Alternative report

46. Ignoring international law, Uzbekistan extradited a citizen of Canada, Husein Jalila, formerly a Chinese national, to China.
47. Although current laws and international conventions and treaties stipulate that foreign citizens are not subject to Uzbekistan's judiciary, some foreign citizens were taken to court in Uzbekistan for offences committed outside of Uzbekistan. This was done in violation of international law.
48. Materials collected during the IGNPU monitoring of trials in Tashkent include cases such as those of an extradited citizen of Kyrgyzstan, Mr. Khusnuddin Juraev (born 1977) who was sentenced to 19 years of prison under 11 articles of Uzbekistan's Criminal Code and Mr. Kasim Ermatov (born 1966), an extradited citizen of Afghanistan who in September 2004 was sentenced to 18 years of prison under 11 articles of the Criminal Code. Both were subjected to severe torture during the investigation. The trial was a closed one, and a lawyer was not allowed during the investigation and the trial.
49. The following have been sentenced to long terms of imprisonment and are currently serving their sentences at KIN 64/21 in Bekabad (Tashkent Oblast):
Mr. Bekjon Ortykov, a citizen of the Kyrgyz Republic
Mr. Mukhtor Zoirov, a citizen of Tajikistan
Mr. Igderbay Amanmuratov, a citizen ot Turkmenistan
Mr. Ne'matullo Rakhimi, a citizen of Afghanistan
Mr. Valeriy Parijer, a citizen of the Russian Federation
Mr. Shukrullo Gafar ugli, a citizen of Afghanistan
Mr. Nikolay Tyutikov, a citizen of the Russian Federation
50. Persons serving their sentences at KIN 64/21 are persecuted, subjected to torture and pressure by the administration of the penal institution. They are not allowed to contact international organizations, embassies of their countries, the government of Uzbekistan, or foreign mass media.
According to a telephone report from a reliable source at KIN 64/21, on 5 April 2007 an inmate at that penal institution, Mr. Bakhtiyor Khasanov (born 1962), former military prosecutor in Surkhandar'ya Oblast, who was convicted for violation of Article 273 of the Criminal Code as a result of a fabricated criminal case, died in Bekabad City Hospital after severe torture.
51. In November 2005 a well-known Uzbek religious leader, Mr. Rukhiddin Fakhruddinov, and eight followers of Imam Obidkhon Nazarov were detained in Shymkent (Kazakhstan) and then secretly sent to Uzbekistan, where they were subjected to severe torture and, in 2006, were sentenced to long terms of imprisonment. Four of these people had contacted the Almaty office of UNHCR requesting international protection; their applications were being reviewed at the time of the incident.
52. In December 2005 on the territory of Kyrgyzstan Uzbekistan's special services detained Mr. Kabul Parpiev, a leader of the Andijan uprising, and his 41 supporters, who were secretly taken to Uzbekistan. Later forged documents were produced, claiming that these people were detained on Uzbekistan's territory. All detainees were subjected to severe torture and sentenced by the Supreme Court of Uzbekistan.
53. On 26 March 2006 imam Husein Jalil, a religious leader originally from Kashgar (China) and now a citizen of Canada, was arrested in Uzbekistan. After his release from prison in 1998 Mr. Jalil spent some time in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, where he married Ms. Kamila Tulaboeva, an Uzbek citizen. The family with four children later moved to Turkey and in 2001 they relocated Canada as refugees. In 2005 Mr. Jalil was granted Canadian citizenship. In February 2006 the dissident Mr. Jalil took his family to Tashkent to visit his wife's parents, who were ill. At the request of the Chinese government, charges of terrorism and murder were fabricated in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan with tacit consent of the governments of Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. In violation of international law, Uzbekistan refused to issue a visa for a Canadian consul who was planning to visit the country to discuss the arrest of a Canadian citizen with Uzbek authorities. On 26 June 2006 Mr. Husein Jalil was extradited to China, where he was subjected to severe torture and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

