Islam.267
According to rights activists, no other evidence of Hamidov’s membership in “banned
religious groups” was introduced at trial. Hamidov was summarily tried alongside 14
others in a closed trial.268
In May 2010 the court convicted Hamidov and all co-defendants for membership in the
banned extremist Islamic group Jihodchilar (Jihadists) that rights groups and regional
experts say never existed.269 The court sentenced the defendants to fines and prison terms
of up to six years.270 Hamidov was sentenced to six years.
Hamidov elected not to appeal his sentence, reportedly telling his mother that there was
no hope of overturning his conviction.271 He is serving his sentence in a Kyzyltepa prison in
the province of Navoi.272
266 Human Rights Watch interview with Abdurakhmon Tashanov, Ezgulik, Washington, DC, April 29, 2014.
267 Sentence of Hayrullo Hamidov (Uzbek), Tashkent Regional Criminal Court, decision of May 27, 2010, on file with Human
Rights Watch.

269 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Surat Ikramov, Tashkent, September 10, 2013; “Jailed Uzbek Sports
Journalist Won't Appeal Conviction,” RFE/RL, June 30, 2010,

http://www.rferl.org/content/Jailed_Uzbek_Sports_Journalist_Not_To_Appeal_Conviction/2087102.html (accessed
270 “Jailed Uzbek Sports Journalist Won't Appeal Conviction,” RF/ERL, June 30, 2010,
271 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Surat Ikramov, Tashkent, September 10, 2013; “Jailed Uzbek Sports
Journalist Won't Appeal Conviction,” RFE/RL, June 30, 2010,


Akram Yuldashev, 51, is a father of four
children and a former mathematics Akram Yuldashev
teacher who became a prominent
religious and spiritual leader in Andijan
and the Fergana valley in the 1990s.273
Yuldashev’s case plays a major role in
the Uzbek government’s narrative
about terrorism and Islamism, and he
remains a central figure in the
government’s official view of the
© 2005 BBC
Andijan massacre of May 13, 2005.
Born: July 25, 1963
Though he lacked a formal religious Arrested: February 17, 1999
education, in 1992 he published an Charges: Various, including “terrorism,”
essay entitled, “lymonga yo’l [The Path “organization of banned civil groups
and religious organizations,”
to Faith],” which sets out religious and
“membership in a banned religious-
philosophical ideas for how to live a
extremist organization” and
faithful and morally sound existence in “possession of materials containing
harmony with Islam.274 His teachings ideas of religious extremism and
resonated with many, and around threatening to public safety”
Sentenced: March 1999; 17 years
1993 he began leading a religious
study group in his Andijan home,
though authorities repeatedly denied
him registration as a religious organization.275 As a result, the authorities briefly jailed him
and 40 of his followers in 1995 for carrying out religious instruction without registration.
SNB agents examined his essay but returned it without objections to the material.276
Yuldashev’s group, which included many local entrepreneurs, sparked the development of a
grassroots business community in Andijan informed by Yuldashev’s philosophies in which
273 Human Rights Watch interview with “Rustam R.,” Washington, DC, February 22, 2013.
274 Akramjon Yo’ldashev, “The Path to Faith,” in Uzbek Islamic Debates: Texts Translations, and Commentary, ed. Allen J.
Frank et al, (Springfield: Dunwoody Press, 2006), p.352-377.

276 Noah Tucker, “Akrom Yo’ldashev, the Myth of Akromiya, and Islam Karimov’s ‘War on Terror,’” from Central Asia and the
Caucasus Working Group, October 9, 2007, on file with Human Rights Watch.

spiritual and moral issues were said to take precedence over monetary concerns.277 The
group of businesses expanded rapidly, from 10 in 1993 to at least 40 separate companies by
2005, which included furniture factories, business supply companies, bakeries, tailoring
firms, construction companies, and transportation firms that employed thousands of people
in impoverished Andijan.278 The businesses in the network were well-known for both their
equitable treatment of workers—providing social services and a minimum wage nearly three
times the official monthly sum—and their charitable giving, in which a fifth of their profits
were donated to the community. By 1998 Yuldashev’s adherents had swelled to several
thousand and could be found in Andijan, Osh, Kokand, and Tashkent. 279
Throughout the mid-1990s, the SNB repeatedly interrogated Yuldashev and in April 1998,
authorities arrested him after an unnamed man began a fight with him in the Andijan market.
The police brought him to the police station and alleged that they found a small quantity of
heroin in his pocket, which Yuldashev later claimed was planted. Authorities prosecuted him
for narcotics possession and the Andijan City Court sentenced him to two and a half years in
prison.280 He was held in incommunicado detention for eight months until his release under
a December 1998 amnesty and resumed his religious activities in Andijan.281
On February 16, 1999, several bombs exploded in Tashkent, killing more than a dozen
people and injuring many others. Authorities immediately assigned responsibility for the
attacks to Islamic “extremists” and launched a wave of repression against independent
Muslims, arresting thousands and subjecting them to torture, unfair trials, police raids,
and threats against family members.282 Police arrested Akram Yuldashev the day after the
bombings. Authorities charged him with nine offenses, including terrorism (article 155),
inciting national, racial, ethnic, or religious tension (article 156), threatening the
constitutional order (article 159), sabotage (article 161), organization of banned civil
groups and religious organizations (article 216), incitement of participation in illegal civil
or religious groups (article 216(1)), organization of a criminal group (article 242),
277 Ibid.
278 Human Rights Watch, “Bullets Were Falling Like Rain”: The Andijan Massacre, May 13, 2005, vol. 17, no. 5(D), May 2005,
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/uzbekistan0605/4.htm#_Toc105632742.
279 Human Rights Watch Interview with “Rustam R.,” Washington, DC, February 22, 2013.
280 Ibid.
281 Ibid.
282 Human Rights Watch, Creating Enemies of the State, p.26-29.

production or dissemination of materials threatening the public order (article 244(1)), and
possession of narcotics for the purpose of sale (article 276).283
During his trial, the prosecution argued that Yuldashev was a main organizer of the
bombings.284 Authorities also blamed members of the unrelated Erk political opposition
movement and members of other independent Muslim groups for the same crime. The
prosecution accused Yuldashev of being the leader of a group called Akromiya which it
characterized as an extremist group with the express goal of overthrowing the government
and establishing a worldwide Islamic caliphate.285 Several scholars have written that the
prosecution in Yuldashev’s 1999 case was the first mention of any religious organization
called Akromiya.286 Despite the SNB’s earlier review, the court ordered a new analysis of
Yuldashev’s essay, “Path to Faith,” which determined it to be an extremist document. But
the “expert analysis” cited text that did not appear in the actual essay.287 According to
Yuldashev’s wife, after a hearing that lasted no more than an hour and in which no
witnesses presented evidence, the court sentenced Yuldashev to 17 years’ imprisonment
in a high security facility.288
After his conviction, prison authorities transferred Yuldashev repeatedly from one prison to
another. He spent time in Jaslyk prison, where he was subjected to severe beatings with
rubber truncheons.289 By 2005 Yuldashev’s health had deteriorated gravely and he had
spent two years in a prison hospital in Tashkent suffering from tuberculosis.290
Caucasus Working Group, October 9, 2007, on file with Human Rights Watch; Sarah Kendzior, “Inventing Akromiya: The Role
of Uzbek Propagandists in the Andijon Massacre,” Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization, vol. 14(4),
2006, p. 548.
285 Saidjahon Zaynabitdinnov, “The ‘Akromiya’ Community – A Tendentious Creation of Uzbek Security Services and Political
Scientists,” Fergana News, May 4, 2005, http://www.fergananews.com/article.php?id=3629 (accessed September 11, 2014).
Caucasus Working Group, October 9, 2007, on file with Human Rights Watch.
287 Ibid.
288Aizenman, N.C., “The Eye of the Uzbek Storm,” Washington Post, May 29, 2005, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2005/05/28/AR2005052800870_4.html (accessed September 11, 2014).

289 “On Torture and Arbitrary Detention in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, Report to UN Special Mechanisms Compiled by
Partners in civil society from Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan,” Civicus, March 3, 2011,
http://civicus.org/images/stories/Eurasia/ReporttoUNSR-UzTk.pdf (accessed September 11, 2014).

After his imprisonment, the business network Yuldashev established in Andijan continued
to grow until June 23, 2004, when police arrested 23 businessmen from the group for
allegedly organizing a criminal organization and threatening the constitutional order of
Uzbekistan. Their arrest, trial, and subsequent liberation from prison by gunmen in Andijan
precipitated mass demonstrations during which Uzbek government forces shot and killed
hundreds of peaceful, mostly unarmed protesters on May 13, 2005.291
In the aftermath of the massacre, authorities pinned responsibility on the already

imprisoned Akram Yuldashev, who in a taped confession dated July 2005 reportedly
admitted to inciting his followers to break the businessmen out of jail using a mobile
phone.292 Experts have written that his confession fits a pattern of statements extracted
through torture and coercion and cast doubt on its authenticity.293
Yuldashev’s son told Human Rights

Watch in mid-2013 that his family has
been denied all contact with him
since 2009, has no information about
his whereabouts, and do not even
know whether he is alive or has died
in custody.294 The refusal to provide,
or concealment of, information on the
fate or whereabouts of a person
deprived of their liberty constitutes
an enforced disappearance, a crime
under international law, and is
Yodgoroi Yuldasheva is the wife of imprisoned spiritual
absolutely prohibited in all leader Akram Yuldashev. Authorities accuse him of
circumstances. organizing the Andijan protests of May 2005, even
though he has been imprisoned since 1999 on other
politically motivated charges. Authorities refuse to
disclose his current whereabouts. © 2008 Fergana News
291 Human Rights Watch, Bullets Were Falling Like Rain.

292 Human Rights Watch Interview with “Rustam R.,” Washington, DC, February 22, 2013; Ian MacWilliam, “Uzbek ‘inciter’ Shown
Confessing,” BBC, October 19, 2005, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4358746.stm (accessed September 11, 2014).
293 Noah Tucker, “Akrom Yo’ldashev, the Myth of Akromiya, and Islam Karimov’s ‘War on Terror,’” October 9, 2007, on file
with Human Rights Watch, p. 16.

Andijan and Other “Internal Enemies”
At first, you feel a terrible headache, then you see everything in red as if
blood is pouring down your eyes, then you see black and white stripes.
After a while it seems that your entire body has moved into your head, and
your head hurts like hell. With that, you feel that your soul wants to break
free of your body, and you want to help it (by tearing the body apart), but
you don’t feel your body.
—Imprisoned UN employee, Erkin Musaev.295
Since the Andijan massacre the government has aggressively pursued, detained, tortured,
and prosecuted anyone believed to have either participated in or witnessed the events.
The government has also taken steps to suppress and manipulate the truth about the
massacre. Between September 2005 and July 2006, in 22 flawed and closed trials, courts
convicted and sentenced at least 303 people to lengthy prison terms on various charges of
extremism.296 Nearly all of these people, many of whom allege that they have been or
continue to suffer torture in detention, remain in prison.297 The government also continues
to aggressively pursue the return of individuals who fled the country following the atrocity.
In some cases, it has sought to lure people back by providing assurances that no harm will
come to them.298 In several cases where refugees agreed to return, including in the case of
Dilorom Abdukodirova described below, those assurances proved false.
Tashkent has refused to comply with demands, mainly by Western governments, to allow
an independent investigation into Andijan and to improve its human rights record. Instead,
295 This is an excerpt from a diary Erkin Musaev kept of the torture he suffered following his arrest in 2006 that he passed at
a later date to his relatives and journalists.

