AZERBAIJAN : Rewriting the Law to Make Journalism a Crime

AZERBAIJAN : Rewriting the Law to Make Journalism a Crime

AZERBAIJAN : Ten-year sentence for an Editor

International PEN and International PEN's Writers in Prison Committee (WiPC) is seriously concerned about the 10-year sentence passed on June 24, 2008, at a closed trial against Novruzali Mamedov, 66, an ethnic Talysh, editor of the Talysh-minority-language newspaper (now-defunct) and head of the Talysh Cultural Center.
The Azerbaijani Court (Baku court) for Grave Crimes, presided by Judge Shakir Aleskerov, has put a full stop in the process of Novruzali Mamedov, head of the Talysh Cultural Centre and editor-in-chief of the "Tolyshi Sado" (Talysh's Voice) newspaper, and Elman Guliev, executive secretary of the newspaper, who were accused of treason against the State.
In spite of the fact that the verdict announcement had been appointed to 3:00 p.m. local time, the verdict was announced by the judge in the morning, without the presence of defendants' advocates and relatives, and also without journalists. The court has informed that both defendants were found guilty under Article 274 of the Criminal Code ("Treason against the State") and sentenced as follows: Mamedov to 10 years of imprisonment (without property confiscation) and Guliev - to 6 years of imprisonment (without property confiscation). Both will serve their terms at a strict custody colony. A report by Leila Yunus, director of the Institute of Peace and Democracy and other sources.
Mamedov was convicted of treason under Article 247 of Azerbaijan's penal code for what the prosecution called "distribution of Talysh nationalist ideas and attempts to destroy the foundations of the Azerbaijani state," the independent news agency Regnum reported. News reports said the case was based on an allegation that Mamedov had received money from Iran to publish the newspaper, but prosecutors have not publicly explained or commented on the charges.
Defense lawyer Ramiz Mamedov (no relation to the journalist) told the U.S.-government funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty that the case was fabricated.
Mamedov has been held since February 2007, initially on charges of "resisting law enforcement" and later on the treason charge, Yunus said. In the first 15 days in custody, Mamedov was held incommunicado at a Ministry of National Security detention center, with neither family members nor lawyers able to visit him, according to news reports. Talyshi Sado stopped publishing after the arrest.

Talyshi Sado was the twice-monthly newspaper of Azerbaijan's ethnic Talysh minority, a group of about 100,000 who live mainly in the southern part of the country, along the border with Iran. Published in the Talysh language, the paper had a circulation of around 1,000. In addition to being the editor, Mamedov headed the Institute of Linguistics of the Azerbaijan National Academy of Science, according to press reports and CPJ sources.

Ramiz Mamedov, Novruzali Mamedov's advocate, has informed the "Caucasian Knot"
correspondent that, according to the legislation, the verdict should be announced publicly. He treated "the secret verdict announcement to be another proof of the forged character of the case."
"We condemn the heavy prison sentence handed to Novruzali Mamedov after a closed trial in the absence of defense counsel," CPJ Europe and Central Asia Program Coordinator Nina Ognianova said. "Authorities should make evidence against Mamedov public, and Azerbaijan should work to remedy, not aggravate, its record of jailing journalists on trumped-up charges."
PEN calls for details of the evidence used to convict Mamedov to be made public and for concerns that he is being held in violation of his rights to freedom of expression and association to be addressed.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The Talysh minority, primarily Shia Muslim, is mainly located in southeastern Azerbaijan. In 1993, in the middle of political turmoil in the country, the minority claimed self-determination under the leadership of the Talysh National Movement. Their autonomy claim did not reach public support and was suppressed. It is believed that the movement remains active. For more on the Talysh
see http://www.azerb.com/az-talyshstan.html
The Talysh-Mughan Autonomous Republic (also known as Talyshstan) was a short-lived
self-proclaimed autonomous republic in Azerbaijan, that lasted from June to August 1993, base on the self determination claims of the Talysh people.
It was located in extreme southeastern Azerbaijan, envisaging to consist in the 6 administrative districts of Azerbaijan around the regional capital city Lankaran: Lankaran, Lankaran rayon, Lerik, Astara, Masally and Yardymli. Historically the area had been a khanate, one of 15 historic Azerbaijani khanates.
The autonomous republic was proclaimed amid political turmoil in Azerbaijan, with the tacit support from Russia. In June 1993 a military rebellion against president Abulfaz Elchibey broke out under the leadership of Colonel Surat Huseynov. Colonel Alikram Hummatov (Alikram Gumbatov), the leader of the Talysh nationalists, seized power in the southern part of Azerbaijan and proclaimed the new republic in Lankaran, escalating violence. However, as the situation settled and Heydar Aliyev rose to power in Azerbaijan, the Talysh-Mughan Autonomous Republic, which failed to gain any significant public support, was swiftly suppressed.
Hummatov was arrested and initially received death sentence which was subsequently commuted to life imprisonment. In 2004 he was pardoned and released from custody under pressure from the Council of Europe. He was allowed to emigrate to Europe after making a public promise not to engage in politics. Gumbatov was expected to be released due to the amnesty proclaimed on Azerbaijan's International Solidarity Day (December 31, 2000). However this never happened. Today, a Talysh National Movement is still active, their aspiration being the restructuring of the Talysh-Mughan Autonomous Republic. However, those who were involved in proclamation of the autonomy say they always envisaged the autonomous republic as a constituent part of Azerbaijan.

