EU concerns

Operative Paragraph (OP) 2 (a) Eyewitness reports of indiscriminate and disproportionate force used by government troops to quell demonstrations in Andijan in May 2005 resulting in the death of many civilians;

Comments by Uzbekistan

On May 12 ?13, 2005 several groups of armed men carried out a number of terrorist acts in the city of Andijan including: - attacked military unit and seized guns and ammunition;

- released more than 500 prisoners from the city prison and armed them; attacked administration and civil service infrastructures;

- took hostage government officials, law enforcement personnel and civilians; organized an armed attempt to seize power in Andijan province and destabilize the situation in Uzbekistan.

The terrorist acts resulted in death of 187 people. Among them 60 civilians, 31 law enforcement personnel and military servicemen. The criminals took 70 people as hostage and, in the end, brutally killed 15 of them.

The events in Andijan represent a well planned and prepared terrorist act organized by radical-extremist groups supported by external forces whose aim was to destabilize the situation in Uzbekistan. It was an action, not a demonstration, undertaken by armed men with proper military training.

Most of the reaction by Western countries to the events was largely shaped by sensational media reports which extremely exaggerated the use of force by the Government.

Very little mention was made of the fact that the insurgents were armed, killed innocent people, took hostages, set fire on the main theatre of the city and civilian cars, attacked administrative buildings, and also that the organizers had clearly planned the event as a military operation. The armed criminals were the driving force of what happened in Andijan.

The organizers of the terrorist acts placed their armed fighters in the midst of crowd - a tactic employed by some notorious terrorist organizations.

The Government employed all possible options to avoid casualties among civilians in its actions to neutralize the terrorists. The Government officials held long negotiations with terrorists. The Government even agreed to release 6 extremists from prison as it was demanded by terrorists. But terrorists continued to produce more and more demands thus leading all the negotiations to deadlock. After that the Government forces started to surround the Regional Administration building that was seized by terrorists. Having realized the hopelessness of their situation terrorists decided to leave the building disorderly firing from fire arms. While leaving the building terrorists used civilians as human shield.

EU concerns

OP 2 (b) The pressure applied to prevent citizens of Uzbekistan with refugee status granted by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees from traveling to a third country;

Comments by Uzbekistan

On 28-29 July 2005, UNHCR, in violation of all procedures and norms of international law and decisions of the UN, carried out a so-called humanitarian evacuation from the territory of Kyrgyzstan of some 440 citizens of Uzbekistan, who crossed the border during the tragic events in Andijan on 12-13 May and stayed on the territory of Kyrgyzstan.

There was no ground for carrying out such an action since, first of all, the number of moved citizens of Uzbekistan to the territory of Kyrgyzstan did not pose any threat to the security or destabilization of the situation in the border regions of Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan.

Uzbekistan requested to return only 25 Uzbek citizens who escaped from prison or committed crimes, which are punishable all over the world, including premeditated murder, terrorism, unlawful possession of weapon and ammunition, infringement of constitutional system and hostage taking.

Concerning other Uzbek citizens who were not involved in committing crime in the territory of Uzbekistan and wanted to travel to a third country the Uzbek side had not had any objection.

In the process of the so-called humanitarian evacuation of the citizens of Uzbekistan, basic principles and conditions of the well-known international norms, namely the UN Convention of 1951 on the Status of Refugees and the Protocol to it of 1967 were breached. UNHCR violated the principles of the Convention and also disregarded the article 4 of UN Security Council Resolution 1269 from 19 October 1999 and article 3 of the SC Resolution 1373 from 28 September 2001, and also the provisions of the SC Resolution 1624 of 2005 by granting participants of terrorist acts in Andijan City with refugee status.

EU concerns

OP 2 (e) Continued refusal to permit the registration of opposition political parties, and their consequent inability to participate in the electoral process;

Comments by Uzbekistan

Registration of political parties is carried out in accordance with the Law on Political Parties adopted on 26 December 1996.

As it was outlined by the law the Ministry of Justice registers a political party within one month after the submission of application for registration.

According to the Article 5 of the Law the State fully guarantees protection of rights and legal interests political parties, equal legal conditions for the parties in realization of goals and objectives outlined in their Statutes.

Article 9 of the Law provides full explanation on what conditions the application for registration of a political party could be rejected. In case of the rejection of the registration of a political party the Ministry of Justice informs the representative of the chief body of the concerned party with full explanation referring to provisions of the Law about the reasons of the refusal.

The concerned party has right to appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision of the Ministry of Justice on refusal of registration.