Classification of acts of torture as offences under the national criminal law. (CAT Article 4)

54. Article 235 of the Criminal Code "Use of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment" states the following:
"The use of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, i.e. subjecting the suspect, defendant, witness, victim or another party in the criminal procedure, a convict serving a term in prison, or their families to unlawful mental or physical treatment by means of threats, battery, beating, torture, subjecting them to distress or by the use of other unlawful actions by an investigator, prosecutor, or another officer of law-enforcement agencies or penal institutions with the purpose of obtaining information or a confession of crime, exercising unauthorized punishment, or coercing them into certain actions shall be punished by correctional labor of up to three years or imprisonment of up to three years.
The same actions carried out:
а) with the use of violence of danger to a person's life or health or with the threat of using such violence;
b) due to reasons based on ethnic, racial, religious, or social discrimination;
с) by a group of people;
d) repeatedly;
е) against a minor or a woman who was obviously pregnant to the perpetrator, shall be punished by imprisonment of three to five years.
f) actions described in the first and second sections of this article leading to grievous bodily harm or other grievous consequences shall be punished by imprisonment of five to eight years and the revocation of certain rights.”
55. According to the Criminal Code of Uzbekistan, liability for preparing and attempting a crime is based on the same article of the Code's Special Section as the completed crime (Article 25).
56. Article 40 of the Code states that "the person who commits a crime following orders or instructions that are knowingly criminal, shall be subject to liability without special considerations".
57. Although both the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure along with relevant resolutions of the Supreme Court state that torture is punishable, presiding judges fail to examine proven acts of torture by MIA and NSS officers.
58. For example, the use of torture was established during the 14 November 2006 trial of Mr. Komiljon Usmanov, who was charged with an offence on religion-related grounds. The claim of torture was supported by the defendant and the witnesses, his cellmates, with whom the defendant had no prior acquaintance. In the basement of GUVD in Tashkent the defendant, Mr. Usmanov, was suspended head down, with his hands tied, while sending electrical current through his earlobes. However, the judges of Tashkent's Criminal Court, Mr. Sharipov, Ms. Mirsagatova, Mr. Shodmonov, and Mr. Rasulov did not decree an investigation of these acts of torture.
59. The practices and methods of torture used against suspects, defendants, and convicts include the following:
- inserting needles under fingernails and toenails, pulling out fingernails;
- hitting the head, body and legs with a rubber club;
- sending high-voltage electrical current through the body;
- pouring boiling water over a naked body;
- raping by penetrating the anus with a rubber club;
- punching the person on the stomach, liver, and kidneys;
- exposing a naked person to the temperature of -20 degrees Celsius in winter or +40 degrees Celsius in summer for prolonged periods;
- forcing to sit on glass bottles of various sizes;
- putting salt and pepper on wounds on the body, hands, feet, and the head;
- confining a person in solitary 2x2-meter cells made out of cement and pouring water inside;
- confining a person in punitive isolation wards (ShIZO) without food and water;
- forbidding to observe religious practices and to pray in prisons and penal institutions;
- putting a gas mask on a person and cutting off the supply of oxygen;

