HUMAN RIGHTS PROTEST CONTINUES UNIMPEDED FOR

C O N F I D E N T I A L TASHKENT 002153 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPT FOR SCA/CEN AND DRL E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/21/2017 TAGS: PHUM PGOV UZ SUBJECT: HUMAN RIGHTS PROTEST CONTINUES UNIMPEDED FOR SECOND DAY REF: A. TASHKENT 2131 ¶B. TASHKENT 2113 Classified By: POLOFF R. FITZMAURICE FOR REASONS 1.4 (B, D) ¶1. (C) Summary: On December 20 and 21, the Human Rights Alliance held a small public protest in Tashkent without incident, in marked contrast to previous failed attempts this year to hold similar events. Eight activists participated, holding posters calling for the release of political prisoners and criticizing the imminent presidential election. Poloff noted that the protestors were far outnumbered by plain-clothed law enforcement officials, who carefully monitored the event but made no effort to intervene. The protest also was observed by an OSCE election monitor on the first day and by international journalists on both days. Separately, several prominent human rights activists complained to poloff that police surveillance of their activities had increased noticeably in the past week, and Ezgulik was officially denied permission to monitor the upcoming presidential election. The true test of the government's apparent newfound tolerance for public dissent, though, is whether this approach survives the December 23 election. End summary. ¶2. (C) On December 21, a small public protest led by activists of the Human Rights Alliance continued unimpeded for a second day in Tashkent. The eight protestors were standing on a busy intersection near the General Prosecutor's Office and holding banners calling for the release of imprisoned human rights activist Mutabar Tojiboyeva and recently arrested dissident Yusuf Jumaev (ref A). Self-declared presidential candidates and Alliance members Abdillo Tojiboy and Aktam Shaymardanov were also present and held banners criticizing the upcoming presidential election. ¶3. (C) According to Alliance activist Elena Urlayeva, who also participated, authorities carefully monitored the protestors but made no attempt to interfere or stage any type of provocation. During the Human Rights Day roundtable at the Embassy on December 10, Urlayeva noted that the Alliance was able to hold a protest at the same location on December 8 (ref B) In contrast, several similar protests by the Alliance and other human rights activists were reportedly disrupted by authorities earlier this year. MORE COPS THAN PROTESTORS -------------- 
¶4. (C) Poloff observed that the protestors were greatly outnumbered by plain-clothed law enforcement officers, most likely National Security Service (NSS) officers, who made little effort to hide themselves. They observed the event from at least six parked cars across the street. Poloff also saw several persons photographing the protestors from passing cars. A few other individuals stood much closer to the protestors and were obviously listening to poloff's conversations with the protestors and journalists covering the event. ¶5. (C) During the hour that poloff was present, few ordinary citizens dared to walk past the protestors, although several of those who did interacted with them, with a few even offering words of support. Poloff noticed larger groups of people watching the protest from across the street. The protest also visibly caught the attention of commuters in cars and buses, some of whom appeared to be staring in disbelief as they passed by. PROTEST COVERED BY INTERNATIONAL PRESS -------------- ¶6. (C) On December 20, Reuters covered the first day of the protest, and quoted Shaymardanov as saying that the upcoming presidential election was an "illegal attempt to grab power." Urlayeva told poloff that an Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) election monitor was also present on the protest's first day. On the second day, there were no OSCE monitors, but the protest was covered by a local RFE stringer and two Almaty-based journalists from Agence France-Presse (AFP). One of the AFP journalists, Antoine Lambroschini, told poloff that his Uzbekistan accreditation expires in January and he was doubtful that it would be renewed. He also mentioned that he knew few other international journalists still accredited in Uzbekistan. On December 20, a local Reuters stringer told Information Officer that five Reuters journalists received accreditation to cover the election. HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVISTS BEING WATCHED MORE CLOSELY -------------- -------------- ¶7. (C) In the past few days, several other human rights activists complained to poloff of being watched more closely than usual by law enforcement officers. On December 20, Tashkent-based human rights activist Surat Ikramov told poloff that his home and office (in the same building) were being watched 24 hours a day by unidentified men in two cars during the past week. The cars also followed him around Tashkent. On December 18, Ezgulik Chairman Vasila Inoyatova described similar stepped up surveillance to poloff. Both Ikramov and Inoyatova surmised that the recent increase in surveillance was tied to the upcoming election. However, both observed that the level of GOU physical interference and harassment had gone gown in recent days. EZGULIK DENIED ACCREDITATION TO OBSERVE THE ELECTION -------------- -------------- ¶8. (C) During a meeting with the Ambassador on December 18, Inoyatova said that Ezgulik was officially denied accreditation by the Central Election Committee (CEC) to monitor the presidential election. According to Inoyatova, the Law on Presidential Elections allows any organization to make an application with the CEC to observe the election (Note: Ezgulik is one of only two registered local human rights organizations in Uzbekistan. End note.) After reportedly confirming with the CEC what documentation would be required, Ezgulik submitted its application on December 3. However, on December 18, Ezgulik was reportedly denied accreditation to observe the election because it had failed to submit a "recommendation letter." According to Inoyatova, she was never informed in advance that such a letter was required and nothing about it is described in the law. She indicated that Ezgulik will go ahead with its own informal observation effort regardless of whether GOU approval is forthcoming. She appreciated the Embassy's offer to prepare a "letter of recommendation" on her behalf but indicated she did not want to legitimate this GOU "requirement." ¶9. (C) Embassy resident legal advisor examined the Law on Presidential Elections and confirmed that it allows organizations to apply with the CEC to observe the election. The law states that organizations need to submit "appropriate documentation" to the CEC at least 15 days in advance of the election, but it does not spell out what documentation is required. COMMENT -------------- ¶10. (C) While the lack of GOU interference at recent public protests could be taken as a positive sign, it most likely reflects the government's desire to avoid provocation in front of OSCE observers and international journalists in the lead up to the December 23 presidential elections. The true test, of course, is whether the GOU continues to tolerate such protests after the election. NORLAND