296 Human Rights Watch, Saving Its Secrets: Government Repression in Andijan, May 2008,
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2008/uzbekistan0508/4.htm, p.12.
297 “Human Rights Watch Submission to the United Nations Committee Against Torture on Uzbekistan,” Human Rights Watch
statement, October 2013, http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/10/28/human-rights-watch-submission-united-nations-

committee-against-torture-uzbekistan; Bahtiyor Muhtarov, “Andijan Refugees Speak Out,” Human Rights Society of
Uzbekistan, November 2010, http://en.hrsu.org/archives/836 (accessed September 11, 2014), including “List of Participants
and Witnesses to the Events of 13 and 14 May 2005 Who Are Currently Imprisoned”; Vitaly Ponomarev, “List of Persons
Arrested on Political or Religious Motives in Uzbekistan (January 2004-December 2008),” Memorial Human Rights Center,
Moscow, 2009, p. 17-18.
298 Between 2005 and 2008, dozens of Uzbek refugees and asylum seekers who faced a grave risk of torture or ill-treatment
were forcibly returned to Uzbekistan from Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Ukraine. Human Rights Watch, Saving Its
Secrets: Government Repression in Andijan, p.42.

the government has targeted for imprisonment those it perceives to have an affiliation with
states that have adopted a critical stance on its behavior such as the United States and
United Kingdom. As part of this campaign Uzbek authorities have charged with espionage
a number of Uzbek nationals who worked or were associated with foreign embassies and
international organizations and even some former government officials whose portfolio
included contact with representatives of Western governments.
In recent years, the Uzbek government’s apparent suspicion of individuals or organizations

seen to have foreign affiliations extended as
well to the graduates of some of Uzbekistan’s Dilorom Abdukodirova
most elite schools, Turkish-Uzbek lycées, and to
members of a peaceful religious movement
known as Nur that authorities view as an
instrument of the Turkish government.
Dilorom Abdukodirova, 48, is a mother and was

an eye-witness to the Andijan massacre.299 On
the day of the massacre Abdukodirova fled to
Kyrgyzstan, leaving behind her husband and
© Private
children. She was later resettled to Australia as
a refugee.300 After Uzbek authorities made Born: 1966
assurances to her family that she could return Arrested: March 2010
without fear of punishment or reprisal, Charges: Illegal border crossing and
Abdukodirova decided to return home.301 “threatening the constitutional order”
Sentenced: April 30, 2010; 10 years, 2
months; sentence extended by 8 years
On January 8, 2010, immediately upon arrival to
the airport, security officials detained
299 “EU must put pressure on Uzbekistan over Andizhan killings,” Amnesty International, May 12, 2010,
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/eu-must-put-pressure-uzbekistan-over-andizhan-killings-2010-05-12
300 “Uzbekistan: Stop Persecuting Andijan Refugees’ Families,” Human Rights Watch news release, May 4, 2010,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2010/05/04/uzbekistan-stop-persecuting-andijan-refugees-families%20.
301 “Uzbekistan: No Justice 7 Years after Andijan Massacre,” Human Rights Watch news release, May 12, 2012,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/05/11/uzbekistan-no-justice-7-years-after-andijan-massacre.

Abdukodirova.302 She was released but taken into custody again in March.303 Initially,
Abdukodirova did not have access to legal counsel, as her state-appointed lawyer was
allegedly away on a business trip.304 The lawyer her family hired to represent her met with
her once, then dropped the case.305
On April 30, 2010, the Andijan City Court convicted Abdukodirova on charges of illegal
border crossing and anti-constitutional activity, sentencing her to 10 years and two months
in prison.306 During her hearing on April 28, Abdukodirova, according to her relative,
appeared with bruises on her face, had lost a lot of weight, and would not make eye
contact with family members.307 During the same hearing, Abdukodirova reportedly
confessed to all charges, including the prosecutor’s accusation that she organized a
busload of people to participate in the demonstration on May 13, 2005.308 However, at the
next hearing, she again pleaded innocent to the charges, except for having unlawfully
crossed the border into Kyrgyzstan in 2005.309
After Abdukodirova was arrested, the police summoned her relatives and warned them not
to organize demonstrations in her defense.310 Abdukodirova’s relatives reported to Human
Rights Watch that her sentence was extended by an additional eight years at some point in
2012 for alleged “violations of prison rules” following a closed trial inside her prison.
Abdukodirova is serving her sentence at Tashkent women’s prison.
303 “Uzbekistan: No Justice 7 Years after Andijan Massacre,” Human Rights Watch news release, May 12, 2012,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/05/11/uzbekistan-no-justice-7-years-after-andijan-massacre.
304 “Uzbekistan: Stop Persecuting Andijan Refugees’ Families,” Human Rights Watch news release, May 4, 2010,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2010/05/04/uzbekistan-stop-persecuting-andijan-refugees-families%20.
305 Ibid.
(accessed September 11, 2014)
307 Ibid.
308 Ibid.
309 Ibid.
310 Ibid.

Botir Eshkuziev, 36, Bahrom Ibragimov, 37,
Davron Kabilov, 41, Davron Tojiev, 33, and Botirbek Eshkuziev, Bahrom Ibragimov,
Ravshanbek Vafoev, 43, all graduated from Davron Kabilov, Davron Tojiev, and
Uzbek-Turkish lycées in the 1990s and founded
Ravshanbek Vafoev
an educational science magazine called Irmoq Born: 1978, 1977, 1973, 1981, and 1971,
in early 2007.311 The magazine quickly gained respectively
popularity for its content and unique design. Arrested: June 27, 2008 (Ibragimov); August 16,
2008 (Eshkuziev, Kabilov, and Vafoev); September
The men, along with colleague Abdulaziz
27, 2008 (Tojiev)
Dadakhanov, were arrested in 2008 as part of a Charges: Various, including “disseminating
wider campaign against alleged adherents of materials or information threatening to the public
the conservative, independent Nur religious order” and “establishing, leading, or participation in
movement, based on the philosophies of the a religious extremist, separatist, fundamentalist or
other banned organization”
Turkish-Kurdish theologian Said Nursi. 312
Sentenced: February 26, 2009; Ibragimov and
Kabilov to 12 years, Vafoev to 10 years, and
In the early years of Uzbekistan’s Eshkuziev to 8 years; April 8, 2009: Tojiev to 8 years
independence, a Nursi-influenced Turkish
philanthropist and scholar, Fethullah Gulen, financed the establishment of Uzbek-Turkish
lycées, which quickly gained renown as elite institutions that taught English. In 1999, with
tensions mounting in diplomatic relations between Turkey and Uzbekistan, Uzbek authorities
closed the lycées.313 According to the authorities, the schools instilled a belief in the
supremacy of the Turkish government and promoted Nursi’s teachings.314 The closure of the
schools came amid a continuing crackdown on independent Islam.315 The deterioration of
Uzbek-Turkish relations was also attributed to Ankara’s refusal to extradite Erk party leader
Muhammad Solih, whom Uzbek authorities tied to the February 1999 Tashkent bombings.316
311 Sentence of Botir Eshkuziev, Bahrom Ibragimov, Davron Kabilov, Ravshanbek Vafoev, and Abdulaziz Dadakhanov (b.
1977), Tashkent City Criminal Court, decision of February 26, 2009, on file with Human Rights Watch; “Uzbekistan: Reports of
Crackdown on ‘Nur’ Religious Group,” Wikileaks, February 13, 2009,
http://cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=09TASHKENT177&q=irmoq (accessed September 11, 2014).
312 “Uzbekistan: Reports of Crackdown on ‘Nur’ Religious Group,” Wikileaks, February 13, 2009,


314 Sentence of Botir Eshkuziev, Bahrom Ibragimov, Davron Kabilov, Ravshanbek Vafoev, Abdulaziz Dadakhanov (“Sentence
of Eshkuziev and others”), Tashkent Criminal Court, decision of February 26, 2009, on file with Human Rights Watch.

316 “Uzbek Authorities Are Carrying Out a Wide Campaign against the Followers of a Turkish Religious Movement,” Voice of
Freedom Regional Human Rights Portal, February 13, 2009, http://vof.kg/?p=3082 (accessed September 11, 2014).

Police arrested Bahrom Ibragimov on June 27, 2008 on allegations that he actively recruited
for the Nur movement among former classmates.317 Eshkuziev, Kabilov, Vafoev, and
Dadakhanov were detained on August 16, 2008, and all five were accused of receiving
funding for Irmoq from radical Nur leaders in Kazakhstan.318 They were also accused of
engaging in proselytism and holding “unsanctioned religious meetings.”319 Another
journalist associated with the group, Davron Tojiev, was arrested on September 27, 2008.
Authorities ultimately charged all six with “disseminating materials or information
threatening to the public order” and “establishing, leading, or participation in a religious
extremist, separatist, fundamentalist or other banned organization.” 320 According to the
indictment, the journalists founded Irmoq and its sister publication, Yetti Iklim, to
propagandize the banned Nur movement.321 Prior to the trial, state-controlled television ran a
piece on the Nur movement, its supposed goal of establishing a pan-Turkic state in Central
Asia, and Ibragimov’s alleged guilt in financing the movement’s propaganda engine.322
According to court documents, US diplomatic cables, and trial monitors, the journalists
denied the charges and alleged SNB officers tortured them during the investigation.323
They stated that officers beat them and stuck needles under their fingernails to extract
confessions.324 As a result of this alleged torture, all five men ultimately signed “letters of
regret,” admitting partial guilt.325 Trial monitors reported that the trial was marred by other
procedural violations, including the court’s refusal to allow the defendants to challenge
the state-appointed experts’ testimony that Irmoq is an “extremist” publication.326 A
Tashkent court sentenced them to prison terms on February 26, 2009: Ibragimov and
317 “Uzbekistan: ‘Nur’ Religious Group Crackdown Continues,” Wikileaks,

March 13, 2009,
http://cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=09TASHKENT277&q=irmoq (accessed August 1, 2014).
318 Ibid.
319 Sentence of Eshkuziev and others on file with Human Rights Watch.
320 Felix Corley, and Mushfig Bayram, “Uzbekistan: ‘You Call White Black and Black White,’” Forum 18, February 27, 2009,
http://www.forum18.org/archive.php?article_id=1262 (accessed September 11, 2014).

321 Sentence of Eshkuziev and others, on file with Human Rights Watch.


326Felix Corley and Mushfig Bayram, “Uzbekistan: ‘You Call White Black and Black White’,” Forum 18, February 27, 2009,
http://www.forum18.org/archive.php?article_id=1262 (accessed September 11, 2014); Ali Yunusov, “Tashkent Appellate

Court Upheld Sentence against Founders and Publishers of a Popular Journal,” Voice of Freedom Regional Human Rights
Portal, March 31, 2009, http://vof.kg/?p=3119 (accessed August 1, 2014).

Kabilov to 12 years, Vafoev to 10 years, and Dadakhanov, Eshkuziev, and Tojiev to 8 years,
and their sentences were upheld on appeal.327
After sustained diplomatic pressure and advocacy by international human rights groups,
Dadakhanov was released in mid-2012. The others remain in prison.
Erkin Musaev, 47, is a UN employee and a

former Uzbek government official in the Erkin Musaev
Ministry of Defense’s foreign trade
department. He was an official involved in
international cooperation programs with
Western governments, including the US
and the EU. The authorities accused him of
espionage.328 Musaev’s persecution and
his relatives’ proactive efforts to draw
international attention to his plight have
resulted in key statements and
findings/conclusions by UN bodies. © Association for Human Rights in Central Asia
Musaev’s imprisonment illustrates an
increasing trend on the part of the Uzbek Born: May 9, 1967
authorities to target persons the Arrested: January 31, 2006
Charges: Various charges, including high treason, sharing
government perceives to be affiliated with
government secrets, abuse of power, and neglect of duty
external actors or outside powers Tashkent
Sentenced: June 13 and 14, 2006; 16 years; sentence
sees as hostile to Uzbekistan, including
extended by 4 years
Western governments.
Musaev participated in a US government-sponsored exchange program in the mid-1990s,

studying English at the Army Language Institute in San Antonio, Texas.329 From 1997 to 2001,
327 “Uzbekistan: Recent Religious Extremism and Terrorism Convictions,” Wikileaks, April 13, 2009,
http://cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=09TASHKENT497&q=irmoq (accessed September 11, 2014); Ali Yunusov,

“Tashkent Appellate Court Upheld Sentence against Founders and Publishers of a Popular Journal,” Voice of Freedom
Regional Human Rights Portal, March 31, 2009, http://vof.kg/?p=3119 (accessed September 11, 2014). Tojiev was tried
separately and sentenced by the same court on April 8, 2009.
328 “Third Strike for Former Defense Official Erkin Musaev,” Wikileaks, January 15, 2008,
http://cablegatesearch.net/cable.php?id=08TASHKENT49&q=erkin%20musaev (accessed September 11, 2014).

329 Ibid.

Musaev represented the Uzbek government in Brussels at NATO and then, after leaving the
government, became a project manager for the UN Development Programme’s “Border
Management in Central Asia” project.330
On January 31, 2006, border guards arrested Musaev at Tashkent airport, after allegedly
uncovering a disk among his belongings containing “state secrets.” Musaev wrote to his
father that officials had planted the evidence during the search.331 Musaev’s mother testified
to the UN Human Rights Committee that the search did not conform to due process
standards.332 In its 2007 Human Rights report on Uzbekistan, the US State Department
reported that Musaev was tortured in detention, including severe beatings on his head, chest,
and feet, and that he was held for two months without access to counsel or any visitors.333
According to a joint letter of the UN special rapporteur on torture and the head of the UN
Working Group on Arbitrary Detention to President Karimov, Musaev sustained a broken
jaw during one such beating.334 Authorities also coerced him to sign a confession that he
had engaged in espionage for the US, the UK, and the UN.335 Various experts linked his
arrest to President Karimov’s anger at Western governments’ reaction to the Andijan
massacre and his repeated assertions that there was a Western government-backed
conspiracy to oust him through a “color” revolution.336
Authorities initially charged Musaev with high treason and sharing government secrets. On
June 13, 2006, a Tashkent military court sentenced him to 15 years’ imprisonment. The day
after his conviction, he was additionally charged with abuse of power and neglect of duty,
330Ibid.
331 Phillip Shishkin, “The Enemy We Need: Washington Courts a Repressive Uzbekistan-Again,” World Affairs Journal,
January/February 2011, http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/enemy-we-need-washington-courts-repressive-

uzbekistan%E2%80%94again (accessed September 11, 2014).
332 UN Human Rights Committee, Communications Nos. 1914, 1915 and 1916/2009, (One-Hundred Fourth Session, 2012),
Views adopted by the Committee at its 104th session, March 12-30, 2012, CCPR/C/104/D/1914,1915&1916/2009,
www.ccprcentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/english.doc, (accessed September 11, 2014), p.3.
333 US Department of State Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, “Country Report: Uzbekistan (2006),” March 6,
2007, http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2006/78848.htm (accessed September 11, 2014).