60. Similar methods of torture are used on men, women, and children:
Ms. Rakhima Akhmadalieva (born 1961), a mother of five children. On 17 March 2001 she was sentenced to 7 years of imprisonment for her religious beliefs, in January 2004 she was amnestied, and on 7 March 2005 she was again detained and is now serving at KIN 64/7 in Tashkent. After the arrests she was held in the basement of MIA and in a NSS pre-trial facility, where she was subjected to cruel torture by MIA officers in "torture chambers". During 35 days out of 54 days of her detention she was subjected to various acts of torture:
а) she was placed on a stationary chair with her hands handcuffed over the back of the chair, while four officers hit her with metal rods on the body, arms and legs;
b) her hands and feet were tied to an iron bed, while cloths soaked in a saline solution were placed on bleeding wounds;
c) she was beaten with a rubber club and dragged on the floor by her hair;
d) after she was undressed men were invited into her cell to rape her while she was handcuffed;
Only 54 days later she was transferred to MIA's Tashtyurma Pre-trial Facility No. 1.
Similar acts of torture were used against minors:
61. Mr. Ibrohim Sarifjanovich Mirzajanov (born 1983) was arrested without warrant by militia officers in 1999, charged on grounds of his religious convictions, and sentenced to 7 years of imprisonment. He was subjected to torture after his detention, during the investigation, and while he served his sentence. He was amnestied in 2001 and detained again by MIA officers in June 2002 on grounds of a fabricated case. During the investigation he was repeatedly subject to torture, then sentenced to 4 years of imprisonment. He has since been released.
62. Mr. Aleksandr Konstantinovich Talibov (born 1987) was detained in 2004 by the officers of Yunus-Abad ROVD in Tashkent, charged under a fabricated murder case with the purpose of gaining possession of his parents' apartment. After the detention and during the investigation he was subjected to severe torture. During trial the defendant's guilt could not be established. In 2005 he was sentenced to 8 years of imprisonment, on 13 March 2006 he was released under an amnesty, and on 13 November 2006 he was detained again, beaten by militia officers from the Yunus-Abad ROVD and accused of "banditry" and "rape or a minor" under a case fabricated for the purpose of extortion. His guilt could not be established in court. The investigation was conducted in the absence of a lawyer, and the trial was held in the absence of a public prosecutor. The Yunus-Abad Court in Tashkent sentenced him to 16 years of prison.
63. Aysha Fakhruddinova is a six-year-old daughter of imam Rukhiddin Fakhruddinov, a religious leader who is well-known in Tashkent. On 31 March 2006 she was raped by a person named Kalandarov while the imam was under investigation after being charged with violating 9 articles of the Criminal Code (even after being subjected to severe torture the imam refused to confess to the crimes fabricated by MIA's CAI). The rape was arranged by MIA officers with the purpose of putting pressure on Mr. Fakruddinov, who was forced to admit some of the charges. The defendant's lawyer, Mr. Rustam Tulyaganov, was excluded from the investigation and was not allowed into the courtroom. A closed trial was held.
Measures of procedural enforcement taken by Uzbekistan against offenders under Article 4 of the Convention.

(CAT Article 6)

64. People detained on suspicion of a criminal offence are often held in MIA pre-trial facilities for months at a time without any charges, without a court order or access to a lawyer, while the family of the detainee is not informed about the detention.
65. When issuing arrest warrants prosecutors sometimes fail to review the materials of the case or to interrogate suspected or accused offenders in person. Moreover, some public prosecutors are not present during some parts of the trial or are absent completely, which contradicts relevant norms of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
66. Prosecutors contribute to fabricating criminal cases investigated by MIA and NSS and approve crime sheets for fabricated criminal cases.
67. Mr. Umid Kuradov (born 1987), was arrested without a warrant on 6 March 2006 by GUVD officers in Tashkent. Severe torture was used against the detainee, who was placed in the GUVD pre-trial facility. His parents were not informed about the detention until March 8th. Militia officers demanded 600 US Dollars from the parents for the release of their son, which prompted the parents to contact NSS. The detainee was held in custody for 10 days without any charges pressed against him and without a court order.
68. Ms. Khamida Tursunmatova (born 1976) and Ms. Saida Mamurova (born 1947), were arrested without a warrant on suspicion of membership in Hizb ut-Tahrir; subjected to torture during investigation; public prosecutor was absent during trial; a closed trial was held. The defendants' attorneys claimed in court that the case was fabricated. Acts of torture were proven in court, but on 3 August 2005 the court sentenced the defendants to 7 and 5.5 years of imprisonment respectively.

Education and information regarding the prohibition against torture.

