UZBEKS TOUT JUDICIAL REFORMS

C O N F I D E N T I A L TASHKENT 000991

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR SCA/CEN AND INL
JUSTICE FOR OPDAT

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/21/2017
TAGS: PGOV PHUM KJUS UZ
SUBJECT: UZBEKS TOUT JUDICIAL REFORMS

Classified By: CDA Brad Hanson for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).


1. (SBU) Poloff and RLA Assistant met with Ministry of
Justice officials on May 10 to discuss judicial reforms in
Uzbekistan and potential avenues of cooperation with Post's
Resident Legal Advisor program. The meeting was prompted by
a series of articles in the government-controlled press
quoting Ministry officials and foreign "experts" commenting
on the positive direction of judicial reforms in the country.



2. (SBU) Shukhrat Mamadjanov, Chief Consultant in the
Ministry of Justice's International Department, told poloff
that judicial reform in Uzbekistan is proceeding on a
step-by-step basis with the goals of ensuring the
independence of the courts, defending human rights, and
liberalization of the criminal code. He provided updates on
the government's signature judicial reform efforts, both of
which he said show the country's positive trajectory.

-- Legislation implementing the President's decree abolishing
the death penalty effective January 1 is under consideration
in the Oliy Majlis. Uzbekistan will replace the death
penalty with prison terms ranging from 25-years to life.
Mamadjanov noted that even many of Uzbekistan's harshest
critics had welcomed the decision to end capital punishment
and said that the new system will be fully in line with the
country's commitment to protect the rights of all people,
even those guilty of serious crimes.

-- Legislation implementing the transfer of authority to
issue arrest warrants is under review in the Cabinet of
Ministers and will ensure the right of all individuals to
judicial review of their cases. As the system currently is
envisioned, Mamadjanov said that as part of its investigation
the prosecutor's office will request that a judge will issue
a warrant for the arrest of a suspect. The judge will order
the person detained, and will then hold a hearing in the
presence of the suspect to determine whether the individual
should remain in jail or should be released. Mamadjanov said
that the judge conducting the arrest hearing will not be
allowed to sit on the panel of judges in the individual's
trial.


3. (C) Comment: Many of Post's Uzbek contacts appear
genuinely perplexed that Uzbekistan does not get more credit
for its judicial reform efforts. Mamadjanov and other Uzbeks
that we have spoken too have portrayed the abolition of the
death penalty and the transfer of arrest warrants to the
judiciary as major steps forward that should appease even the
harshest critic. Unfortunately, they fail to understand that
while these steps may be positive from a structural point of
view, they mean little in practice without true judicial
independence and a commitment to the rule of law. It is
clear from Mamadjanov's description, for example, that there
is little prospect that the transfer of the arrest warrant
power will result in anything more than a judicial rubber
stamp. Post is eager to assist the government with its
efforts and has offered on several occasions to facilitate
discussions or training on judicial reform issues.
Unfortunately, at present Uzbekistan's willingness to
cooperate is limited to scripted statements only.
HANSON