UN RAPPORTEUR ON TORTURE COMMENTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS CONDITIONS IN UZBEKISTAN, AZERBAIJAN
Q&A With Sir Nigel Rodley: 7/20/01

The human rights climate in both Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan has come under growing scrutiny of late. The governments of both countries have moved to curtail freedom of expression in recent weeks, effectively silencing independent information outlets. In Azerbaijan, for example, Faig Zulfulgarov, head of the ABA television channel in Baku announced July 18 that government pressure was forcing him to cease broadcasts. He went on to announce that he intended to seek political asylum in the United States. Meanwhile, the Uzbek government has become notorious for a far-reaching crackdown on religious freedom. EurasiaNet recently posed questions about the human rights climate in both Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan to Sir Nigel Rodley, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture. Rodley is also a professor of law at the University of Essex in Great Britain, and a member of the Human Rights Centre at the same university. His written responses to EurasiaNet’s questions follow:

EurasiaNet: In April, the UN Human Rights Committee reviewed the report of the government of Uzbekistan regarding its compliance with the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights. As we understand it, Committee members spoke out strongly against arbitrary detention and the death penalty in Uzbekistan, but received evasive and unsatisfactory answers. What leverage is now available to the Committee to press the Uzbek government for accountability for these actions?

Rodley: The Committee's Concluding Observations, formulated as a response to the dialogue between the Committee and the State Party's delegation, expressed its concerns in respect of a broad range of human rights issues, including those mentioned in your question. (These may be found on the UN Human Rights Website.) You will see that the Committee has asked for information on these issues within 12 months.

EurasiaNet: Last year, you and the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention submitted a request to the Uzbek government for access to prisons. UN protocol requires the government to have responded by December 2000, but the deadline has passed and the government is still ostensibly "considering" the request. What can be done to secure an immediate response, specifically an invitation to conduct an investigation?

Rodley: I have had meetings with the Permanent Representative of Uzbekistan in New York (in October 2000), and the Head of the delegation to the Human Rights Committee (in March 2001; see above), in which I clarified the nature and modalities of such a mission. No invitation has yet been received. Any institution or individual is free to use whatever influence they may have with the authorities to urge the issuance of an invitation.

EurasiaNet: Last year, you conducted an investigation of allegations of torture and other forms of ill treatment in Azerbaijani places of detention. Among other measures, you recommended that, "In view of the numerous allegations of torture and ill-treatment by law enforcement personnel, the State party should take all necessary steps to prevent the crime of torture and other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." Are you aware of any steps the government of Azerbaijan has taken to implement this recommendation since the report’s submission? What additional pressure can be brought to bear to promote implementation?

Rodley: The visit took place in May 2000 and the report was issued in November 2000. Accordingly, it is early days for any substantive response. The authorities have, however, brought to the UN's attention some changes in the law that were underway at the time of the visit. Of particular concern is the apparent lack of any intention to change the system whereby the detention premises of the Ministry of National Security serve as a place if initial detention and pre-trial detention, thus putting detainees in the hands of the same (feared) body for a protracted period.

EurasiaNet: You have conducted investigations into allegations of torture in many different countries. Is there anything distinctive about what you saw in Azerbaijan, such as the nature or the scope of abuse, government reaction to UN pressure, or the involvement of the non-governmental sector in combating the practice?

Rodley: I am reluctant to make comparisons, but I can say that the authorities seem sensitive to the concerns of the international community. My own visit was an example of that, as was the conclusion of an agreement granting access by the International Committee of the Red Cross soon after the visit. There was an encouragingly active NGO community, which contributed much to the efficacy of the visit.

EurasiaNet: The University of Essex has seen many students from the Caucasus and Central Asia pass through the classrooms of the Human Rights Centre. What is your impression of them as a group, and how do you evaluate prospects for their work, given that virtually all are returning home to precarious, and even dangerous legal practices?

Rodley: I have been consistently impressed by the calibre of the students we have received from the region. In fact, our top student last year was a young man from Uzbekistan. Most do, I think, appear to return to professional lives in their countries of origin, and I haven't heard of anything untoward befalling them.

Email this article
Posted July 20, 2001 © Eurasianet
http://www.eurasianet.org

	The Central Eurasia Project aims, through its website, meetings, papers, and grants, to foster a more informed debate about the social, politcal and economic developments of the Caucasus and Central Asia. It is a program of the Open Society Institute-New York. The Open Society Institute-New York is a private operating and grantmaking foundation that promotes the development of open societies around the world by supporting educational, social, and legal reform, and by encouraging alternative approaches to complex and controversial issues. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the position of the Open Society Institute and are the sole responsibility of the author or authors.