(CAT Article 10)

69. The level of education within MIA agencies is inadequate, with most militia officers and prison wardens lacking legal training. Many of them graduated from secondary schools or universities with degrees in agriculture, history, linguistics, economics, etc.
70. Surveys and observations have shown that not even a single MIA officer can define "torture", while most militia officers and prison wardens believe that "torture" are part of their responsibilities and that their commanders expect them to use torture when necessary.
71. In an interview with IGNPU an officer with the criminal investigation department of Khorezm Oblast UVD openly stated that the use of torture is necessary to uncover crimes.
72. Members of MIA staff are not involved in workshops and trainings on human rights, standards of international law, and prevention of torture among suspects, defendants, and convicts.
73. The academies and secondary educational institutions of MIA do not offer any formal training on human rights and international human rights conventions signed by the Government of Uzbekistan.
74. Because they are controlled by the executive branch of government and due to lack of freedom of speech, Uzbekistan's mass media do not raise issues related to torture, human rights, and international law. The Human Rights Commissioner of the Oliy Majlis (Parliament), i.e. the Ombudsman, does not help build public awareness with regard to human rights; the same can be said of the National Human Rights Center. Brochures that are published in limited quantity do not make any significant impact. They are used to give the impression that the issue of human rights is addressed. Meanwhile, flagrant human rights violations in Uzbekistan are being ignored.
75. Since the country gained independence in 1991, the government and law-enforcement agencies have been persecuting human rights NGOs, independent human rights defenders and journalists, who are beaten, attacked, placed on house arrest, and taken to militia offices by force. This demonstrates that the government is unwilling to help build the awareness of MIA officers and the public. Instead, it persecutes human rights defenders and journalists for informing the public and the international community on the human rights situation in Uzbekistan.
Arrest, detention and custody, or imprisonment. (CAT Article 11)
76. Article 226 of the Code of Criminal Procedure "Terms of Detention" says the following: "Detention shall not last longer than 72 hours after the delivery of the detainee to the facilities of militia or another law-enforcement agency." "In exceptional cases a court order can be used to take the suspect into custody as a restraint measure. In this case a charge must be brought against the suspect within ten days from the day of detention. Otherwise the restraint shall be lifted and the person freed from custody."
However, law-enforcement authorities regularly disregard these norms for arrests, detentions, and terms of detention:
77. Mr. Kholmurod Jalolov (born 1971), father of four children, native of Margilan (Fergana Oblast) went to Tashkent in search of a job. In February 2006 he was detained by MIA officers on suspicion of being affiliated with Hizb ut-Tahrir. His parents found out about their son's detention six months later. Mr. Jalolov's lawyer claims that terms of detention were violated during detention and the case was fabricated. Mr. Jalolov was convicted by the Tashkent Court.
78. Ms. Feruza Juraeva (born 1982), a religious person, resident of Parkent Rayon in Tashkent Oblast. On 8 October 2004 district militia officers came to her house, promising the mother, Umilya Juraeva, that her daughter would be back in two hours. The daughter did not return home, and when the mother inquired in the militia office, she was told that the daughter would be back in three days. It was not until 15 days later that she found out that Ms. Feruza Juraeva has been detained and was in custody in a pre-trial facility without any charges brought against her. Twenty days later the mother discovered that her daughter was under investigation and was subjected to torture and abuse. Later the Tashkent Court sentenced Ms. Feruza Juraeva to seven years of imprisonment under a fabricated criminal case for violations of 8 articles of the Criminal Code.
79. Mr. Mirzaraim Botirov (born 1970), resident of Markhamat Rayon in Andijan Oblast. On 14 May 2005 he was detained by officers of Markhamat RUVD and taken to Andijan Oblast UVD, where he was held for 15 days. After that, heavily injured and distressed, he was let go for lack of evidence without any charges pressed against him. Twenty days later he was once again arrested in his home by officers of the Andijan Public Prosecutor's Office, and a case was fabricated claiming violations of 5 articles of the Criminal Code. Officers of the prosecutor's office subjected Mr. Botirov to torture with the purpose of forcing confession. it was not until May 2006 that Mr. Botirov's family found out that he was kept in Penal Institution 64/51 located in Karshi, Kashkadar'ya Oblast. The investigation and the trial were done secretly and were both closed to the public. People convicted for involvement in the Andijan events are not even aware of the length of their term of imprisonment. Over 400 people sentenced for alleged involvement in the Andijan events are currently in prison. Many of their families have not been informed.
