ICRC RESTARTS, IMMEDIATELY SUSPENDS PRISON

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TASHKENT 001258 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPT FOR SCA/CEN AND DRL E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/09/2017 TAGS: PREL PHUM PGOV ICRC UZ SUBJECT: ICRC RESTARTS, IMMEDIATELY SUSPENDS PRISON MONITORING REF: TASHKENT 948 (NOTAL) Classified By: Classified By: CDA BRAD HANSON FOR REASONS 1.4 (B, D). ¶1. (C) Summary: International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Deputy Director told Charge d'Affaires on July 2 that the ICRC suspended its prison monitoring program again after a three hour visit to one of Tashkent's principal detention facilities on May 21. ICRC's prison monitoring program in Uzbekistan began in 2001, and was suspended in December 2004 after Uzbek officials failed to facilitate monitoring according to ICRC's worldwide modalities. The Deputy Director believes that permission for the visit was an attempt to win favor with EU governments ahead of their decision to renew sanctions against Uzbeksistan, and he does not expect that the Government will allow more visits until shortly before the EU governments convene in November to review sanctions again. End summary. ¶2. (C) International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Deputy Director Raffaello Muller told Charge d'Affaires on July 2 that the ICRC suspended its prison monitoring in Uzbekistan again after a short visit to one of Tashkent's principal detention facilities on May 21. The visit to the Tashtyurma pre-trial detention facility, which was ICRC's first since suspending its prison monitoring program in December 2004, was supposed to last a week, but was cut short after only three hours when it became clear that the Uzbeks were not willing to fully cooperate with ICRC according to its worldwide modalities. ¶3. (C) The ICRC's prison monitoring program in Uzbekistan began after a formal agreement was signed between the Government and ICRC in 2001. The program was originally suspended in December 2004 after several months in which Uzbek officials failed to facilitate monitoring according to ICRC's worldwide modalities. Since that time, both sides have continued negotiations aimed at restarting the monitoring program, but without success (reftel). ¶4. (C) In a separate meeting with Poloff on July 6, Muller said that Uzbek officials pressured the ICRC to restart prison monitoring before May 14, the date when the General Affairs and External Relations Council of the European Union met in Brussels to decide whether to extend sanctions against Uzbekistan. He therefore thinks that the Uzbeks were not interested in restarting the monitoring program for its own sake, but instead were seeking to win favor with the EU ahead of its decision. Muller said that after the EU decided to renew sanctions for another six months, the Government lost any incentive to grant ICRC monitors full access to their prisons. Muller added that he did not expect the Uzbeks to permit further prison visits until shortly before the EU meets again in November to decide on sanctions. ¶5. (C) Muller told Poloff that the ICRC is continuing negotiations with the Government to restart the monitoring program. Muller said that the ICRC's main interlocutors are from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and that the ICRC also periodically meets with representatives from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the National Security Service and the General Prosecutors Office. The ICRC has clearly stated its position to the Government that it must accept all of its worldwide modalities, which include allowing unfettered access to prisons, for its monitoring to go forward. ¶6. (C) Muller told Poloff that in recent years, the Government has ceased cooperation on other ICRC programs, including seminars and competitions for teachers and students on international humanitarian law. For example, Uzbek students were not allowed to participate in a regional competition this summer that was held near Lake Issik-Kul in Kyrgyzstan. Earlier, the ICRC had helped institute courses on international humanitarian law which are now mandatory in Uzbek secondary schools and universities. ¶7. (C) Comment: Citing the ICRC's confidentiality agreement with the Government, Muller was reluctant to provide additional details to Poloff on the May 21 visit to Tashtyurma. But Muller inferred that the Uzbeks were not TASHKENT 00001258 002 OF 002 willing to grant ICRC full access to the prison, and instead had organized a carefully controlled visit that clearly did not meet ICRC's worldwide standards for prison monitoring. We agree with Muller's contention that the Uzbeks most likely agreed to the May 21 prison visit as an attempt to win favor with EU governments shortly before their decision on renewing sanctions. Unfortunately, Muller is also probably right in believing that the Government will not seek to restart ICRC prison monitoring until shortly before EU governments convene in November to consider the issue of sanctions again. HANSON