|
Allies of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
on Trial in Tashkent
Trial of the members of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
(IMU) accused of performing terrorist acts in the Uzbek capital
in February 1999 and committing other crimes lasted through
the first half of November in Tashkent. The case for prosecuting
Tokhir Yuldashev, Jumaboi Khojiev (Namangani), Salai Madaminov
(Muhammad Solikh), Murodilla Kaziev, Ulugbek Babajanov, Khamidjan
Rakhmonov, Yuldash Umarov, Najmiddin Jalolov, Shavkat Karimov,
Ulugbek Makhmudov, Olimjon Abduvokhidov and Usman Shukurov
was transferred form the prosecutor’s office to the Supreme
Court of Uzbekistan on October 26. The corresponding notice
emphasized that the legal requirement of providing defence
to the accused should be strictly followed1.
The odd thing about the proceedings was that only three of
the accused were in the dock: Ulugbek Makhmudov, Olimjon Abduvokhidov
and Usman Shukurov, while the others were tried externally,
since they were outside the country2.
The defendants were prosecuted on the basis of more than ten
articles of the Criminal Code of Uzbekistan, including the
attempt at overthrowing constitutional order of the republic,
murder, burglary, brigandage, etc3.
Already in the first days of the proceedings the defendants
pled guilty, but the process, nevertheless, continued in its
due course. Uzbek press was full of detail from depositions
of the victims. Here is one of the cited passages: "medical
doctor Khojaeva also told of her grief. On that day (February
16) her brother did not come home. After all searches she
found his body in morgue. The corpse was torn to shreds. She
was given a sack with pieces of human body of which she composed
hands, ears, both feet and toes of her brother. She also appealed
to the court to convict the criminals to the capital punishment"4.
Victims have been testifying for about a week, and on November
6 the criminals who had previously been convicted for various
felonies began to give evidence. For instance, Murodjon Ashurov
admitted that in 1996-97 together with Kozim Zokirov he committed
many acts of banditry and murder in Andijan Province. Proceeds
gained from brigandage were sent to a special camp in Tajikistan
where terrorists and saboteurs were trained5.
Further on the Namangan resident Salokhiddin Khamidov also
testified that after he "had stolen large amounts of
public property", he "went over to the terrorist
camp in Tajikistan"6.
Previously convicted criminals testified in unison to the
activities and atrocities committed by Jumaboi Khojiev (Namangani).
According to the available information, the key figures of
the trial Tokhir Yuldashev and Jumaboi Khojiev (Namangani)
now stay in Afghanistan protected by the Taliban leaders,
and Salai Madaminov (Muhammad Solikh) received political refuge
in Norway7. The former two
are known mainly by their activism in organizing armed resistance
on the territory of the Ferghana Valley and other regions
of Uzbekistan, while Muhammad Solikh, who never directly participated
in armed combat, was the principal ideological instigator
of the campaign aimed at the assassination of the Uzbek President
and overthrowing constitutional order in the republic8.
On November 13 during the trial session pleadings took place.
From the prosecution side spoke E. Kudratov, Deputy Prosecutor
General of Uzbekistan, who declared that in the course of
litigation the guilt of the defendants was completely proved.
This was testified by the depositions of victims and witnesses,
material evidence, expertise and video materials. At the same
time, prosecution noted that "nine defendants are hiding
from justice, which provides one more proof of their guilt"9.
Public Prosecutor’s demand was drastic: for Olimjon Abduvokhidov
and Usman Shukurov -- 20 years of imprisonment; for others
-- capital punishment; the property of all of them is to be
confiscated. Social prosecutors fully supported the demand
of the Public Prosecutor and commented that "those who
committed those crimes shall inevitably by despised and hated
by our people"10. Appearances
of attorneys, which, according to press, were rather impotent
as such, did not produce any impact neither on court, nor
on public.
Finally, on November 17 the court collegium for criminal
cases brought in the verdict. The verdict was announced by
Deputy chairman of the Supreme Court of Uzbekistan Bakhtiyor
Jamolov. The sentence was considerably milder than that demanded
by the Public Prosecutor. Only Tokhir Yuldashev and Jumaboi
Khojiev (Namangani) were convicted to capital punishment,
other defendants were sentenced to different terms of imprisonment:
from 12 to 20 years. Minimum terms were given to the defendants
actually present at the trial. The property of all the accused,
according to the verdict, shall be confiscated11.
The resounding proceedings that lasted two weeks is over.
What has been its not only legal, but also political outcome?
It should be noted that the trial was preceded by a propaganda
campaign aimed to establish unambiguous opinion of the defendants.
Newspapers cited public representatives who condemned the
defendants. "They betrayed our people, our sacred religion
and therefore deserve the ultimate punishment", thus
spoke M. Turgunov, head of the city department of public education12.
Similar publications accompanied the trial itself. "Hatred
of the victims is immeasurable", the "Oila va Jamiyat"
newspaper wrote13. "As
the trial proceeds", the "Khurriyat" newspaper
asserted, "the conscience of citizens is also being purged"14.
The "Fidokor" newspaper of November 7 was full of
soul-rendering stories of the witnesses. Practically all newspapers
of Uzbekistan took part in the condemnation campaign.
Certainly, terrorists and murderers deserve the most severe
condemnation, however, an unbiased look on the proceedings
causes a number of questions. Firstly, the political implication
of the trial is plainly evident, since the key defendants
were not present. According to the "Kommersant-daily",
"the trial without the presence of most of the accused
can evidently pursue only one objective: to use the court
decision as basis for negotiating extradition of the IMU leaders
by other countries"15.
Secondly, the result of the trial could be predicted from
the very beginning, and the entire event turned into a purely
ideological campaign aimed to threaten even more anyone who
may dare engage in any anti-government activism (even if it
may be just in the form of propaganda). At the same time,
such measures, apparently, get less and less effective. For
instance, a month earlier, in Kashkadarya Province the trial
of the 25 members of the religious movement "Hezb-ut
Tahrir" was completed. The accused were distributing
leaflets and carrying out propagandistic work. Most of the
defendants were younger than 30. The court sentenced them
to different terms of imprisonment16.
But has the trial resolved any other problems besides purely
legal? It seems that until the key reason for people’s involvement
with the opposition to the government is considered "lack
of ideological principles and indifference of the public"17,
the ranks of allies of both religious movements and militant
terrorist groups are going to multiply.
1"Narodnoe Slovo", October 26, 2000.
2"Fidokor", October 31, 2000.
3"Narodnoe Slovo", November 1, 2000.
4"Adolat", November 3, 2000.
5"Pravda Vostoka", November 7, 2000.
6Ibid.
7"Kommersant-daily", November 1, 2000.
8"Nezavisimaya gazeta", October 31, 2000.
9"Narodnoe Slovo", November 14, 2000.
10 Ibid.
11"Narodnoe Slovo", November 18, 2000.
12"Uzbekiston Ovozi", October 28, 2000.
13"Oila va Jamiyat", November 14, 2000.
14"Khurriyat", November 8-14, 2000.
15"Kommersant-daily", November 1, 2000.
16"Mahalla", October 18, 2000.
17"Uzbekiston Ovozi", October 28, 2000
|