334UN OHCHR, “Joint letter on Erkin Musaev.”

336 Phillip Shishkin, “The Enemy We Need: Washington Courts a Repressive Uzbekistan-Again,” World Affairs Journal,
January/February 2011, http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/enemy-we-need-washington-courts-repressive-

uzbekistan%E2%80%94again (accessed September 11, 2014).

and another year was added to his sentence.337 In the ensuing years, Musaev’s relatives
reported to journalists and US embassy officials that he continued to suffer torture.338 In
spring 2007, he was transferred to the SNB headquarters in Tashkent to testify against four
border guards accused of espionage. According to his family, because Musaev refused to
give false testimony, he was so severely beaten that he was hospitalized with significant
blood loss.339 A court later tried and convicted him in another case where he had been
originally called as a witness, adding four years to his sentence. His prison term is now set
to expire on February 1, 2026.340
During the third trial, Musaev’s family reported that his health was deteriorating. In a 2008
letter published on Fergananews.com, his wife stated he was in critical condition and that
she learned during a recent visit that he had been beaten so severely that his face was
unrecognizable.341
In May 2008 the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention rendered an opinion finding
Musaev’s imprisonment “arbitrary” and in contravention of several international
agreements to which Uzbekistan is a party.342 By February 2011, authorities had transferred
Musaev to a high security prison in Navoi province and his body showed signs of burns
and wounds.343 In June 2012 the UN Human Rights Committee also rendered a judgment
that the Uzbek government was in violation of ICCPR articles 7, 9, and 14, calling on
Uzbekistan to provide him with an effective remedy.344 Musaev remains imprisoned.345
337 Ibid.
338 Ibid; Raykhon Musaeva, “Uzbekistan: Wife of Sentenced Lieutenant E. Musaev Says Husband Has Been Tortured in
Prison,” Fergana News, January 14, 2008, http://www.fergananews.com/news.php?id=8160 (accessed September 11, 2014).

340Permanent Mission of the Republic of Uzbekistan to the United Nations, “Information on the questions raised in the
communication from the Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Mr. El Hadji Malick Sow, and the
Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Mr. Juan Méndez, regarding
the convict, Mr. Erkin Musaev,” HRC/NONE/2012/107GE.12-15671 (E) 081012 091012, June 19, 2012,
https://spdb.ohchr.org/hrdb/21st/Uzbekistan_19.06.12_(5.2012)_Trans.pdf (accessed September 11, 2014).
341 Raykhon Musaeva, “Uzbekistan: Wife of Sentenced Lieutenant E. Musaev Says Husband Has Been Tortured in Prison,”
Fergana News, January 14, 2008, http://www.fergananews.com/news.php?id=8160 (accessed September 11, 2014).
342 UN Human Rights Council, Agenda Item 3 (tenth session, 2009), “Opinions Adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention,” A/HRC/10/21/Add.1, February 4, 2009, http://www.refworld.org/pdfid/5062b12e2.pdf (accessed September 11,

2014), p. 138.
343 OHCHR, “Joint letter on Erkin Musaev.”
344 UN Human Rights Committee, Communications Nos. 1914, 1915 and 1916/2009, Views adopted by the Committee at its
104th session, March 12-30, 2012, CCPR/C/104/D/1914,1915&1916/2009, www.ccprcentre.org/wp-

content/uploads/2012/07/english.doc (accessed September 11, 2014), p.3.

III. Prison Abuses and the Arbitrary
Extension of Sentences
There’s not much time left [for me] to suffer.

—Imprisoned journalist Muhammad Bekjanov told his wife during her visit
with him in prison in March 2013, one month after authorities extended his
13-year sentence by another 5 years
And you are going to tell us where to build our prisons, are you? Why are
you so set on closing Jaslyk? Have you ever been there? Or how about any of
those who constantly write about it? I’ve seen it with my own eyes. How
would you know if Jaslyk meets international standards [on the treatment of
prisoners]?
—Akmal Saidov, head of Uzbek government delegation to the UN
Committee against Torture, responding to the committee’s
recommendation that the Jaslyk prison, known for torture, should be closed,
October 30, 2013, Geneva
As the profiles of individuals imprisoned on politically motivated charges presented above

show, severe abuses to which Uzbek authorities subject imprisoned human rights activists,
journalists, political opposition activists, religious figures and believers, and other perceived
critics include: denial of access to counsel, incommunicado detention, torture, the practice
of solitary confinement, dire health problems, the denial of or inadequate medical care,
arbitrary denial of entitled early release, and unlawful extension of prison sentences.
This chapter analyzes these different categories of abuse and identifies the international
human rights laws and standards, and in some cases, Uzbekistan’s own laws, which such
abuses so egregiously violate. This chapter draws both on the 34 cases presented above
and interviews with 10 additional individuals formerly imprisoned on politically motivated
charges, some of whom have been released in the last year.346
345 “Tashkent’s Tidbits February 10, 2009,” Wikileaks, February 11, 2009,
http://www.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09TASHKENT158_a.html (accessed September 11, 2014); OHCHR, “Joint letter on

Erkin Musaev.”
346 The ten former prisoners are: Turaboi Juraboev, Norboi Kholjigitov, Abdurasul Khudoynazarov, Mahmadali Mahmudov,
Farkhodkhon Mukhtarov, Kayum Ortikov, Nematjon Siddikov, Mutabar Tadjibaeva, Sanjar Umarov, and Gulnaza Yuldasheva.

The new first-hand accounts of these 10 recently released former prisoners, combined with
the 34 profiles above, underline the deplorable conditions in which individuals imprisoned
on politically motivated charges are held. Serious concerns for the many that remain in
prison have only grown more acute since April 2013 when, due to Uzbek government
interference, the International Committee of the Red Cross was forced to terminate its
visits with detainees and prisoners, leaving Uzbekistan’s prisoners and places of
detention without independent monitoring of any kind.
Due Process Violations

Denial of Access to Counsel
Lack of access to a lawyer and counsel of one’s choice enable conditions that can amount
to incommunicado detention. These rights are essential safeguards against torture in
pretrial custody, which is especially critical for persons arrested on politically motivated
charges. Accordingly, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
affirms the right to counsel in legal proceedings, as well as the right “to have adequate
time and facilities for the preparation of… [one’s] defense and to communicate with
counsel of his own choosing.”347
The United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers also echo these requirements
and further clarify that legal assistance must be provided promptly (defined as within 48
hours of arrest), must be confidential, and must be given without outside interference.348
In January 2009 the Uzbek government expanded, in law at least, procedural rights for
pretrial detainees, including a right of access to counsel and instructing police to administer
United States-style “Miranda” warnings to suspects in custody. Under the amended article
49 of the Criminal Procedure Code, lawyers should be granted immediate access to their
clients at any stage of the criminal process, including from the moment of arrest.349
347 ICCPR, art. 14(1) and 14(3)(b).
348 Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, adopted by the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the
Treatment of Offenders, Havana, August 27 to September 7, 1990, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.144/28/Rev.1 at 118 (1990), Principles 1, 5,
6, 7 and 8. (Principle 7: “Governments shall further ensure that all persons arrested or detained, with or without criminal charge,
shall have prompt access to a lawyer, and in any case not later than forty-eight hours from the time of arrest or detention.”
Principle 8: “All arrested, detained or imprisoned persons shall be provided with adequate opportunities, time and facilities to
be visited by and to communicate and consult with a lawyer, without delay, interception or censorship and in full confidentiality.
Such consultations may be within sight, but not within the hearing, of law enforcement officials.”)
349 Instead of written authorization (dopusk), a lawyer must merely present proof of his representation order, such as a
retainer agreement signed by the lawyer and the family, to gain access to a facility where a client is held. Were such a right

But despite improvements on paper, the amendments have not been implemented in
practice and are routinely ignored by police, prosecutors, and judges. In the majority of
cases, individuals imprisoned on politically motivated charges are either denied access to
counsel during critical points of the proceedings or are provided with state-appointed
lawyers who do not effectively represent them. As shown above, Azam Farmonov was tried
entirely without his lawyer present. Authorities denied Ruhiddin Fahriddinov access to his
lawyer, Rustam Tyuleganov, for two months following arrest and tried him in a closed trial
which neither his lawyer nor family were allowed to attend.350 Similarly, Solijon
Abdurakhmanov was denied access to counsel throughout his pretrial detention.351
Lawyers report that even when they are allowed one or two meetings with their clients,
authorities use a variety of methods to prevent them from meaningfully consulting with or
representing them. Tactics include not being informed of the time and date of key
hearings, witness interrogations, and refusals to allow them to meet with their clients
confidentially. The experiences of former political prisoners also support this pattern.
In 2013, Fergana
For example, Nematjon
valley-based activist Siddikov, a rights activist from
Nematjon Siddikov the Fergana valley imprisoned
was arrested after his
family was assaulted
in 2012 until his release under
at home by unknown amnesty in 2013, was held for
assailants following
several months in pretrial
his investigation into
local police detention with severely limited
corruption. He was access to counsel, and all
sentenced to six years
visitation requests made by
but later released
under amnesty. © family members were denied.
2013 Human Rights Despite their continued
Alliance of Uzbekistan
requests for information,
authorities notified Siddikov’s
relatives about his trial only on
guaranteed in practice, it would significantly reduce the amount of time detainees are left in incommunicado detention,
where they are often interrogated.
350 Human Rights Watch interview with Rustam Tyuleganov, Tashkent, November 10, 2010.
351 “Uzbekistan: Release Independent Journalist,” Human Rights Watch news release, September 12, 2008,
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/09/11/uzbekistan-release-independent-journalist.

the day it was to begin. Since they live nearly 100 miles from the court, both Siddikov’s
relatives and his public defender, Shuhrat Rustamov, were unable to attend.352
Incommunicado Detention
January 2009 amendments to Uzbekistan’s Criminal Code provide for a detainee’s right to
contact a lawyer or close family member immediately, but in practice police do not allow
detainees to exercise their right to make a phone call and do not otherwise inform a
detainee’s family of their detention. Although article 217 of the Criminal Procedure Code
requires police, prosecutors, or courts to inform relatives of the detention within 24 hours,
this provision is often ignored. Family members may search for days before receiving
confirmation that their relatives are in custody. In some cases, police may even deny they
are holding a suspect in order to throw family members off the trail.
Under international law, authorities commit an enforced disappearance when they refuse
to acknowledge holding someone in custody or conceal the person’s fate or whereabouts,
thereby placing them outside the protection of the law. Disappearance, a crime under
international law, increases the likelihood of torture or other ill-treatment.
As illustrated in the previous chapter, Uzbek authorities’ violations of these rights have
resulted in conditions of prolonged incommunicado detention for several individuals
imprisoned on politically motivated charges, including Samandar Kukanov, Isroiljon
Kholdorov, and Akzam Turgunov.
Torture
Over the past two decades Human Rights Watch has documented hundreds of credible
allegations of law enforcement officials in Uzbekistan using both physical and
psychological torture to abuse detainees and prisoners, including many of the individuals
profiled here.353
352 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Shuhrat Rustamov, Human Rights Alliance of Uzbekistan, May 22, 2013.
353 Human Rights Watch, Nowhere to Turn: Torture and Ill-treatment in Uzbekistan, vol. 19, no. 6(D), November 2007,
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2007/11/05/nowhere-turn; Human Rights Watch, No One Left to Witness; Human Rights Watch,
And it Was Hell All Over Again: Torture in Uzbekistan, Vol. 12, No.12 (D), December 2000,
http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/2000/uzbek.

