UZBEKISTAN: SIX MONTH SCORECARD ON HABEAS CORPUS

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 TASHKENT 000835 SENSITIVE SIPDIS DEPT FOR INL ANDREW BUHLER DEPT OF JUSTICE FOR OPDAT CATHERINE NEWCOMBE ASTANA FOR ALMATY/USAID E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV PREL KCRM PHUM EAID UZ SUBJECT: UZBEKISTAN: SIX MONTH SCORECARD ON HABEAS CORPUS REF: A. TASHKENT 786 ¶B. TASHKENT 741 ¶C. TASHKENT 400 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED -- PLEASE PROTECT ACCORDINGLY ¶1. (SBU) Summary: The USAID-funded Institute for New Democracies (IND) co-sponsored a workshop in Tashkent on July 9-10 to examine efforts to implement a law with habeas corpus elements that took effect in January 2008. There was high-level participation by the Government of Uzbekistan, including Minister of Justice Ravshan Mukhitdinov, key parliamentarians, and Supreme Court judges. Human rights defenders were noticeably absent, although the Government of Uzbekistan is reportedly contemplating their inclusion in future events. An AmCit former Federal prosecutor who was previously a Resident Legal Advisor in Tashkent participated as a visiting expert; she highlighted some shortcomings in the implementation of the law but was impressed by the overall progress compared to her previous work in Uzekistan in 2004-05. After six months it is clear the law is forcing authorities to think about habeas corpus principles in a more enlightened way, although there is still a long way to go. End summary. ¶2. (U) In its first formal event since obtaining registration (ref A),IND co-sponsored a workshop entitled "On the Implementation of Habeas Corpus in Uzbekistan" in Tashkent on July 9-10, in partnership with the Ministry of Justice and the government-sponsored Institute of Civil Society Studies. There were 56 invitees representing the Ministry of Internal Affairs (including investigators from regions throughout the country),Office of the General Prosecutor, the Supreme Court, the Ministry of Justice, the Human Rights Ombudsman Office of the Parliament, and the Tashkent Law Institute. Several high-level attendees, including Mukhitdinov and some members of Parliament, attracted local media coverage of the event. The event was the first forum since the law took effect for each of the officials involved in sanctions -- investigators, prosecutors, and judge -- to interact and exchange experiences. Claims of Success -------------- ¶3. (U) Mavjuda Radjabova, Chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Legislation and Judiciary, reported to participants that surveys of the general public indicated "84 percent have high trust in the courts, and therefore our reforms are successful." Radjabova, with news cameras rolling, said that the quality of investigations and case evidence is improving while professional qualifications are also strengthening. She also mentioned the President's May 1 decree on reforming the Bar Association (ref B) as an important step in "improving the credibility of the Bar Association." (Comment: These survey results are rather dubious. Still, it is surprising that even "16 percent" of respondents dared to go against the grain on a government-sponsored survey. Radjabova's on-the-record comments about making improvements and enhancing credibility are significant. End comment). ¶4. (U) Kholmurod Hasanov, a Supreme Court Judge, noted that initial implementation of the habeas corpus principles has been smooth since there were extensive preparations made between August 2005, when Karimov announced the law, and January 2008, when it took effect. Hasanov said that 1-2 percent of requests for detention from investigators or prosecutors are being declined, evidence which he says demonstrates that the transfer of arrest warrant authority to the judiciary has been effective. Sayora Rashidova, the parliament's Human Rights Ombudsperson, added that her office TASHKENT 00000835 002 OF 003 has recorded 108 instances in which the courts have denied requests for warrants, which she noted was "small but significant." ¶5. (U) Svetlana Artykova, from the Office of the General Prosecutor, noted that the habeas corpus reforms are taking place against a backdrop of a decrease in crime in Uzbekistan. In 2003 she said there were 19,205 crimes recorded but by 2007 the number fell to 17,686. Many conference attendees attributed this drop to the liberalization of the criminal justice system in Uzbekistan since 2001, in which convicted criminals are given shorter sentences and second chances. A Ministry of Internal Affairs investigator said that the detention of criminal suspects is down 16 percent overall in the first six months of 2008 compared to the same period in 2006 and 27 percent in rural areas. He explained that due to the new provisions of the law investigators are paying more attention to the admissibility of evidence in a court since the judges now play a larger role. Thus, they are mindful of the requirements and are seeking fewer warrants. Arrest First, Ask Questions