Ensuring a prompt and impartial investigation of cases of torture. (CAT Article 12)
80. When cases of torture become evident during trials, making it clear that the defendant was being tortured during investigation with the purpose of obtaining confession, judges dealing with criminal cases (in district, city, oblast courts and in the Supreme Court) do not make decisions to investigate and prosecute these cases of torture. Moreover, judges ignore facts on torture presented by the defendant, lawyers, witnesses, and the defendant's family.
81. Public prosecutors fail to participate in many trials, and those who do do not demand investigation of torture cases. The monitoring of criminal trials has shown that charges on grounds of the defendant's religious beliefs always involved the use of torture, however in every case public prosecutors did not demand that the court order an investigation of these acts of torture.
82. Mr. Samandar Umarov (born 1969), sentenced in 2000 to 17 years in prison on religious grounds, was serving his sentence at KIN 64/29 in Navoi (Navoi Oblast) when, on 2 January 2005, he died as a result of torture. According to the official statement his death was caused by a cerebral hemorrhage. Four days before his death, Mr. Umarov spoke with his family by telephone. On 3 January 2005 the body of Mr. Umarov was taken to Tashkent by militia officers and prison wardens and handed over to his family. The house where his body lay was guarded by militia officers who did not allow neighbors and friends to see the body and made sure that it is buried promptly. However, the family managed to take photographs of the body at various angles. The photographs clearly show traces of torture: the man's jaw was crushed and his toenails and fingernails had been torn out. At the request of international human rights organizations and local human rights defenders, a committee was set up to investigate the death of Mr. Umarov. The committee comprised "independent experts" invited from USA and Slovenia, officers of General Prosecutor's Office and GUIN, and alleged "human rights defenders", Mr. Abdusalom Ergashev and Mr. Vakhid Karimov. In violation of the laws of Uzbekistan and international law, without a detailed investigation or exhumation, the committee, which had apparently made a deal with the authorities, presented its "findings" on the death of Mr. Umarov claiming that he died a natural death. General Prosecutor's Office did not order exhumation of the body.
83. It must be acknowledged here that General Prosecutor's Office, MIA, NSS, and President's Staff respond to UGNPU reports (press releases) on human rights violations that are distributed via the Internet. These agencies investigate cases described in the reports and, following the visit of a special prosecutor to the penal institution where persons are subjected to torture, the tortures are discontinued, and perpetrators and accomplices in torture are punished accordingly. In some cases, following IGNPU reports of detainees being beaten by several militia officers, an MIA committee is assigned to investigate the case resulting in the firing of all militia officers involved. However, unfortunately, in these cases neither the prison wardens who subjected convicts to torture nor the militia officers who had beaten detainees were taken to court on charges of violation of Article 235 of the Criminal Code.
Persecution of human rights defenders, foreign and independent journalists, and political activists.
84. During the tragic Andijan events of 13 May 2005 thousands of peaceful protesters were shot and killed by the forces of the Ministry of Defense and MIA. The international community learned about these events through foreign and independent journalists, news sources on the Internet, the Russian television, human rights defenders, and eyewitnesses who spoke about the shooting of unarmed residents of Andijan when, without attempting to use water cannons or tear gas, thousands of members of the armed forces opened fire on the protesters. Unofficial statistics claim that over one thousand people were killed in the shooting, including small children, women, and elderly people.
85. According to official government data, 187 people died in the massacre, but even now many residents of Andijan still do not know what happened to members of their families who "disappeared" after the events of 13 May 2005. The international community condemned these acts of genocide and demanded an independent international investigation, but the government, seeking to conceal its crimes, did not allow an international investigation to take place.