Uzbekistan is party to international treaties that impose legal obligations regarding the
treatment of detainees and the conduct of law enforcement personnel. These include the
ICCPR354 and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment.355 These treaties prohibit arbitrary arrest and detention and the
use of torture and other ill-treatment. They uphold the right of detainees to be held in
humane conditions and to be treated with dignity. Detainees also have the right to due
process and a fair trial, including the right not to be compelled to confess to guilt or testify
against themselves.
In November 2013 the UN Committee against Torture expressed concern at the “numerous,
ongoing, and consistent allegations” of torture and ill-treatment in Uzbekistan, citing a
European Court of Human Rights judgment which states that torture and ill-treatment are
systematic, unpunished, and encouraged by law enforcement officers.356 The committee
further expressed concern that “human rights defenders that have been deprived of their
liberty have been subjected to torture and other ill-treatment,” specifically naming many of
the current and former prisoners featured in this report.357
Torture in Pretrial Detention

As the profiles presented in this report demonstrate, there are numerous credible and
consistent accounts of Uzbek law enforcement officials having abused political detainees
in pretrial custody, using forms of both physical and psychological torture. Methods of
torture documented in Uzbekistan include: beatings with rubber truncheons, plastic
bottles filled with water, electric shock, hanging by wrists and ankles, the threat of rape
and sexual humiliation, asphyxiation with plastic bags and gas masks, threats of physical
354 ICCPR, adopted December 16, 1966, G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), 21 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 52, U.N. Doc. A/6316 (1966),
999 U.N.T.S. 171, entered into force March 23, 1976, ratified by Uzbekistan on September 28, 1995, art. 19(2).
355 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted December 10,
1984, G.A. res. 39/46, annex, 39 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 51) at 197, U.N. Doc. A/39/51 (1984), entered into force June 26, 1987,
ratified by Uzbekistan on September 28, 1995.
356 UN Committee against Torture, “Concluding Observations,”
http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CAT%2fC%2fUZB%2fCO%2f4&Lang=en
(accessed on September 11, 2014). In at least seven cases decided since the beginning of 2008, the European Court of
Human Rights has ruled that sending an individual wanted by authorities to Uzbekistan would be a breach of the absolute
ban on return to risk of torture, on the basis that torture and ill-treatment remains so pervasive in the country.
357 UN Committee Against Torture, “Concluding Observations,” p. 3.

harm to relatives, and denial of food or water.358 The cases of Akzam Turgunov, Azam
Farmonov, Nosim Isakov, Yuldash Rasulov, Ruhiddin Fahriddinov, Botirbek Eshkuziev,
Bahrom Ibragimov, Davron Kabilov, Ravshanbek Vafoev, Muhammad Bekjanov, Yusuf
Ruzimuradov, and Mehriniso and Zulhumor Hamdamova, all presented above, offer some
of the most egregious examples of torture in pretrial custody.
In addition, several recently released persons imprisoned on politically motivated charges,

their lawyers, or relatives told Human Rights Watch about torture they experienced during
their pretrial detention.
Gulnaza Yuldasheva, 29, is a member of the

Initiative Group of Independent Human Rights
Defenders (IGIHRD) who worked to combat
corruption on the part of Uzbek government
officials allegedly involved in human
trafficking. She was arrested in April 2012 on
what appear to be politically motivated
charges of extortion after conducting an
independent investigation into the issue and
in July 2012 was sentenced to seven years’
Rights activist Gulnaza Yuldasheva was imprisoned in July
imprisonment following a closed trial.359 2012 on extortion charges after conducting an
investigation into officials’ involvement in human
trafficking. © 2013 Steve Swerdlow/ Human Rights Watch
Yuldasheva told Human Rights Watch that
during her pretrial detention in April 2012 in an
isolation cell of the Chinaz district police station she was brought to a jail cell where seven
police officers surrounded her and were instructed by their superior officer that they should
rape her if she did not sign a false confession. According to Yuldasheva’s account, several
officers beat her on the legs, stomach, and shoulders with a rubber truncheon for
approximately 30 minutes, dragging her around the room by the hair and causing her to lose
358 “Human Rights Watch Submission to the United Nations Committee against Torture on Uzbekistan,” October 2013,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/10/28/human-rights-watch-submission-united-nations-committee-against-torture-
uzbekistan.
359 “U.S. Official on Conviction of Gulnaza Yuldasheva in Uzbekistan,” US State Department IIP Digital, July 21, 2012,
http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2012/07/201207219436.html#axzz2hOWyNsnd (accessed September

11, 2014).

consciousness.360 In early 2013, following public statements from human rights activists and
the US government calling for her release Yuldasheva was amnestied and set free.
Torture Following Conviction

Human Rights Watch has documented dozens of cases in which prison officials or
prisoners acting at their behest physically tortured, abused, or otherwise humiliated
individuals imprisoned on politically motivated charges in places of detention. Several
current prisoners featured here, including Azam Farmonov, Ruhiddin Fahriddinov, and
Rustam Usmanov, have made credible allegations of severe episodes of torture.
Such attacks often were compounded by prison authorities’ subsequent denial of medical
treatment to the victims. This treatment directly violates Uzbek law and contravenes
international standards prohibiting the use of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or
punishment to which Uzbekistan is a party.
Former prisoner Kayum Ortikov, a former employee of

the British embassy in Tashkent accused of espionage
shared his harrowing experience of torture at the hands
of SNB officers for nine months in 2009 following his
conviction on what appeared to be fabricated charges
of human trafficking.361 He said his torturers in the
basement of the Tashkent city jail burned his genitalia
with newspapers set on fire, poked needles under his
Kayum Ortikov is a former employee fingernails, and threatened to have prisoners allegedly
of the British Embassy in Tashkent HIV positive rape him if he did not confess to being a
who was tortured to extract a
spy.362 His wife told Human Rights Watch,
confession of espionage for the UK.
Released in 2009, he fled Uzbekistan
and now lives in the US with his He [my husband] told me how officers would
family. © 2012 Kayum Ortikov
strap him to a chair during interrogations. They
360 Human Rights Watch Interview with Gulnaza Yuldasheva, Kiev, Ukraine, February 13, 2013.
361 Human Rights Watch interview with Kayum Ortikov and Mohira Ortikova, Kiev, February 12, 2014.
362 Ibid.

would pour cold water over his naked body, placing two high-speed fans on
each side of him so that he would freeze. They would leave him like this for
two to three hours. They did this so he would sign what they asked him to.
Officers would hang him from the ceiling by his wrists, and eight or nine
people one after the other would beat him. When I saw him, it was obvious
he had been hanged by the wrists. I could see the marks.363
Ortikov’s suffering was so great that he tried to slit his wrists with his own teeth and later
used a razor blade to cut his head and neck. Following sustained public advocacy by his
wife, human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, and British journalists, Ortikov
was released in May 2011, after which he and his family fled the country and finally
resettled as refugees in the United States in February 2014.
Solitary Confinement
Prison authorities have also
subjected individuals imprisoned on
politically motivated charges to
solitary confinement, either
arbitrarily imposing it on them or
using it as a means of reprimanding
dissent within the prison system.
International standards state that

“punishment by placing [the prisoner] A guard in a solitary confinement block at an unidentified
prison in Uzbekistan. Prisoners in solitary confinement in
in a dark cell, and all cruel, inhuman
Uzbekistan’s prisons experience cramped cells without
or degrading punishments shall be bedding—some in total darkness, others with permanent
completely prohibited.”364 Experts bright lights. © date unknown, Fiery Hearts Club
have concluded that prolonged
363 Ibid.
364 United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Standard Minimum Rules), adopted by the First
United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, held at Geneva in 1955, and approved
by the Economic and Social Council by its resolution 663 C (XXIV) of July 31, 1957, and 2076 (LXII) of May 13, 1977, art. 31.

solitary confinement may rise to the level of cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or
torture.365 Solitary confinement is detrimental to mental and physical health and therefore
international standards require that it “be used only in exceptional circumstances or when
absolutely necessary” and that it last for the shortest amount of time possible.366
However, in several cases Human Rights Watch researched prisoners were subjected to
significant periods of solitary confinement at some point in their detention. They
experienced cramped, squalid cells without bedding—some in total darkness, others with
permanent bright lights—where they were deprived of all human contact. They said they
were repeatedly denied visits by medical professionals, a further contravention of
international standards.
The case of peaceful political activist Sanjar

Umarov, imprisoned on various economic
charges five months after announcing the
creation of a political reform movement,
illustrates how Uzbek authorities combine
torture and ill-treatment with solitary
confinement, which can bring about
disastrous consequences for the physical
and psychological health of prisoners.
Arrested in October 2005, Umarov was

In January 2008, while serving his 14 and half year
drugged and beaten in pretrial custody.
sentence at Kyzyltepa prison, authorities placed
peaceful political opposition figure Sanjar Umarov Three days after his arrest, his attorney found
in an open-air cell, or “monkey cage,” for five days him naked in a basement cell, covering his
in below-freezing temperatures. © 2014 Human
face with his hands and rocking back and
Rights Watch
forth, unresponsive to his own name.367
365 United Nations Human Rights Committee, General Comment 20, Compilation of General Comments and General
Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.1 at 30 (1994), art. 6.
366 “The practice [of solitary confinement] has a clearly documented negative impact on mental health, and therefore should be
used only in exceptional circumstances or when absolutely necessary for criminal investigation purposes. In all cases, solitary
confinement should be used for the shortest period of time.” United Nations General Assembly, Interim Report of the Special
Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, UN Doc. A/63/175, July 28, 2008, p. 2.
367 “Uzbekistan: Jailed Opposition Leader’s Health at Risk,” Human Rights Watch news release, November 1, 2005,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2005/10/31/uzbekistan-jailed-opposition-leader-s-health-risk.

Umarov told Human Rights Watch that following conviction, prison guards beat and tortured
him on 10 to 12 occasions,368 including an incident in January 2008, when he was confined
for five days in an unheated cage in subzero temperatures.369 In late 2008, when his wife
was allowed to visit him at Kyzyltepa prison, she found that he was gravely thin, scarred from
torture, and that he barely recognized her when she arrived. Umarov spent nearly half of his
sentence in solitary confinement, deprived of human contact, sunlight, or exercise.370
After sustained pressure by human rights groups and US officials, Umarov was released in
November 2009 and was immediately resettled to the US, where he now lives with his
family. He continues to speak about torture in Uzbekistan and chairs the “Sunshine
Uzbekistan” movement in exile.
Health Problems and Inadequate Medical Treatment

Uzbekistan fails to meet basic international standards regarding the treatment of prisoners.
Conditions are abysmal for common and political prisoners alike, with overcrowded cells,
unhygienic and insufficient food and water, and inadequate medical treatment.
Many persons imprisoned on politically motivated charges have been routinely denied
treatment for serious medical problems, many of which emerged over the course of prolonged
imprisonment. Their representatives and recently released prisoners jailed on such charges
said that poor prison conditions—which produced and then exacerbated such health
problems—were neither monitored nor remedied, as international standards demand.371
Under international human rights law prisoners, like all other persons, enjoy the right to
the highest attainable standard of health, which means that prison authorities should
take practical measures to protect the physical integrity and the health of persons who
have been deprived of their liberty. Failure to provide adequate health care or medical
368 C.J. Chivers, “An Uzbek Survivor of Torture Seeks to Fight It Tacitly,” New York Times, September 24, 2010,
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/25/world/europe/25umarov.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 (accessed September 11, 2014).

369 Sanjar Umarov, “Op ed: Uzbekistan Deserves Better,” Los Angeles Times, August 15, 2012,
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/15/opinion/la-oe-umarov-uzbekistan-human-rights-20120815 (accessed September 11, 2014).

370 C.J. Chivers, “An Uzbek Survivor of Torture Seeks to Fight It Tacitly,” New York Times, September 24, 2010,
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/25/world/europe/25umarov.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 (accessed September 11, 2014).

371 UN Standard Minimum Rules, art. 26.

treatment to a detainee in prison may contribute to conditions amounting to inhuman or
degrading treatment.372
States have an obligation to ensure access to health facilities, goods, and services to all
persons, including prisoners, without discrimination on the basis of their political or other
status. Governments also have obligations to “refrain from denying or limiting equal access
for all persons, including prisoners or detainees to preventive, curative, and palliative health
services” and to abstain from “enforcing discriminatory practices as state policy.”373
Many family members or representatives of several current wrongfully imprisoned

individuals told Human Rights Watch that prisoners suffer serious health ailments in
prison, sometimes as a result of inadequate medical treatment or harsh, unhygienic
conditions.374 Medical check-ups are routinely not provided, even when prisoners manifest
serious illnesses. In far too many cases, prison officials have outright refused to provide
badly needed medical attention.
372 UN Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, principles 1 and 24.
373 UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, “Substantive Issues Arising in the Implementation of the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,” General Comment No. 14, The Right to the Highest
Attainable Standard of Health, E/C.12/2000/4 (2000), para. 34. States also have an obligation to ensure access to core
minimum standards of the right to health, especially for vulnerable or marginalized groups. CESCR General Comment 14
paras 43 and 44. Prisoners are also mentioned in para 34. The Human Rights Committee has repeatedly determined that the
ICCPR requires governments to provide “adequate medical care during detention.” Pinto v. Trinidad and Tobago
(Communication No. 232/1987), Report of the Human Rights Committee, vol. 2, UN Doc A/45/40, p. 69. The Committee
against Torture has also found that failure to provide adequate medical care can violate the CAT’s prohibition of cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment. UN Committee against Torture, “Concluding Observations: New Zealand,” (1998) UN Doc.
A/53/44, para. 175. Also, Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Republic of Moldova, CCPR/CO/75/MDA,
2002,
http://docstore.ohchr.org/SelfServices/FilesHandler.ashx?enc=6QkG1d%2fPPRiCAqhKb7yhsmq1D%2b4Wvg6LhA1iuk%2bH
o%2bUUl%2f18PqzftybICPY5yac8piWATK8r2LWbh%2fu4BHKEHg9hC51fvbu3iIbqdvejmeXapVvM%2f0qY73OwlMa9OJ3P,
(accessed September 11, 2014), para. 9.
374 Chapter II, Profiles of Azam Farmonov, Mehriniso Hamdamova, Isroiljon Kholdorov, Gaybullo Jalilov, Ganikhon
Mamatkhanov, Chuyan Mamatkulov, Bobomurod Razzakov, Akzam Turgunov, Solijon Abdurakhmanov, Muhammad Bekjanov,
Yusuf Ruzimuradov, Dilmurod Saidov, Murod Juraev, Samandar Kukanov, Rustam Usmanov, Akram Yuldashev, and Erkin
Musaev.

