Uzbekistan: Law on Mass Media article 19

Recommendations: 
–
The Mass Media Law should not contain any content restrictions whatsoever. If the 
publication of a certain category of statement carries a sufficient risk of harm to justify 
a restriction on freedom of expression, this should apply regardless of the manner in 
which the statement is disseminated. As a result, the restriction should be placed in a 
law of general application. Article 6 of the Mass Media Law should be omitted. 
Organising activities of the mass media 
Chapter 2 of the Media Law, unchanged by the April 2018 amendments with exception 
of Article 18, outlines procedures for establishing the media outlets, and details inter alia 
of what should be contained in Charter documents, founding agreements and provides 
further details on what the composition of the editorial board, functions of the editorial 
staff, and the content of the masthead of the media outlet should be. 
Some of the provisions are not very clear. For example, it is not clear if the right to establish 
a media outlet is limited to the citizens of Uzbekistan (Article 8 states that they can be 
34 
The Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, 1994: Article 158

---

18
established by “legal entities and private individuals of the Republic of Uzbekistan”) or to 
what extent they restrict the rights of certain entities to set-up media outlets (e.g. non-profit 
organisations).
If the “individuals of the Republic of Uzbekistan” are indeed the citizens, ARTICLE 19 
seriously questions such limitation. We recall that Article 19 of the UDHR and the ICCPR 
applies to everyone, not just to citizens. Equally importantly, Article 2 of the ICCPR 
requires States to ensure respect for the rights guaranteed by it for all persons “within 
its territory and subject to its jurisdiction,” without distinction of any kind, including on 
the basis of national origin. This would, therefore, apply to every person physically on 
the territory of Uzbekistan, as well as to persons under its jurisdiction, for example on a 
State-owned vessel or on territory under the effective control of the state although not 
belonging to it. The limitation to “citizens” would deprive non-nationals such as refugees 
or stateless persons of the right to publish – something that cannot be justified under 
international law. 
Similarly, ARTICLE 19 questions whether it is appropriate to ban non-governmental non-
profit organisations which have been banned by law from establishing their own media 
outlets. It is not clear which NGOs can be banned by law and if these provisions could 
be abused to prevent civil society to inform the public about particular subjects in the 
community.