Please send appeals…..
• expressing serious concern about reports of the closed trial against editor Novruzali Mamedov, which, if confirmed, would be in violation of Articles 10 and 11 (a) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
• calling for details of the evidence used to convict Mamedov to be made public;
• urging authorities to address concerns that Mamedov is being held in violation of his rights to freedom of expression and association.

Eynulla Fatullayev

Another Incident :
On 3 June 2008 the Azerbaijani Supreme Court upheld the decision taken by the appellate court of 16 January 2008, Eynulla Fatullayev, who is serving an eight and a half year sentence on charges linked to his critical reporting.
Eynulla Fatullayev, editor of Russian language weekly Realny Azerbaijan and the Azeri language weekly Gündelike Azerbaijan, was sentenced in April 2007 to two and a half years in prison on charges of 'criminal libel' and 'insult' under Article 147.2 of the Criminal Code and was immediately imprisoned. He was convicted for an article posted on the internet accusing the Azeri army of culpability in the deaths of Azeri citizens during an Armenian army siege of a city in Nagorno Karabakh in 1992. This article was attributed to him, but Fatullayev denied posting it. The same day as Fatullayev's conviction, his Realni Azerbaijan colleague Uzeyir Jafarov was attacked by unknown assailants, sustaining serious injuries. And again he was sentenced to eight and a half years in prison on 30 October 2007 on charges of terrorism and inciting ethnic hatred under article 214 of the Azeri Penal Code. He is currently being held in a prison just outside Baku.
English PEN was pleased to learn that imprisoned Azerbaijani editor Eynulla Fatullayev, has been awarded Human Rights Watch's Hellman/Hammett Grant for persevering with his work despite being subject to political persecution. This year, there are 34 award recipients from 19 countries, including fellow Azerbaijani editor Genimet Zakhidov and his brother, journalist Sakit Zakhidov. According to Human Rights Watch, recognition of the Azerbaijani journalists comes amid the deteriorating media situation in the country. For the past 18 months, the government has cracked down on independent and opposition media using serious criminal indictments, and moving away from more traditional defamation charges. Critics are worried that the restrictions on the media will make a free and fair vote in the presidential elections this autumn impossible.
English PEN considers the continued detention of Eynulla Fatullayev to be a breach of international standards guaranteeing freedom of expression and calls for his immediate release.
English PEN is alarmed by the rising number of Azeri journalists sentenced to lengthy prison terms in recent weeks on charges related to their writings. Five journalists are now serving prison terms on charges of defamation, terrorism and 'inciting religious enmity'. Although there have been frequent reports of attacks and imprisonments of journalists in Azerbaijan throughout recent years, there has been a dramatic upsurge in recent weeks.
According to Human Rights Watch, Fatullayev was fined 10,000 Azeri mantas (about US$12,000) for the same offense two weeks prior to his conviction. Tatiana Chaladze, the head of the Azeri Center for Protection of Refugees and Displaced Persons brought a civil claim against him as well as instigated the more recent criminal libel and insult charges. Fatullayev had previously been handed down a two-year suspended sentence in a September 2006 libel case.
On 22 May 2007, further charges of 'terrorism' were levied against him under Article 214 of the Criminal Code, for which he faces a further 12 years in prison. The Ministry for National Security has accused him of aiding the Armenian Special Forces, although no specific details are given. On 20 May, his newspaper's offices were searched by National Security agents and subsequently sealed. Its computers were seized, as were notebooks and other documents.
English PEN protests the sentence handed to Eynulla Fatullayev, as violating international standards guaranteeing the right to freedom of expression. It is alarmed by the additional charges levied against him that could lead to another sentence of up to 12 years.
PEN is calling for his immediate release and for the second charges to be dropped. PEN is furthermore gravely concerned by the threats made against Fatullayev and his family, urging that these acts be condemned by the authorities and that measures be taken to safeguard them against attack.