The case of the late rights Rights activist Abdurasul
activist Abdurasul Khudoynazarov died only 26 days
following his release from prison in
Khudoynazarov illustrates the 2014 on the same day that officials
tragic consequences of this diagnosed him with advanced liver
practice. Khudoynazarov cancer. He told rights groups before
his death that officials consistently
served eight years of a nine- denied his requests for medical
year sentence during which he treatment since his imprisonment in
2006. © Ezgulik
told relatives he was
repeatedly tortured, moved
from prison to prison, and
denied medical treatment despite his deteriorating health. In April 2011 Khudoynazarov’s
wife reported that he looked pale and weak and was suffering serious headaches and
rheumatism in his legs.375 When his family met again with him in June 2013, he was thinner,
more withdrawn, and unwilling to converse and had contracted additional health problems,
including bronchitis.376 On May 31, 2014, the same day a court ordered his release on
health grounds, Khudoynazarov was diagnosed with stage-four liver cancer, lymphoma,
severe tuberculosis, and acute hemorrhoids.377 He died just three weeks later.
Khudoynazarov’s wife told Human Rights Watch that during much of prison sentence, but
especially in the last year of his life, he constantly appealed to prison officials for medical
treatment. However, the authorities did not react. “It was only once his condition had
become critical, and his tuberculosis and cancer had gotten out of control, that they let
him out in order to die,” she said.378
Such failures to provide timely medical attention may constitute inhuman or degrading
treatment, as they unnecessarily exacerbate the suffering of prisoners.379
Despite signs that prison conditions aggravate the illnesses of all prisoners, in the cases
documented by Human Rights Watch, prison officials consistently fail to ensure that
harmful conditions are improved or move sick prisoners to facilities less likely to
375 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with “Tursuna T.,” Gulistan, April 17, 2011.
376 Ibid, August 23, 2013.

377 “Uzbekistan: Critically Ill Activist Freed,” Human Rights Watch news release, June 6, 2014,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/06/05/uzbekistan-critically-ill-activist-freed.
378 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with “Tursuna T.,” Gulistan, June 26, 2014.
379 Rick Lines, “The right to health of prisoners in international human rights law,” International Journal of Prisoner Health,
vol. 4, no.1, March 2008, pp. 22-24.

exacerbate their illnesses. Relatives of the formerly
imprisoned human rights defender Norboi Holjigitov
reported in early 2011 that prison authorities at least
twice ignored his requests to be transferred to a prison
hospital despite the clear deterioration health,
including worsening diabetes, the appearance of
gangrene in his leg, and a severe viral infection.380
This lack of oversight falls foul of international

standards requiring that prison medical officials report
cases in which prisoners’ health will be harmed by
Former prisoner Norboi Kholjigitov,
president of the Ishtikhan branch of
continued imprisonment, that medical officials regularly
the Human Rights Society of inspect prisons and alert prison officials to substandard
Uzbekistan in Samarkand province,
conditions, and that prison officials take action to
following his release from prison in
2011. He developed diabetes during remedy the shortcomings.381 The combination of lack of
his incarceration. © 2011 Bahtiyor treatment and unchanged conditions described in
Hamraev
testimonies collected by Human Rights Watch suggests
a deliberate disregard for the health of prisoners.
International standards state that records of prisoners’ medical examinations should be

kept and that prisoners should have access to their records.382 However, representatives
of individuals imprisoned on politically motivated charges and their families said that
they were repeatedly denied access to information about their health. The lack of
information adds to the emotional hardship of family members, who find themselves
uninformed and powerless as they witness the decline in health of a loved one. Obid
Saidov, remarking on the continued imprisonment and worsening tuberculosis on his
brother Dilmurod told Human Rights Watch that his brother “is no longer living, but
merely existing.”383
380 “Uzbekistan: Free Ailing Rights Defender,” Human Rights Watch news release, June 22,
2011,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/06/22/uzbekistan-free-ailing-rights-defender; “Uzbekistan: Imprisoned Activist Reportedly
Attempts Suicide,” Wikileaks, November 4, 2008, http://www.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08TASHKENT1269_a.html
381 UN Standard Minimum Rules, arts. 24(1) and 25(2).
382 UN Body of Principles, No. 26.

383 Ibid.

Denying Early Release, Prolonging Prison Time
Article 221 of Uzbekistan’s Criminal Code creates the offense of “disobedience to
legitimate orders of administration of institution of execution of penalty” often referred to
as “violations of prison rules.” There is, however, no definition of “legitimate orders” in
the Criminal Code and no publicly available list of prison rules. Therefore, there is no way
of knowing what actions might constitute disobedience of a “legitimate order.” The
nonexistence of guidance on what a legitimate order is, or what rules and regulations
apply in prison, means that article 221 can be and is used arbitrarily, as the basis to
continue and, as shown below, even extend a person’s incarceration.
Arbitrary Denial of Amnesty

When confronted by allegations of torture and prisoner abuses during reporting before UN
treaty bodies or in negotiations with Western governments, Uzbek officials often point to the
fact that each year, in connection with Uzbekistan’s national independence and Constitution
Day celebrations, several thousand prisoners are released under amnesties.384 The
amnesties are usually reserved for those convicted of less serious offenses and for specific
demographic categories such as teenagers, women, and prisoners over 60.385 But
individuals imprisoned on politically motivated charges, even those over 60, are regularly
denied amnesty year after year for alleged “violations of prison rules.”
Infractions used as a basis for denying amnesty have included “saying prayers,” “going to
the bathroom without prior permission,” “failure to keep one’s slippers in the proper
place,” and “wearing a white shirt”.
Human Rights Watch research indicates that prison officials have wide discretion over
whom to release under amnesty and are sometimes instructed from above to find
384 “More than two thousand people released in Uzbekistan under amnesty,” Trend, July 1, 2013,
http://en.trend.az/regions/casia/uzbekistan/2166480.html (accessed August 1, 2014). “According to the decree of the

Senate, the amnesty first of all should be applied to those whose crimes do not represent a danger to society, including the
women under 18, men over 60 and foreign nationals. In addition, the amnesty covered the disabled persons the first and
second groups, and those who suffer from serious illnesses, as well as people who committed the crime because of
negligence and were convicted for the first time. The amnesty was also applied to the persons who were for the first-time
convicted of involvement in terrorist organizations, those who have not committed any serious crimes and have
embarked on the path of correction. The senate banned the application of amnesty to those who were sentenced to
imprisonment for life, who were convicted of murder, and those who committed particularly serious crimes” (emphasis
added).
385 Ibid.

justifications to keep persons imprisoned on politically motivated charges and other
inmates incarcerated despite their eligibility.
A former senior prison official who worked for seven years at both men’s and women’s
prisons in Tashkent told Human Rights Watch that prison authorities are often instructed
to find reasons to deny amnesty to those prisoners who would otherwise be eligible,
especially those convicted on politically motivated charges:
Each year, GUIN [the Main Directorate of the Administration of Punishments]

would pressure us to keep in prison prisoners who should have been
entitled to release under amnesty. Officials in the Ministry of Internal Affairs
[which is in charge of GUIN] and the SNB try to maintain certain levels of
incarceration to justify their budgets. They often won’t allow prisoners to be
amnestied who are considered political at all, even if their families are
prepared to pay bribes.
When I worked at the women’s prison colony [in Zangiota] in my first two
years I looked after a group of inmates all year. There was a prisoner who
had served her four-year sentence for prostitution without any violations.
When it came time to prepare for the amnesty I got her paperwork ready for
release. She was a model prisoner and had her children to return to. But my
superiors said, “Find some kind of a violation [of prison rules]. She needs
to stay in longer.” I tried to resist and insisted on having a written order to
follow in order to do this, but they threatened to fire me.
Later I transferred to several other prisons and I saw that we did this to
almost all prisoners convicted on charges of article 159 [“anti-constitutional
activity”], and anyone regarded to be a jihadist [jihodchi] or in the political
opposition. 386
386 Human Rights Watch interview with “Nafisa N.,” Istanbul, March 21, 2014.

Sentence Extensions for “Violations of Prison Rules”
In addition to denying eligibility to political prisoners
for early release under amnesty, authorities, in
combination with the SNB, regularly extend the
prison sentences of imprisoned rights activists,
journalists, political opposition figures, and
individuals imprisoned on charges of so-called
“religious extremism.” Out of the 34 current and 10
former prisoners whose cases are documented in
this report, Human Rights Watch found that at least Writer and opposition figure
Mahmadali Mahmudov was released in
14 have had their sentences arbitrarily extended in
2013 after serving over 14 years on
prison, some on several occasions. 387 Such trumped-up charges of extremism. He
extensions may add years to a sentence and occur as suffered torture and had his sentence
extended in prison. © Association for
a rule without due process. Human Rights in Central Asia
As with denial of amnesty, the primary means for

extending sentences is to charge a prisoner with “violations of prison rules.” Our research
indicates that authorities have based multi-year extensions of sentences on minor,
insignificant, or absurd alleged infractions, such as “failure to lift a heavy object,”
“wearing a white shirt,” “failing to properly place one’s shoes in the corner,” and “failing
to properly sweep the cell.”
While the general regulations on the administration of prisons, issued by the Ministry of
Internal Affairs, set out a range of behaviors that prisoners are both required to and
prohibited from engaging in, they leave wide range for determining what constitutes a
“legitimate order” that should not be disobeyed. The guidelines also are not
comprehensive as to what would constitute “violations” under article 221 that form the
basis of sentence extensions. Human Rights Watch is not aware of any publicly available
source that alerts prisoners to what all these “violations” might be. The government did
not reply to our request for such information and none of the former prisoners, family
members of prisoners, or their lawyers could provide Human Rights Watch with any source
that sets out or defines the full scope of potential “violations.”
387 The 14 are: Isroiljon Kholdorov, Gaybullo Jalilov, Abdurasul Khudoynazarov, Mahmadali Mahmudov, Ganikhon
Mamatkhanov, Nosim Isakov, Muhammad Bekjanov, Murod Juraev, Gayrat Mikhliboev, Erkin Musaev, Zafarjon Rahimov,
Rustam Usmanov, Samandar Kukanov, and Dilorom Abdukodirova.

Indeed, our interviews with numerous former prisoners, their lawyers, civil society activists,
and a senior prison official demonstrate that prison officials interpret broad regulations
arbitrarily and in an entirely ad hoc fashion, as a pretext to extend sentences or deny
amnesty eligibility and thereby punish those imprisoned on politically motivated charges.
Extension hearings, which often occur as

summary hearings within a prison, are closed
to the public. Human Rights Watch knows of
no cases where prisoners had access to their
counsel of choice or had a meaningful
opportunity to challenge the decision.
Mutabar Tadjibaeva, a former political
prisoner in Uzbekistan until her release in
2008 and now the head of the Fiery Hearts
Club, told Human Rights Watch that she does
not know of a single case when a political
prisoner charged with “violations of prison
rules” and has been able to successfully
prove his or her innocence. 388
Prison guards tortured rights activist and

former prisoner Mutabar Tadjibaeva (center) In several cases, Human Rights Watch
during her nearly three years of imprisonment documented family members being informed
in Tashkent Women’s Prison. She now lives in
by prison officials of a pending sentence
Paris, France. © 2013 Fiery Hearts Club
extension which had not yet taken place but
which was treated as a foregone conclusion.
Nadejda Atayeva, president of the Association for Human Rights in Central Asia told Human
Rights Watch,
The illegal extension of sentences for political prisoners, some of whom

have been behind bars for well over fifteen years, shows the particular
cruelty of Uzbekistan’s criminal justice system. Several of these men, such
as Murod Juraev, Samandar Kukanov, and Solijon Abdurakhmanov, are
388 Human Rights Watch interview with Mutabar Tadjibaeva, Brussels, March 20, 2014.

elderly and in ill-health. Continuously extending their sentences effectively
condemns them to die behind bars.
While Human Rights Watch is unable to determine the number of such extensions that
have occurred in politically motivated and other cases, Human Rights Watch has regularly
received credible reports of arbitrary prison sentence extensions over many years. Rights
activists Surat Ikramov and Vitaly Ponomarev, who have monitored the practice for close to
two decades, report that the practice may affect thousands of prisoners.389
According to Ikramov, “There has long been an unspoken policy of using extensions
[prodleniya] to keep political prisoners and anyone who could be seen as a threat to the
regime incarcerated as long as possible, sometimes indefinitely. Their imprisonment
continues while they slowly succumb to illness, inhumane treatment, and the deplorable
conditions in which they are held.”390
Another particularly cruel aspect of the extensions is that they can occur within weeks of
the very end of a prisoner’s sentence, which may in some cases have been five or more
years. Families told Human Rights Watch that this inflicts a powerful psychological and
moral blow to the prisoner and his or her loved ones who have awaited the prisoner’s
release for years.
The disproportionately long sentences meted out to persons imprisoned on politically

motivated charges, the vague and arbitrary fashion in which they are announced and
extended, and the sense that extensions in political cases may constitute cruel, inhuman,
or degrading punishment are in violation of Uzbekistan’s international obligations.
Extensions of sentences may also result in a decision to transfer a prisoner from his or her
current place of detention to a prison in an altogether different region of Uzbekistan, which
can compound the already great financial difficulties facing the families of individuals
imprisoned on politically motivated charges who must raise transportation funds to visit
their imprisoned relatives.
389 Human Rights Watch interview with Vitaly Ponomarev, Brussels, March 22, 2014; Human Rights Watch telephone
interview with Surat Ikramov, Tashkent, January 29, 2014.