At present 5 political parties (People?s Democratic Party, Fidokorlar Party, Milliy Tiklanish Party, Adolat Party and Liberal-Democratic Party) have been registered by the Ministry of Justice and functioning in Uzbekistan.

EU concerns

OP 2 (f) A continued pattern of discrimination, harassment and prosecution with regard to the exercise of freedom of thought, conscience and religion;

Comments by Uzbekistan

Uzbekistan is home for representatives of 16 religious confessions. The Article 18 of the Constitution of Uzbekistan ensures the equality of all citizens? rights regardless of differences in gender, race, nationality, language, religion, belief, social origin and status.

Adoption of the Law ?On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations? in 1991 resulted in qualitative changes of the role and judicial status of religious organizations. New edition of the Law in 1998 clearly defined the role and status of religious organizations as well as their interaction with state agencies. The Law fully grants the citizens with the right to practice their religion, make devotions and rituals, and pilgrimage to the holy places either individually or collectively.

The State promotes an establishment of the relations of mutual tolerance and respect among citizens in practicing different religions. Religious or any kind of fanaticism and extremism, causing interreligious confrontation and enmity between different confessions and sects are banned by the law.

In 1990 there were only 211 religious organizations in Uzbekistan. Today this number is 2202. Among them 2016 Muslim, 170 Christian and 8 Jewish organizations.

Every year believers make pilgrimages to holy places with comprehensive assistance of the government ? Muslims to Saudi Arabia for Hajj and Umra, Christians - to Russia, Greece and Israel, Jews ? to Israel. For the last decade more than 45 thousand citizens of Uzbekistan have been able to make pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia, to Russia, Greece and Israel with the support of the Government. Pilgrims receive a wide-ranging assistance including charter flights, medical care, lowered prices on air tickets, rapid and unhindered issuing of visas.

The system of religious education of Uzbekistan includes Tashkent Islamic Institute, Tashkent Islamic University, 10 madrasahs, Orthodox and Protestant seminaries.

EU concerns

OP 2 (g) Serious constraints on, and harassment and detention of, the members of non-governmental organizations and civil society, including human rights defenders;

Comments by Uzbekistan

At present more than 5 thousands NGOs, including about 500 international or foreign NGOs are working in Uzbekistan. Among them sizeable number of human rights organizations.

The activity of NGOs, including those dealing with human rights issues, are regulated by existing national legal norms including the laws on Public Associations, on Non-Commercial Organizations and on Public Funds.

At present a new law on Guarantees of the activities of non-governmental and non-commercial organizations, and also revised version of law on Public Associations are being prepared.

The State fully protects the rights and legal interests of the NGOs, creates for them equal legal conditions for their participation in the public life without interfering into their activities.

EU concerns

OP 3. Deeply regrets the decision of the Government of Uzbekistan to reject both the repeated calls of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights for the establishment of an independent commission of inquiry into the events that occurred in Andijan on 13 May 2005, and the request of the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions to visit Uzbekistan soon afterwards;

Comments by Uzbekistan

Andijan and territories in its vicinity are not the zones of armed conflict, humanitarian disaster or political genocide. Thus, the idea of conducting international investigation of Andijan events is irrelevant and contradicts the established political and international legal practice.

Under the existing international legal instruments similar procedure is exercised when states request such an investigation, or in case of inability of authorities or collapse of a state, and when the situation directly concerns maintaining international peace and security.

The first prerequisite, application of which is entirely sovereign right of the Uzbekistan, is not deemed necessary. The rest cannot be applied to Uzbekistan.

The law enforcement agencies of Uzbekistan have conducted full-scale investigation and their work was closely monitored by the Independent Parliamentary Commission and also International Working Group represented by officials of foreign diplomatic missions accredited in Uzbekistan.

Despite the invitation by the Uzbek side the EU countries rejected to participate in the work of the International Monitoring Group. By this Western countries clearly showed their unwillingness for cooperation and dialogue. Their call for international investigation is politically charged and highly violates the international norms in respecting the national sovereignty, territorial integrity and stability of the states and not interfering into their internal affairs.

Since September 20, 2005 the Supreme Court of Uzbekistan has been hearing the cases of those involved in terrorist acts committed in Andijan. The court process is open to all interested parties. The representatives of the diplomatic corps and international organizations, including the United Nations, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, Shanghai Cooperation Organization are observing the court proceedings.

Calls to conduct international investigation on Andijan events are viewed by the Uzbek side as a method of exerting political pressure on the country with the aim of certain strategic goals and interfering into internal affairs of Uzbekistan.

The issue is an exclusively domestic affair of Uzbekistan. In its actions to deal with the matter Uzbekistan has been guided by both the national and international legal norms.