Please send appeals:
• Calling for the release of Eynullah Fatullayev and protesting the additional charges levied against him;
• Referring to the fact that the conviction and charges are in clear breach of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights;
• Calling for the provision of protection to Fatullayev and his family against attack;
• Expressing concern about the growing repression of the Azeri media in recent months.

For all cases mentioned here please send your appeals to

President Ilham Aliyev
Office of the President
19 Istiqlaliyyat Street
Baku AZ1066
Azerbaijan
Fax: +994 12 492 0625
E-mail: president@gov.az

Minister of Internal Affairs
Lt.-Gen. Ramil Usubov
Ministry of Internal Affairs
Husu Hajiyev Street 7
370005 Baku
Azerbaijan
Fax: + 994 12 492 45 90

It may be more effective to send the above appeals via the Azeri representative in London:
His Excellency Fakhraddin Gurbanov
Embassy of the Republic of Azerbaijan
London
W8 5 DL

HE Mr Rafael Ibrahimov
Embassy of the Republic of Azerbaijan
4 Kensington Court
London W8 5DL
Fax: (020) 7937 1783

see http://www.cpj.org/news/2008/europe/azer25jun08na.html
http://www.pen.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/2639/prmID/1610
http://eng.kavkaz-uzel.ru/newstext/engnews/id/1224259.html
www.armtown.com/news/en/a1p/20070206/45182/
www.armtown.com/news/en/pan/20071030/23909/

ANALYSIS: Rewriting the Law to Make Journalism a Crime
By Nina Ognianova

In its 17 years on the air, Moscow-based Ekho Moskvy Radio has enjoyed, by Russian standards, extraordinary editorial independence. Nearly alone among Russian broadcasters in its critical approach, the station employs some of the country’s most outspoken journalists, who produce in-depth reporting on the most sensitive issues of the day. But in the run-up to the March 2008 presidential election, even the unshakable Ekho has begun to feel a shudder of apprehension.
Ekho received a series of letters in midyear—15 in all—from Moscow prosecutors, the Federal Security Service, the prosecutor general’s office, and the state media regulator Rosokhrankultura, after the station gave airtime to Garry Kasparov and Eduard Limonov, leaders of the Other Russia coalition and organizers of the so-called Dissenters’ Marches in several major cities. In the letters, authorities informed Ekho that its April programs featuring Kasparov and Limonov were being investigated for carrying “public calls to extremism.” The authorities demanded the station provide transcripts of the programs and said that host Yuliya Latynina, one of Russia’s sharpest political commentators, had been placed under investigation as well. “Extremism” is an evolving and expanding term in Russian law. In successive years, parliament has sharply contracted the boundaries of acceptable reporting by redefining laws against extremism. Criticizing public officials and covering dissenting views are now outside the limits of permissible journalism. In pursuing this tactic—rewriting laws to restrict critical commentary—Russia has taken a regrettable lead in the region. Uzbekistan has rewritten laws to drastically limit the activities of foreign media, while Tajikistan has taken aim at Internet commentary by making much of it illegal.
The trend began in 2006, when the Russian parliament passed a measure broadening the
definition of extremism to include media criticism of public officials. The measure, which President Vladimir Putin signed into law over the objections of media and human rights groups, said extremist activity includes “public slander directed toward figures fulfilling the state duties of the Russian Federation”—the sort of catchall terminology used by the Soviets to prosecute critics in the past.
In 2007, parliament approved a series of amendments to the criminal code that were ostensibly designed to counter the growing nationalist and neo-Nazi movements. The amendment package, also signed into law by Putin, classifies “public justification of terrorism” as extremism and gives law enforcement officials broad authority to suspend noncompliant media outlets. The new law pointedly avoids defining “justification,” leaving critics to say that it will be interpreted very broadly.
“This law I compare to a surgical scalpel,” said Karen Nersisian, a prominent Russian lawyer known for defending journalists’ rights. “It is only to be used against those who
criticize—inconvenient individuals, inconvenient politicians, and, particularly, inconvenient journalists. The moment a journalist makes the decision to pick up a pen and write about a sensitive issue, he will be already at risk. This is why today, journalists are more and more cautious to write about hot subjects.”