390 Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Surat Ikramov, Tashkent, January 29, 2014.

Lack of Adequate Monitoring and Complaint Mechanisms
The Uzbek prison system lacks adequate oversight mechanisms and fails to provide
effective means for individuals imprisoned on politically motivated charges as well as
other prisoners to voice complaints. Officials do not remedy abuses that are brought to
their attention, allowing abysmal conditions to persist while those responsible benefit
from total impunity. Such failings violate Uzbekistan’s international obligations to offer
effective and confidential remedies to victims of human rights abuses.391
Former prisoners and the family members of current

prisoners said the Uzbek government bodies tasked
with responsibility for monitoring conditions and
investigating complaints inside prisons, including the
Office of the Ombudsperson for Human Rights and the
government-controlled National Center for Human
Rights, are neither independent nor effective and
mostly ignore or redirect complaints among various
government agencies. Left with no other remedy for
abuses, many individuals imprisoned on politically
75 year-old rights activist motivated charges undertake hunger strikes and other
Turaboi Juraboev was sentenced drastic measures to call attention to their treatment.392
to 5 years imprisonment in 2013
and suffered torture in custody
However, these actions are often met with further
before later being amnestied. reprisals by prison officials.
© Fiery Hearts Club
Uzbekistan’s Universal Periodic Review and in the

November 2013 Conclusions of the UN Committee
against Torture note Uzbekistan’s failure to make independent forensic medical
examinations available to prisoners who allege instances of torture or ill-treatment.393
391 “Every prisoner shall be allowed to make a request or complaint, without censorship as to substance but in proper form,
to the central prison administration, the judicial authority or other proper authorities through approved channels.” UN
Standard Minimum Rules, art. 36, para. 3.
392 The late rights activist and former political prisoner Abdurasul Khudoynazarov declared a hunger strike in 2008 in
response to harsh conditions and ill-treatment and grew so desperate that he tried to commit suicide later that year.
393 UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, Uzbekistan, A/HRC/24/7, July 5,
2013, http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G13/154/79/PDF/G1315479.pdf?OpenElement (accessed September

11, 2014); UN CAT “Concluding Observations,”

Compounding these problems, Uzbekistan is entirely closed to human rights monitoring.
In April 2013 the ICRC suspended its observer activities at detention facilities in
Uzbekistan due to interference from the government with its standard operating
procedures, which the ICRC stated had rendered its visits with detainees “pointless.”394
Local and international human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch, are
prohibited from carrying out human rights fact-finding missions.
394 “Uzbekistan: ICRC decides to terminate visits to detainees,” International Committee of the Red Cross, April 12, 2013,
http://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/news-release/2013/04-12-uzbekistan-detainees.htm (accessed September

11, 2014).

IV. International Responses to Uzbekistan’s Policy of
Politically Motivated Imprisonment
There are no political prisoners in Uzbekistan! People are subjected to

criminal liability not for their beliefs, but for concrete actions
—Akmal Saidov, director of the Uzbek government-controlled National
Center for Human Rights during the Universal Periodic Review of Uzbekistan,
24th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, Geneva,
September 19, 2013
The Uzbek government has faced virtually no consequences in its relations with
international actors for its persistent refusal to acknowledge its imprisonment of its
perceived opponents on politically motivated charges, to release them from prison, to
improve their treatment in custody, or to end the cycle of crackdown, arrests, and
convictions. Nor has the government faced concrete consequences for its systematic
failure to cooperate with international institutions tasked with improving or monitoring
human rights conditions such as the United Nations Human Rights Committee and the UN
Committee against Torture, or the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).
The European Union and the United States have publicly criticized Uzbekistan’s atrocious
rights record in past years, most strongly in the immediate aftermath of the 2005 Andijan
massacre, placing sanctions and restrictions on Uzbekistan. Some EU and US officials
have also raised the cases of some of the current and former prisoners described in this
report. However, their criticism and public diplomacy have softened over the past five
years, most markedly since the lifting of EU sanctions in October 2009, which was followed
by a loosening of restrictions by the US government on military assistance to Tashkent in
January 2012. Tashkent’s failure to release and end its abuses of individuals imprisoned
on politically motivated charges has not substantially affected its relationships with
Washington, Brussels, or other European capitals, as most actors prioritize Uzbekistan’s
geostrategic importance as a transit route in the context of the war in Afghanistan.
When faced with sustained external pressure, including sanctions, restrictions on military
assistance, and other robust, public, specific criticism from high-level diplomats, the

Uzbek government has responded in different periods by taking incremental steps, such
as releasing political prisoners, often on the eve of bilateral summits or high-level visits.
These episodes demonstrate the importance and effectiveness of public pressure and
proactive engagement on human rights in Uzbekistan. In particular, Uzbekistan’s civil
society activists have noted that Tashkent has shown more willingness to engage on the
release of prisoners during periods when it has faced substantial pressure from external
actors and that the momentum on prisoner releases has decreased substantially by
contrast with those periods when international actors have opted for a “quieter” or more
conciliatory approach.395
United Nations
For over 12 years the Uzbek government has denied access to all 11 UN experts who have
requested invitations, including the UN special rapporteurs on the situation of human
rights defenders and on torture, and has failed to comply with recommendations by
various expert bodies. The Uzbek government has taken a similar stance with respect to
the ICRC and other international human rights organizations seeking to monitor conditions
in the country. In April 2013, due to government interference into its standard operating
procedures, the ICRC took the unusual step of publicly announcing its decision to suspend
its prison visitation program.
On April 24, 2013, Uzbekistan underwent the second cycle of Universal Periodic Review
at the sixteenth session of the UN Human Rights Council. A number of the
recommendations made by Australia, France, Slovakia, the United Kingdom, and the UK
called on the government to immediately and unconditionally release those they called
Uzbekistan’s political prisoners and respect its commitments on freedom of expression,
assembly, and association. The US delegation recommended for Uzbekistan to “initiate
395 See, for example, “The Uzbek Regime Had Been Forced to Deal with European Union Sanctions; Their Cancellation Takes
Away the EU’s Leverage To Influence Human Rights Situation [Режим Узбекистана был вынужден считаться с санкциями
Евросоюза, их отмена лишает ЕС рычагов влияния на ситуацию с правами человека в Узбекистане],” post to Nadejda
Atayeva blog, April 2, 2008, http://nadejda-atayeva.blogspot.com/2008/04/blog-post_2.html (accessed August 1, 2014),
includes chart of political prisoner arrests and releases. The association’s analysis reveals that at the height of EU sanctions,
2005-2006, 13 political prisoners, including rights activists and journalists, were released. But as sanctions were gradually
lessened in 2007 and 2008 the number of releases drops to 5 (despite the existence of dozens in custody), and then drops
to zero in 2009-2010, the year following the lifting of all remaining EU sanctions. The number of releases then rose back to 3
or 4 per year during 2011-2014. Human Rights Watch interview with Surat Ikramov, Bishkek, July 18, 2014.

prompt, thorough and independent investigations
of all torture allegations and end politically
motivated prosecutions by ensuring all trials
conform to obligations under the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”396
During the outcome session of the Universal

Periodic Review in September 2013, Uzbek officials
categorically declared that “there are no political
prisoners in Uzbekistan” and rejected most
recommendations on key human rights issues,
stating that they “do not correspond to … reality.”397
Kasan prison colony 64/51 in the The UN Human Rights Council has a clear mandate
southern province of Kashkadarya. In to “address situations of violations of human
2013 the International Committee of the
rights, including gross and systematic violations
Red Cross announced it would stop
monitoring places of detention in and make recommendations thereon.” The Uzbek
Uzbekistan, citing authorities’ government’s systematic failure to engage
interference with its standard working
meaningfully with human rights mechanisms—as
procedures. © Association for Human
Rights in Central Asia demonstrated by its longstanding denial of access
to special procedures, its refusal to implement
recommendations made by special procedures and treaty bodies, and the approach of
denial and obfuscation it exhibited during its second UPR in April 2013 and the fifty-first
session of the UN Committee against Torture—warrants a strong Human Rights Council
response. The council should condemn unequivocally the gross and systematic human
rights violations by the Uzbek government and establish, without delay, a country-specific
monitoring mechanism that would allow for sustained and proactive engagement by the
council on the human rights situation in Uzbekistan.
396 UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, Uzbekistan, A/HRC/24/7, July 5,
2013, http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G13/154/79/PDF/G1315479.pdf?OpenElement (accessed September

11, 2014), para. 136.42.
397 Ibid, paras. 50 and 138.

European Union
The EU and its member states’ position on political prisoners and the overall human
rights situation in Uzbekistan is weak, with only rare public expressions of concern in
recent years about the government’s deteriorating record and no policy consequences
for Tashkent’s failure to meet the EU’s reform expectations articulated by EU foreign
ministers in 2010.398
In the immediate aftermath of the 2005 Andijan massacre, the EU, along with the US
government, various UN bodies, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe,
and the NATO Council called for an independent international inquiry into the events and
for accountability for those government officials found responsible.399 Yet Uzbek
authorities responded with a refusal to cooperate and renewed persecution of civil
society that included the arrest of more than 20 well-known human rights activists,
journalists, and political opposition figures, several of whom are still in prison.400
In response, the EU imposed sanctions on Uzbekistan in October 2005, including a visa

ban on 12 Uzbek officials, an arms embargo, and a partial suspension of the Partnership
and Cooperation Agreement, the framework that regulates the EU’s relationship with
Uzbekistan.401 As noted above, while continuing to defy the EU’s core demands for human
rights improvements, the Uzbek government engaged in response to EU sanctions on the
issue of political prisoners by making some releases, often in connection with various
rounds of the EU’s sanctions review process. Between 2005 and 2009, the EU
incrementally eased the sanctions despite the Uzbek government not meeting the human
rights criteria attached to them.
398 Conclusions of the EU General Affairs and External Relations Council, 2971st Council Meeting, October 27, 2009,
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/gena/110805.pdf (accessed September 11, 2014)

(lifting all remaining EU sanctions toward Uzbekistan).
399 Human Rights Watch, Saving Its Secrets: Government Repression in Andijan, p.13.
400 Human Rights Watch email correspondence with Nadejda Atayeva, August 21, 2013.
401 European Union, “Council Common Position of 14 November 2005 concerning restrictive measures against Uzbekistan,”
2005/792/CFSP, Official Journal L 299/72, December 16, 2005, http://eur-

lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2005:299:0072:0079:EN:PDF (accessed September 11, 2014); “General
Affairs and External Relations,” Council of the European Union press release, C/05/242, October 3, 2005,
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=PRES/05/242&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLangu
age=en (accessed September 11, 2014).

On October 27, 2009, the EU lifted the remaining arms embargo, the last component of the
sanctions, referring to “positive steps” taken by the Uzbek government.402 These included
“efforts to improve detention conditions, the introduction of habeas corpus, the
ratification of conventions[,] … continuation of judicial reform,” Uzbekistan’s “active
participation” in the EU Rule of Law Initiative, and “the consolidation of the dialogue on
human rights between the EU and Uzbekistan.”403
However, these “positive steps” were overshadowed by a fresh round of politically

motivated arrests, including those of independent journalist Dilmurod Saidov, prominent
human rights defenders Ganikhon Mamatkhanov and Farkhodkhon Mukhtarov, as well as
six journalists from Irmoq magazine. At the same time, the European Court of Human
Rights continued to rule that to send a detainee to Uzbekistan would be a breach of the
prohibition on exposing an individual to the risk of torture, enshrined in article 3 of the
European Convention on Human Rights.404
In January 2011 NATO and European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso hosted
President Karimov in Brussels as a gesture of renewed engagement. Barroso issued a
statement critical of Uzbekistan’s human rights record, even mentioning several political
prisoners.405 He also reiterated the need for the Uzbek government to fulfill the human
402 “Conclusions of the EU General Affairs and External Relations Council,” 2971st Council Meeting, October 27, 2009,
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/gena/110805.pdf (accessed September 11, 2014).