Later -------------- ¶6. (U) Artykova called for further "attitudinal change" among law enforcement agencies towards the courts, and she said this was an area where international experts could provide useful technical assistance. She conceded that a big problem for Uzbekistan is that, when a crime is committed, first the authorities find and arrest a suspect and then assemble evidence. She noted that this is an outdated approach that is incompatible with the requirements of the new law, particularly in meeting the 72-hour time limit in which suspects can be detained. A participating AmCit expert noted that Uzbek authorities need to stop interviewing "witnesses" when they are actually "suspects," which gives government officials too much leeway to bypass defendants' rights. Problems for Rural Investigators -------------- ¶7. (U) Comments by Ministry of Internal Affairs officers from the provinces illustrated that there are unique issues to be addressed in rural areas. One problem raised is the lack of transportation for some officers in rural areas, which results in lost time on investigations and difficulties in transporting arrested suspects to regional facilities in a timely manner. There is also a lack of suitable holding cells in some rural areas, necessitating longer trips to better-equipped police stations for booking suspects. One investigator complained that the workload is too much for rural officials who also have agricultural responsibilities and too little time to conduct investigations or collect evidence. Another proposed that evening hours should not count against the 72-hour clock for initial detention since it is not reasonable to expect progress overnight. (Comment: While these rural perspectives raise other issues such as why investigators are also working as farmers, an underlying positive is that law enforcement officials are earnestly thinking about the issue in the context of the new law. End comment.) Signs of Progress -------------- ¶8. (U) A participating AmCit legal expert, who was formerly a Federal prosecutor and a Resident Legal Advisor based at the Embassy, was impressed by the extent to which the substance and tone of discussions has changed for the better since her departure from Uzbekistan in 2005. She noted that the small TASHKENT 00000835 003 OF 003 group breakout sessions were the most productive because participants were more willing to have frank discussions instead of sticking to bland, Soviet-inspired presentation scripts, as they tend to do in the plenary sessions. She observed that, particularly among the ranks of prosecutors, there were more younger faces willing to discuss reforms than just a few years ago. On the margins and in small groups, she said several investigators realized they need to begin collecting evidence prior to making arrests, which would strengthen cases and help them comply with the habeas corpus requirements. No Defenders Present...Yet -------------- ¶9. (SBU) Human rights defenders were conspicuously absent from this event, which allowed the attendees from various ministries or government-affiliated entities to make unchallenged claims that implementation is proceeding "very smoothly." Many attendees agreed that defense lawyers should be involved in habeas corpus decisions at an early stage, itself a major step forward in attitude; however, the Uzbek Bar Association had a conflicting event that also considered habeas corpus issues. Mjusa Sever, IND's Country Director, told poloff that several ministries said they were now comfortable about inviting defense attorneys to the table but that "there are still some holdouts at a political level." She was told by government contacts there is a chance defense attorneys could be included at the next such event. Similarly, representatives of human rights groups, who have questioned the effectiveness of the new habeas corpus law, were uninvited. Comment: -------------- ¶10. (SBU) Not only would defense attorneys add spice to the discussions but interacting with government counterparts would help them better adapt to the new playing field and learn to use the new habeas corpus provisions to represent defendants' interests. We are hoping to engage the Uzbek Bar Association with an assistance project in the near future. ¶11. (SBU) On balance, the workshop helped to keep the spotlight on the implementation of the new law which, despite shortcomings, still represented a major step forward. The Uzbeks seem to be making an earnest effort to implement the law rather than chalk it up as a successful paper reform, although we must remember that change is often at a glacial pace here. There are still reports that some prosecutors are telling judges what to do and the visiting AmCit legal expert believes the government is still "getting too many bites at the apple" in some detention scenarios; however, it is encouraging that experts who contributed to assistance projects in years past are able to return and see that, in the long-run, their efforts bore fruit. NORLAND