Masha Lipman, editor of the Carnegie Moscow Center journal Pro et Contra, called the extremism legislation one more tool in the Kremlin’s now-bulging tool kit. Its
greatest threat to press freedom, she said, lies not in its actual use but in its contribution to an existing climate of self-censorship. “The law is designed to contribute to an environment in which every writer, every editor, every [media] owner would not forget that we can only exercise our freedom of expression because the Kremlin is permissive,” Lipman told CPJ. “The more instruments there are, the more authors would weigh it up, thinking, ’Maybe I should be more cautious, maybe I should censor myself.’ That is the point.”Several details in the 2007 amendments are of particular concern. One requires media to label as “extremist” in their reports any organization that the government has banned as such. Another bans the production and distribution of “extremist” material but does not specify what constitutes such material, even as it introduces new penalties for journalists, media outlets, and printers found guilty of the offense. The measure also expands the definition of extremism as a crime motivated by “hatred or hostility toward a certain social group” without clarifying the term “social group.” This purposely vague language is expected to have a chilling effect on the coverage of public officials,
businesspeople, and law enforcement officials.
“The effect of the new amendments could be compared to a cold shower on political journalism,” said Andrei Richter, director of the Moscow-based Media Law and Policy Institute. Since the extremism laws were first adopted in 2002, Richter said, the list of concepts that fall under its definition has grown long. And if a “cold shower” were not enough, authorities emphasized the point by moving quickly to initiate criminal proceedings against Kremlin critics. In September, state prosecutors brought charges against prominent political analyst Andrei Piontkovsky over statements in his 2006 book Unloved Country, a collection of political essays critical of Putin and his policies. The prosecutor in Piontkovsky’s case, who spoke briefly to The Washington Post after the hearing but refused to elaborate or give her name, said Unloved Country incited
“inferiority among people of Jewish, American, Russian, and other nationalities.”

On September 25, the court ordered that Unloved Country be subjected to a linguistic analysis to determine whether it contains extremist content. Piontkovsky and his lawyers said the accusations were utterly baseless. “There are no calls to extremism in my political diary,” Piontkovsky told CPJ. “Absolutely none. This book is very critical of Putin, yes, but the accusations against me are a laughing matter.” But Piontkovsky, who is now a visiting scholar at the conservative Washington-based Hudson Institute, is pessimistic about the potential verdict. “The court sent my book to undergo a linguistic [analysis] at the Institute of the Ministry of Justice. So you can imagine how ’independent’ the expertise will be. ... It will be independent only of sound logic.”

Piontkovsky’s case is the first to be tried under the newly amended law on fighting extremism. He faces up to five years in prison if convicted. “In the world, as a rule, the concept of extremism is linked to terrorism. But in Russia, it is used to describe critics of the powerful,” said Oleg Panfilov, director of the Moscow-based media watchdog Center for Journalism in Extreme Situations.
Russia has been unmoved by Western criticism of its backsliding on press freedom and democracy; instead, authorities have warned against what they call “foreign meddling” in their country’s internal affairs. Emboldened by the defiant attitude of their strong neighbor, authorities in the former Soviet states of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan have broadened their own restrictions against reporters. In other ex-Soviet countries—such as Azerbaijan—authorities have employed existing laws with new creativity and fresh vigor.