403 Ibid.
404 Council of Europe, European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 4 November
1950, ETS No.5. Consistently the European Court of Human Rights has held that ill-treatment has been a persistent problem
in Uzbekistan with “no concrete evidence … produced to demonstrate any fundamental improvement in this area in this
country for several years.” The court therefore concluded “that ill-treatment of detainees is a pervasive and enduring
problem in Uzbekistan.” Sultanov v. Russia, European Court of Human Rights, no. 15303/09, judgment of November 4, 2010,
para. 71; Karimov v. Russia, European Court of Human Rights, no. 54219/08, judgment of July 29. 2010, para. 99; Isakov v.
Russia, European Court of Human Rights, no. 14049/08, judgment of July 8,2010, para. 109; Yuldashev v. Russia, European
Court of Human Rights, no. 1248/09, judgment of July 8, 2010, para. 84; Garayev v. Azerbaijan, European Court of Human
Rights, no. 53688/08, judgment of June 10, 2010, para. 72; Muminov v. Russia, European Court of Human Rights, no.
42502/06, judgment of December 11, 2008, para. 94; Ismoilov and Others v. Russia, European Court of Human Rights, no.
2947/06, judgment of April 24, 2008, para. 122; Yakubov v. Russia, no. 7265/10, European Court of Human Rights, judgment
of November 8, 2011.
405 “Statement of European Commission President José Manuel Barroso following his meeting with the President of
Uzbekistan Islam Karimov,” European Commission press release, MEMO/11/40, January 24, 2011,
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-11-40_en.htm?locale=en (accessed September 11, 2014); Letter from Human
Rights Watch to European Commission President Barroso on Uzbek President Islam Karimov’s Visit to Brussels, January 19,
2011, http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/01/19/letter-european-commission-president-barroso-uzbek-president-islam-
karimov-s-visit-b.

rights criteria articulated by EU foreign ministers. But his statement stopped short of
outlining the specific policy consequences that would follow absent improvements.406
Copy of an official complaint

written in prison by late rights
activist Abdurasul
Khudoynazarov. In late 2013,
additional time was added to his
prison sentence for “violations of
prison rules.” ©Association for
Human Rights in Central Asia
While the EU has repeatedly stated that closer relations are contingent on progress on
human rights, it has not followed through with any known policy consequences in
response to Uzbekistan's consistent failure to make concrete, demonstrable progress.
With the adoption on June 25, 2012 of a comprehensive human rights package, EU foreign
ministers made a pledge to prioritize human rights in EU policy at home and abroad.407
The commitments made in the strategic framework on human rights further obligate the EU
to take principled, public positions on Uzbekistan’s abysmal human rights record. The true
test of the commitments made in the framework will be whether the EU will make good on its
promise to throw its “full weight behind advocates of liberty, democracy, and human rights.”
406 Several months later, the Uzbek Supreme Court liquidated Human Rights Watch’s Tashkent office registration, expelling
the organization from the country, despite that the continued operation of Human Rights Watch in Uzbekistan had been a
specific human rights criteria outlined by the FAC. “Uzbekistan: Government Shuts Down Human Rights Watch Office,”
Human Rights Watch news release, March 16, 2011, http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/03/15/uzbekistan-government-shuts-
down-human-rights-watch-office.
407 The EU human rights package consists of a strategic framework on human rights and democracy, an EU action plan, and a
decision to appoint an EU special representative on human rights. EU foreign ministers pledged that human rights,
democracy, and rule of law will be promoted “in all areas of the EU's external actions without exception” and that the EU will
“place human rights at the center of its relations with all third countries including strategic partners.” Catherine Ashton said
upon adoption of the package: “Human rights are one of my top priorities and a silver thread that runs through everything
that we do in external relations…”

The EU and its member states need to be prepared to impose meaningful policy
consequences when expectations on reform are not fulfilled. EU member states should set
a clear timeline for the government to heed, once and for all, the EU’s human rights criteria
or face concrete consequences, including targeted restrictive measures against Uzbek
government agencies and individual officials who are engaging in egregious, ongoing
abuses.408 The EU and its member states should also be prepared to support the
establishment of a country-specific mechanism on the human rights situation in
Uzbekistan within the UN Human Rights Council.
United States
In recent years, the US government has avoided attaching any serious policy
consequences for Uzbekistan’s failure to improve its overall abysmal human rights record,
including its continuing failure to release political prisoners and continuing imprisonment
of civil society activists. The Obama administration views Uzbekistan as a critical part of
the Northern Distribution Network (NDN) through which it has sent nonlethal supplies to
Afghanistan since 2009.
The Department of State has long documented Uzbekistan’s atrocious rights record, and
beginning in 2004, Congress restricted assistance to Uzbekistan, including military aid,
based on the absence of “substantial and continuing progress” in its human rights
record.409 It escalated those restrictions after the Andijan events and helped organize an
airlift and resettlement to the US of hundreds of Uzbek refugees who fled from the violence
into neighboring Kyrgyzstan.410
In 2006, and each year since, the State Department has designated Uzbekistan a “Country
of Particular Concern” (CPC) based on the findings of the bi-partisan Commission on
408 The European Parliament set a rare, positive example in December 2011, when it rejected a reduction of EU textile tariffs
until Uzbekistan grants access to the International Labor Organization to monitor the cotton harvest and takes concrete
steps to end forced child labor. It is only in this context that one can then set forth a strategy that will successfully guide EU-
funded projects on the rule of law.
409 FY 2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act 2004 (H.R. 2673), US Congress, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-
108hr2673enr/pdf/BILLS-108hr2673enr.pdf (accessed September 11, 2014), sec. 568(a).

410 In 2006, the Senate introduced a condition that the Uzbek government should permit an international investigation of
violence against civilians in Andijan in May 2005. In fiscal year 2008, the Senate added another condition that if the
Secretary of State had credible evidence that Uzbek officials might be linked to the “deliberate killings of civilians in
Andijon … or for other gross violations of human rights,” (P.L. 110-161), these individuals would be ineligible for admission to
the US.

International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), which found that Uzbekistan systematically
violates religious freedom. USCIRF’s annual reports have repeatedly documented the
pervasive practice of torture against thousands of persons in pretrial detention and prison
who are accused of, or sentenced on charges of, “religious extremism” and “anti-state”
crimes.411 While the CPC designation envisages the possibility of sanctions targeting
sectors other than humanitarian or educational assistance, the executive branch has
elected each year to waive them.
Beginning in 2008-2009, the US significantly deepened its engagement with Uzbekistan,

prioritizing its role as a transit route for the Northern Distribution Network and viewing it as
an important alternative to what were viewed as unstable supply lines through Pakistan.
This engagement culminated on January 18, 2012 in a deeply troubling move, preceded by
no human rights improvements, when the Obama administration exercised the authority
Congress granted it to waive rights-related sanctions and restart military aid to Tashkent.412
Farkhodkhon Mukhtarov and

wife, Surayo, five days after his
release from prison in December
2010. His release came one day
after US Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton publicly promised
to raise cases of imprisoned
human rights activists with
President Karimov during a visit
to Tashkent. © 2010 Steve
Swerdlow/Human Rights Watch.
At the same time, the Uzbek government has exhibited a pattern of providing some human
rights concessions in advance of high-level negotiations with the US. In advance of then-
Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s visit to Tashkent in December 2010, and following her
411 United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, “USCIRF Annual Report 2013 - Countries of Particular
Concern: Uzbekistan,” April, 30 2013, http://www.refworld.org/docid/51826ef316.html (accessed September 11, 2014).

412 Human Rights Watch, World Report 2013, (New York: Human Rights Watch, 2013), Uzbekistan chapter,
http://www.hrw.org/world-report/2013/country-chapters/uzbekistan?page=2.

public remarks prior to her visit that she would raise the issue of imprisoned rights
activists with President Karimov, authorities released rights activist Farkhodkhon
Mukhtarov.413 Before her official visit to Uzbekistan in October 2011, authorities released
both human rights activist Norboi Holjigitov and journalist Jamshid Karimov, who had been
held in forced psychiatric detention.414 In June 2013, 12 US senators signed a letter to
President Karimov raising the cases of imprisoned journalists and human rights defenders
Akzam Turgunov, Dilmurod Saidov, and Solijon Abdurakhmanov and demanding their
immediate and unconditional release.
Despite these positive developments, the absence of concrete policy consequences for the
Uzbek government’s continued refusal to heed such demands or implement promised
reforms, as well as the US’s prioritization of the NDN in its relations with Uzbekistan, have
hobbled prospects for meaningful engagement on human rights issues.
The US should more robustly make freedom of assembly, expression, and association an
integral and regular part of all bilateral engagement with Uzbekistan. It should publicly
and regularly urge the release of activists, human rights defenders, and journalists
prosecuted on politically motivated charges. It should also push Tashkent to reform Uzbek
statutes such as those on religion, libel, and insult that limit the space for freedom of
expression, assembly, and association in the country.
Unless Uzbekistan demonstrates immediate and measurable progress on human rights,

including on its use of politically motivated arrests and imprisonment, the US government
should discontinue the waiver of restrictions in the Leahy amendment, which ban military
assistance to the Uzbek government on human rights grounds. Furthermore, in the context
of discussions regarding freedom of religion, and in line with Uzbekistan’s “CPC” status,
the US should be prepared to follow through on the sanctions recommended by the
designation absent concrete, demonstrable progress. The US should also be prepared to
support the establishment of a country-specific mechanism on the human rights situation
in Uzbekistan within the UN Human Rights Council.
413 “Uzbekistan: Activist’s Release Shows Sustained Pressure Works,” Human Rights Watch news release, December 4, 2010,
http://www.hrw.org/news/2010/12/04/uzbekistan-activist-s-release-shows-sustained-pressure-works-0.
414 Joanna Lillis, “Uzbekistan & Tajikistan: Visiting Clinton Offers NDN Appreciation, Cautions on Religious Rights,”
Eurasianet.org, October 24, 2011, http://www.eurasianet.org/node/64366 (accessed September 11, 2014); Catherine A.
Fitzpatrick, “Uzbekistan: Karimov's Nephew Released from Psychiatric Prison?” Eurasianet.org, November 28, 2011,
http://www.eurasianet.org/node/64588 (accessed September 11, 2014).

Recommendations
To the Government of Uzbekistan

• Immediately and unconditionally release all persons whose cases are detailed in
this report and all other prisoners held for peaceful expression of their political
views, civil society activism, journalistic activity, or religious views. To the extent
that any such individuals are also alleged to have engaged in acts of violence, they
should be granted a new and fair trial according to international standards.
• Take immediate steps to eliminate torture and ill-treatment in pretrial detention

and penal facilities, including by ensuring unhindered access to counsel at all
stages of investigations, ensuring prompt access to appropriate medical care and
re-establishing the independent monitoring of prisons.
• Ensure fair trials for all defendants. Promptly investigate all allegations of
judicial procedural violations and ensure that judges take into account allegations
of torture and witnesses’ allegations of coercion on the part of investigators,
exclude all evidence procured through the use of torture or ill-treatment, and
thoroughly investigate allegations of fabrication of evidence.
• Provide families of all prisoners with full information regarding the location and
current health conditions of their relatives. Rigorously investigate all allegations of
intimidation or reprisals against family members and prisoners who communicate
with journalists, human rights defenders, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs).
• Investigate and hold to account all officials, security service personnel, and
penal system staff alleged to have tortured or ill-treated prisoners and detainees or
denied requests for medical care.
• Comply with the United Nations Convention against Torture and other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and ratify the Optional Protocol
to the Convention against Torture, which requires Uzbekistan to permit visits by
the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (SPT) and to establish an independent national
preventive mechanism for the prevention of torture at the domestic level.
• Immediately and fully implement the November 2013 recommendations of the UN

Committee against Torture and the February 2003 recommendations issued by

the UN special rapporteur on torture following his visit to Uzbekistan in 2002,
including the immediate closure of Jaslyk prison 64/71.
• Approve the pending requests by eleven UN special procedures to visit

Uzbekistan, including the UN special rapporteur on torture; allow unimpeded
independent monitoring of prisons by the International Committee of the Red
Cross and other independent monitors.
• Cease the practice of arbitrarily exempting prisoners held on politically

motivated charges who qualify for amnesty from annual amnesty declarations and
of arbitrarily lengthening of prison sentences for minor offences or “violations of
prison rules” under article 221 of the criminal code on “disobedience to the terms
of punishment.”
• Clarify and bring into line with international standards overbroad criminal
articles such as article 158 on “threatening the president,” article 159 on
“threatening the constitutional order,” and article 244(2) on “forming, leading, or
membership in an extremist, fundamentalist, or otherwise banned organization,”
which are frequently manipulated to target people expressing their legitimate right
to freedom of expression, speech, or religion.
• Remove criminal responsibility for libel and insult (articles 139 and 140 of the
criminal code, respectively) in line with international standards and protect
freedom of speech and expression.
• End the crackdown on civil society and allow human rights defenders, journalists,
and others to operate free from harassment or other forms of undue government
interference. Allow local human rights groups to register and re-register foreign
NGOs that were liquidated or otherwise forced to cease operating in Uzbekistan,
including through granting visas and accreditation to their staff.
To the European Union and EU Member States

• Given Uzbekistan’s appalling human rights record and persistent failure to meet
the human rights criteria articulated by EU foreign ministers, EU member states and
institutions should urgently take up the human rights situation in Uzbekistan
with a view to devising an appropriate policy response.