EU concerns

OP 4. (a) To implement fully without any delay the recommendations contained in the report of the mission of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to Kyrgyzstan in June 2005, most notably with respect to granting permission for the establishment of an international commission of inquiry into the events in Andijan;

Comments by Uzbekistan

For the first, harshly prepared and distributed report of the mission of OHCHR distorts the real situation, since it was based on the statements of persons who took part in terrorist acts and escaped from prison. Surprising is the fact that while referring to the lack of information about criminal and terrorist acts which took place in Andijan on May 13, 2005 OHCHR claims objectivity of its conclusions and recommendations.

For the second, OHCHR mission?s assessment, legitimacy of which is doubtful, coarsely breaks the sovereignty of Uzbekistan.

For the third, statements of the OHCHR on behalf of mandates of conventional agencies and special process is violation of fundamental principles of High Commissioner?s mandate, which were designated by Resolution 48/141 GA UN, interpretation norms and mechanisms of international law by office in this case is arbitrary, calling to apply against Uzbekistan so called ?public mechanism of UN? seems to be provocative.

For the fourth, in its activity OHCHR disregarded UN Security Council Resolutions 1269 of October 19, 1999 and 1373 of September 28, 2001 which require not allowing the status of refugee to be a granted to terrorists.

It is natural to ask:

- OHCHR is protecting whom? The terrorists?...

The results of investigation presented to international community by the law enforcement agencies of Uzbekistan, as well as testimony of eyewitnesses proved that Andijan event was not a protest of peaceful demonstrators, but thoroughly planned act of terrorism.

EU concerns

OP 4. (b) To accede to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol thereto;

Comments by Uzbekistan

Dictating to a sovereign state to accede to any international agreement is legally wrong and absolutely inappropriate. It is a sovereign rights of every country to which agreements they should accede and when.

In the meantime, the Uzbek side deems it necessary to note that Uzbekistan is drafting a national legislature on migration which will be fully in accordance with the international norms and standards. Consideration of accession of Uzbekistan to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its Protocol will be possible after the Uzbekistan?s legislation on migration is adopted. Such an approach fully complies with international practice.

EU concerns

OP 4. (g) To implement fully the recommendations contained in the report of the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the question of torture prepared following his visit to Uzbekistan from 24 November to 6 December 2002;

Comments by Uzbekistan

Uzbekistan is the first and only country among the CIS states who invited the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture to visit Uzbekistan. The invitation of the Special Rapporteur and the subsequent adoption of the National Action Plan to fully comply with the UN Convention against Torture manifest our strong political will to prevent and eradicate such phenomena.

The Uzbek Government submitted detailed information to the Human Rights Committee on implementation of 22 recommendations of the UN Special Rapporteur on torture and it has been issued as a UN document Ref.#CCPR/C/UZB/2004/2/Add.1 and also UN document A/59/675 (January 18, 2005). To this date 20 recommendations of the Special Rapporteur have been fully realized and the rest 2 recommendations are in the phase of implementation.

EU concerns

OP 4. (h) To work closely with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights with regard to the areas of concern and to cooperate fully with all the mechanisms of the Commission on Human Rights and all the relevant United Nations treaty bodies;

Comments by Uzbekistan

Uzbekistan is actively cooperating with the UN Regional Adviser under the four-year Regional Project of the OHCHR on cooperation in the field of human rights. For the last two years we submitted 6 national reports to the UN treaty bodies. In cooperation with UNDP Uzbekistan adopted the National Action Plan to fully implement the recommendations of the UN treaty bodies.

Last year Uzbekistan invited the Independent expert of the CHR to assess the situation on human rights in Uzbekistan. After the consideration of his report on Uzbekistan the CHR Working Group on Situations welcomed in its consensus decision adopted on February 11, 2005 in Geneva the achievements of Uzbekistan in the field of human rights.

EU concerns

OP 4. (i) To allow, in line with Uzbek commitments, access of representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross to detainees;

Comments by Uzbekistan

The Agreement between the Government of Uzbekistan and ICRC on Humanitarian Activity in relation with detained and those under arrest were signed on 17 January, 2001.

In accordance to the Agreement all law enforcement agencies provide ICRC representatives with timely and unrestricted access to detention places. Such cooperation was also established with Diplomatic Corps in Tashkent and other international and non-governmental organizations.

For the past four years representatives of ICRC have been freely visiting every penitentiary establishment they wanted to visit. For instance, only in 2004 the representatives of ICRC visited more than 30 prisons.

Uzbekistan has always been open for cooperation with ICRC on all issues concerning the monitoring the rights of the arrested and convicted.