ACCESS TO FORMER GUANTANAMO DETAINEE MUQUIT VOHIDOV (ISN

C O N F I D E N T I A L DUSHANBE 001132

C O R R E C T E D C O P Y - //Secstate added as action// ZUI HSD

SIPDIS

STATE DEPARTMENT FOR SCA/CEN AND S/GC

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/8/2019
TAGS: PHUM PINR PTER KDRG TI
SUBJECT: ACCESS TO FORMER GUANTANAMO DETAINEE MUQUIT VOHIDOV (ISN
090)

CLASSIFIED BY: AMBASSADOR KEN GROSS, AMBASSADOR, EXEC, DOS.
REASON: 1.4 (b),(d)

1. (C) Per Ref A request, on October 8, 2009, emboff visited
Muquit Vohidov (AKA Sobit Vahidov) in High Security Penitentiary
Number 1 in Dushanbe. The meeting took place in the Prison
Commander's office, with Prison Commander Colonel Tabarali
Inomov and two other prison officers present.




2. (C) Emboff asked Vohidov whether his treatment in prison
differed from that of other prisoners, whether he had adequate
food, access to medical care, contact with his family, and in
general whether his conditions of confinement were fair in
comparison with other prisoners.




3. (C) A visit to the other prisoner requested in Ref A,
Rahmiddin Sharipov, was not possible on this occasion. Prison
officials told Emboff that Sharipov had committed a crime in
prison and had been transferred to an investigative holding
facility. They said the embassy would have to make a separate
request to the Prosecutor's office to gain access to him.
Emboff contact the MFA later in the day, and the MFA North
America desk said it was working on making this second visit
happen.




4. (C) As with last year's access request, this one took about
six weeks from initial request to actual visit. At one point
the Ministry of Justice simply denied the request forwarded by
the MFA. MFA contacts said this was the result of personnel
changes at the Justice Ministry - new MOJ staff unfamiliar with
the access agreement between the United States and Tajikistan
simply refused an unfamiliar request. Later, the process was
delayed by a week because of the absence from work of an MOJ
official who was, apparently, the only one who could authorize
the visit. Such delays are common in Tajikistan's bureaucracy.




5. (C) Comment: Vohidov was sullen, spent much of the interview
looking at the floor, and resisted answering questions. His
behavior matched that described in Ref A in last year's meeting.
He several times responded to emboff by saying he had already
answered these questions at the last visit by an embassy officer
(Ref B),and would not answer them again. When pressed by
emboff, he briefly said he had no serious complaints, was
allowed to practice his religion, could see his family "if they
visited," and his health was good. The prison officers present
urged Vohidov to be more forthcoming, and they said he enjoyed
the same privileges as other prisoners, including food brought
in by his family and periodic communication with family.




6. (C) Vohidov appeared to Emboff to be in good physical health,
and showed no physical signs of mistreatment. While obviously
hostile to emboff and sometimes despondent in manner, he walked
upright and with assurance into the interview, saluted the
officers present, and wore a clean prison uniform. When told
the interview was over, he saluted the prison officers again and
walked out with a noticeable air of defiance. End Comment

GROSS