Specifically, EU Member States and Institutions Should
• Consider concrete measures to give real, practical meaning to the Foreign
Affairs Council’s (FAC) pledge to make “the depth and quality” of the relationship
directly “depend[ent] on Uzbek reforms and progress.”
• The EU High Representative and EU foreign ministers should set a timeline for
Uzbek government compliance with the FAC human rights criteria and consider
the specific policy consequences that would follow should it not, such as
instituting targeted restrictive measures against Uzbek government entities
and individuals responsible for grave human rights violations in the country.
Such measures should include imposing visa bans and asset freezes with respect
to individuals responsible for torture and ill-treatment and the impunity with which
these abuses occur, the imprisonment of human rights defenders, journalists, and
political opposition figures, and the repression and harassment of independent
civil society.
Other Specific Measures the EU Should Take

• Given the Uzbek government’s failure to cooperate with UN human rights bodies
and the continued pattern of serious and widespread human rights violations in
Uzbekistan, support the establishment by the Human Rights Council of a
country-specific mechanism in the form of a special rapporteur on the
situation of human rights in Uzbekistan.
• Press the Uzbek government to permit the registration of local human rights
groups and the re-registration of foreign NGOs, including through granting visas
and accreditation to their staff.
• Representatives of the EU diplomatic mission and of EU member states in Tashkent

should monitor closely and respond to the Uzbek government’s record of
politically motivated imprisonment, harassment of human rights defenders,
and torture, including through regular contact with local rights groups, monitoring
of trials, raising and following up with the authorities on concerns about specific
cases, and requesting periodic visits to places of detention.
• Raise concerns related to politically motivated imprisonment, torture, and due

process violations at every opportunity, including but not limited to the EU-
Uzbekistan human rights dialogue, making publicly available the specific

questions raised during the dialogue in this regard and the concrete steps the
Uzbek government should take to address the concerns of the EU and EU member
states in this area.
To the United States

• Given Uzbekistan’s persistent refusal to make “substantial and continuing
progress” in its human rights record as outlined in the Consolidated
Appropriations Act or to meaningfully address the egregious abuses documented
by the US Department of State in its annual country reports on human rights and
by the US Commission on International Religious Freedom, the US government
should urgently place the human rights situation in Uzbekistan more
prominently on its bilateral agenda.
• Set a timeline within which the Uzbek government is expected to undertake

concrete human rights improvements.
• Make clear specific policy consequences that will follow if it does not. Such
consequences should include imposing targeted restrictive measures such as
asset freezes and visa bans (some of which already exist) against Uzbek
government entities and individuals responsible for grave human rights violations
in the country, including those responsible for torture and ill-treatment, politically
motivated imprisonment, and the harassment of independent civil society.
Other Specific Measures the US Should Take

• Immediately cease all security assistance programs, including direct military
aid, to the Uzbek government until it takes meaningful steps to combat torture and
address other human rights abuses.
• Given the Uzbek government’s failure to cooperate with United Nations human
rights bodies and given the continued pattern of serious and widespread human
rights violations in Uzbekistan, support the establishment by the Human Rights
Council of a country-specific mechanism in the form of a special rapporteur on
the situation of human rights in Uzbekistan.
• Press the Uzbek government to permit the registration of local human rights
groups and the re-registration of foreign NGOs, including through granting visas
and accreditation to their staff.

• US embassy officials should monitor closely and respond to the Uzbek
government’s record on politically motivated imprisonment, harassment of
human rights defenders, and torture, including through regular contact with local
rights groups, monitoring of trials, and requesting updated information on the
condition of individuals already in prison; keeping records of allegations of torture;
raising with the authorities concerns about specific cases; and requesting periodic
visits to places of detention.
• Raise concerns related to politically motivated imprisonment, torture, and the

harassment and repression of civil society activists at every opportunity of US-
Uzbek dialogue, including but not limited to the US-Uzbekistan Annual Bilateral
Consultations, making publicly available the specific questions raised and the
concrete steps the Uzbek government should take to address US concerns in this area.
• Lift the waiver in place on existing sanctions, including a ban on visits to the US
by high-level officials, which are outlined in the designation by the State
Department that Uzbekistan is a “country of particular concern” for its systematic
violations of religious freedom, including for the use of torture.
To the United Nations

• Given the Uzbek government’s failure to cooperate with United Nations human
rights bodies and the continued pattern of serious and widespread human rights
violations in Uzbekistan, the Human Rights Council should establish a country-
specific mechanism in the form of a special rapporteur on the situation of
human rights in Uzbekistan.
• Relevant UN special procedures, including the special rapporteurs on torture

and on the situation for human rights defenders, should renew their pending
requests for invitations to visit Uzbekistan and use every opportunity to
highlight concern and request information from the Uzbek government in the form
of public press releases, urgent appeals, and communications about the situation
in Uzbekistan relating to their mandates.
• Relevant UN treaty bodies should take up concerns relating to the arrest,

detention, torture, and imprisonment of persons on politically motivated charges
and to the failure of judicial reforms in all periodic reviews of Uzbekistan,
building on the welcome emphasis on these issues by the Human Rights Committee

and Committee against Torture, as reflected in their respective concluding
observations resulting from their 2007, 2010, and 2013 reviews of Uzbekistan.

Acknowledgements
This report was researched and written by Steve Swerdlow, researcher in the Europe and
Central Asia Division of Human Rights Watch, and representative of Human Rights Watch’s
Tashkent office until the Uzbek government forced its closure in spring 2011.
Viktoriya Kim, coordinator in the Europe and Central Asia Division in 2009, conducted
preliminary research and several interviews for the report. Daniel Sheron, acting
coordinator in the Europe and Central Asia Division, researched and helped write case
profiles and provided invaluable assistance on several sections of the report.
The report was edited by Hugh Williamson, director of the Europe and Central Asia Division,
and by Tom Porteous, deputy program director in the Program Office. Allison Gill, senior
advisor to the Europe and Central Asia Division provided crucial editorial guidance. Veronika
Szente Goldston, Europe and Central Asia Division advocacy director, reviewed and provided
comments on the summary, recommendations, and international responses section. Aisling
Reidy, senior legal advisor at Human Rights Watch, conducted the legal review.
Production assistance was provided by Annkatrin Tritschoks and Kaitlin Martin, senior
associates in the Europe and Central Asia Division, Grace Choi, publications director,
Kathy Mills, publications specialist, and Fitzroy Hepkins, administrative manager.
Human Rights Watch expresses its deep gratitude and respect to the relatives of current
prisoners, former political prisoners, civil society activists, and organizations who agreed
to tell us about the realities persons imprisoned on politically motivated charges face in
Uzbekistan. Human Rights Watch would like to acknowledge the invaluable assistance and
contributions of a number of human rights activists and organizations in and outside of
Uzbekistan, including the Association for Human Rights in Central Asia, Memorial, the Fiery
Hearts Club, the Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan, the Human Rights Alliance, the
Initiative Group of Independent Human Rights Defenders, Frontline, the Committee to
Protect Journalists, the International Federation for Human Rights, Amnesty International,
and others. Human Rights Watch also extends our great appreciation to a number of
volunteers, including relatives of prisoners, who assisted our efforts to obtain data and
photos from individuals in prisons on politically motivated charges. We cannot name them

because doing so could endanger them, but we are deeply indebted for their help and
acknowledge the personal risks they took in assisting our research.
This report is dedicated to the courageous representatives of Uzbekistan’s independent

civil society, both at liberty and in custody, across various professions and generations,
who continue to work for human rights, justice, accountability, and change.

The Uzbek government has arbitrarily imprisoned thousands of individuals on political or (above) Individuals formerly
religious grounds to enforce its repressive rule since the early 1990s. The victims include imprisoned on politically motivated
human rights activists, journalists, political opposition activists, religious leaders and charges in Uzbekistan
believers, cultural figures, artists, entrepreneurs, and others imprisoned for the peaceful (front cover) Individuals currently
exercise of their freedom of expression. imprisoned on politically motivated
charges in Uzbekistan
Based on more than 150 in-depth interviews and analysis of recently obtained court
documents, “Until the Very End”: Politically Motivated Imprisonment in Uzbekistan profiles
the cases of 34 of Uzbekistan’s most prominent individuals imprisoned on politically
motivated charges. Those interviewed include 10 individuals previously imprisoned on such
charges.
The prisoners whose cases this report documents have experienced a wide range of human
rights violations, including denial of access to counsel, incommunicado detention, pretrial
and post-conviction torture, abusive and prolonged solitary confinement, the denial of
appropriate medical care, and the arbitrary denial of amnesty and extension of prison
sentences. Human Rights Watch calls on the Uzbek government for their immediate and
unconditional release.
Uzbekistan’s international partners, including the United States, the European Union and EU
member states, and UN Human Rights Council, should convey clearly to Tashkent, both in
public and in private, the urgent need for concrete human rights improvements, including
the release of all those imprisoned on politically motivated charges.
hrw.org

Uzbekistan0914 ForUpload 0

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Uzbekistan0914 ForUpload 0

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Uzbekistan0914 ForUpload 0

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

H U M A N

R I G H T S “Until the Very End”

For more information, please visit our website: http://www.hrw.org

“Until the Very End”

Key Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 9

I. Politically Motivated Imprisonment in Context: 25 Years of Repression ..........................14

II. Profiles of Individuals Imprisoned on Politically Motivated Charges.............................. 22

III. Prison Abuses and the Arbitrary Extension of Sentences ............................................. 84

IV. International Responses to Uzbekistan’s Policy of Politically Motivated Imprisonment

Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... 119

© 2014 Human Rights Watch

I HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | SEPTEMBER 2014

Agents of Uzbekistan’s feared National Security Services, the “SNB,” kidnapped

1 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | SEPTEMBER 2014

Human Rights Watch research demonstrates that individuals imprisoned on politically

• At least 29 have made credible allegations of torture or ill-treatment during their

• At least 18 have been denied access to counsel at critical stages of the

“UNTIL THE VERY END” 2

• In at least one case, authorities have forcibly disappeared a prisoner, failing to

3 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | SEPTEMBER 2014

The abuses suffered by those imprisoned on politically motivated charges in Uzbekistan

“UNTIL THE VERY END” 4

Uzbekistan’s Criminal Code creates the offense of “disobedience to legitimate orders of

Compounding the above abuses, there is no adequate monitoring of places of detention in

5 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | SEPTEMBER 2014

The governments traditionally viewed as champions of the cause of human rights in

“UNTIL THE VERY END” 6

Despite the Uzbek government’s resistance to acknowledge the problem, international

7 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | SEPTEMBER 2014

“UNTIL THE VERY END” 8

To the Government of Uzbekistan

• Take immediate steps to eliminate torture and ill-treatment in pretrial detention

• Immediately and fully implement the November 2013 recommendations of the UN

• Approve the pending requests by 11 UN special procedures to visit Uzbekistan,

9 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | SEPTEMBER 2014

• Cease the practice of arbitrarily exempting prisoners held on politically

• Set a timeline for the Uzbek government to address longstanding human

“UNTIL THE VERY END” 10

• When visiting Uzbekistan, foreign officials should insist on meeting individually

• In pursuing any dialogue with the Uzbek authorities, whether on economic

• The release of persons imprisoned on politically motivated charges and other

11 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | SEPTEMBER 2014

“UNTIL THE VERY END” 12

13 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | SEPTEMBER 2014

Dismantling the Political Opposition (1992-1997)

1 Human Rights Watch, Human Rights in Uzbekistan, May 1993, http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/05/01/human-rights-

“UNTIL THE VERY END” 14

15 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | SEPTEMBER 2014

Persecution of Independent Muslims (1997-present)

The government aimed to eliminate a perceived threat of Islamic fundamentalism and

“UNTIL THE VERY END” 16

Andijan and its Aftermath

Human Rights Watch, Creating Enemies of the State.

2008),” Memorial Human Rights Center, (Moscow: 2009), p. 10.

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/05/14/uzbekistan/index.html?eref=sitesearch (accessed September 11, 2014).

17 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | SEPTEMBER 2014

Searching for New Enemies

“UNTIL THE VERY END” 18

How Many People Are Imprisoned on Politically Motivated Charges?