UZBEKS REFUSED ASYLUM IN RUSSIA

C O N F I D E N T I A L MOSCOW 001043

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/30/2016
TAGS: PREF PHUM PREL RS
SUBJECT: UZBEKS REFUSED ASYLUM IN RUSSIA

REF: BISHKEK 79 AND PREVIOUS

Classified By: A/POL Bruce Donahue. Reasons 1.4 (b and d).


1. (C) The Russian Federal Migration Service has refused to
grant asylum to 13 Uzbeks whom the Government of Uzbekistan
wants extradited for alleged connections to the uprising in
Andijon last May. The group's lawyer, at the urging of
UNHCR, has appealed that decision to Russian courts and will
file separate appeals to the European Court of Human Rights
(ECHR) in Strasbourg. Thus far, none of the Uzbeks is in
imminent danger of deportation, and the appeals should
provide further protection while the courts consider their
claim. The appeals could be heard in the Russian court as
early as February 13. Appeals to the ECHR should be filed
shortly, and the ECHR should issue a ruling in one week.


2. (C) UNHCR Senior Protection Officer Gang Li said that
UNHCR has not received access to the 13 despite repeated
requests to the Office of the Procurator General. UNHCR
Moscow has asked the migration service and the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs to weigh in with the procuracy on its behalf,
and UNHCR headquarters in Geneva has raised the issue with
the Russian mission there. Although MFA officials have
informally been somewhat supportive, Li said Russian
officials have questioned the legal basis for UNHCR's
involvement in the case. All 13 have been resident in Russia
for several years and had not sought refugee status until
after they were arrested, a fact Russian officials constantly
stress in their discussions with UNHCR. The initial Russian
response to UNHCR's request for access was that UNHCR should
ask permission from Uzbek authorities, a response that left
UNHCR baffled. The MFA has subsequently asked UNHCR to
formally submit a justification for its involvement in the
case. Li said UNHCR would argue that the men faced
persecution, torture, and worse if returned to Uzbekistan.
(NOTE: Of the 13, 12 are citizens of Uzbekistan, and one is
a citizen of Kyrgyzstan. Authorities arrested another ethnic
Uzbek with Russian citizenship and then released him. He
fled to Ukraine after the GOR began proceedings to strip him
of his citizenship. He has sought UNHCR protection there.
END NOTE.)


3. (C) Li remained hopeful that UNHCR would gain access to
them. It was trying to use its good relationship with the
Federal Migration Service and the April visit of High
Commissioner for Refugees Guterres as leverage with the MFA
to convince prosecutors to allow a UNHCR visit. UNHCR would
be prepared to work quickly in making a resettlement
determination once it can interview the 13. Li said that
UNHCR is also looking at contingency plans that would allow
UNHCR to designate them as refugees without an interview and
seek their immediate resettlement. Li said UNHCR did not
know whether the GOR would release them from detention and
allow them to leave the country, however. Li said he thought
that Russian authorities will closely watch what the
Government of Kyrgyzstan does with four Uzbeks still in its
custody whom the GOU wants extradited (reftel). Human Rights
Watch's (HRW) Aleksander Petrov also thought that the Kyrgyz
Government's decision would influence the GOR's handling of
these cases. Petrov said HRW has offered advice to the
group's lawyer in drafting the appeals based on its reporting
of what happened in Andijon. HRW would soon begin a public
campaign urging the GOR not to return them to Uzbekistan.


4. (C) COMMENT: UNHCR has thus far found nothing to
suggest that the 13 were involved in the uprising in Andijon.
We understand that the GOU warrants are based on claims that
they had provided financial or other support to the uprising
or that members of their families were involved in it. The
GOR now finds itself with a dilemma; it can meet its
international obligations or preserve the recent warming in
its bilateral relationship with the GOU.
BURNS