“I don’t think anyone can imitate what Russia is doing exactly because no one is as sophisticated as the Kremlin,” said Lipman, who also noted that Russia still allows greater press freedom than most other former Soviet states.
Still, Lipman said, Russia is clearly pulling former Soviet states back into its orbit of influence through political initiatives such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization—a regional security alliance that includes China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. “And there is no doubt,” she said, “that these countries feel more secure having Russia by their side.” The regime of Uzbek President Islam Karimov, after all, might not have survived international outrage over the mass killings in the city of Andijan in May 2005 had it not been for the Kremlin’s public support.
A year after the killings—in which government troops fired on civilian demonstrators—Uzbek authorities further restricted the small independent press by passing a new law regulating the work of journalists for international media. With domestic media entirely under state control, international broadcasters such as the U.S. government-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the BBC, and the German public broadcaster Deutsche Welle—all of which support local-language services—have served as important alternatives for independent news.
International broadcasters lost their bureau accreditations and were forced to leave Uzbekistan in the months immediately after Andijan, but they retained informal networks of local stringers who continued to contribute to them at the risk of official harassment. Since the passage of the 2006 law, however, not only has reporting for international outlets become risky—it has also become illegal.

The new regulations give the Uzbek Ministry of Foreign Affairs wide discretion to issue formal warnings to foreign correspondents, revoke their accreditation and visas, and expel them. Among other vaguely worded bans, foreign correspondents were barred from “interfering in the internal affairs of the Republic of Uzbekistan, harming the honor and dignity of citizens of the Republic of Uzbekistan, interfering in their private lives, and committing other actions that provide for legal accountability.” The broad language of the measure does not define what constitutes interference in Uzbekistan’s internal affairs or in the private lives of citizens, nor does it specify “other actions” that are prohibited.

Interpretation of this law, like the Russian antiextremist measures, is left to state agencies. And, as in Russia, the law spreads and sustains a climate of fear and self-censorship. “The sense is that you can be attacked at any moment and placed under criminal investigation,” said Galima Bukharbaeva, a prominent exiled Uzbek journalist and 2005 recipient of CPJ’s International Press Freedom Award. “Any journalism but that of state media is outlawed.”
Putting the new regulations to immediate use, the Uzbek Foreign Ministry issued official
reprimands to several Deutsche Welle correspondents, forcing one to quit journalism and another to flee Uzbekistan to escape legal threats.

In Tajikistan, authorities are expanding restrictions to the Internet. In July, the Tajik parliament passed amendments to the country’s Criminal Code that broaden defamation provisions to include Internet publications. The bill, which President Emomali Rahmon signed into law in October, effectively criminalizes critical reporting and commentary online, and extends existing penalties for criminal insult and defamation to the Internet. Penalties include fines and prison terms of up to two years.

The Internet-specific amendments are significant for Tajikistan, where no daily newspapers circulate, independent weeklies are suppressed, and foreign broadcasters are barred from the airwaves. With the scarcity of available independent information, Central Asia news Web sites such as Ferghana and Centrasia, as well as Tajikistan-specific opposition sites such as Charogiruz and Tajikistan Times, have grown popular. The new amendments are expected to cause wide self-censorship among Web site contributors, according to CPJ sources in the region. Mukhtor Bokizoda, director of the Dushanbe-based press freedom group Foundation for the Memory and Protection of Journalists, told CPJ that officials tend to interpret criticism as libel, and that a politicized court system invariably sides with the government.
This is a common refrain. In Russia and other former Soviet states, journalists have little
confidence in the independence of their justice systems. “State agencies create a myth of a formal procedure,” Russian lawyer Nersisian told CPJ. “They choose the opponent, they put together a case, and the law acts as a guided missile against him.”
Said Panfilov: “Russian authorities are setting an example for those governments who want to re-create Soviet authoritarianism.”

One such country is Azerbaijan, where, in the words of Emin Huseynov, director of the
Baku-based Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety (IRFS), authorities are following “a Russian scenario” in regard to critics. “Azeri authorities are now moving away from using defamation charges and [toward] more serious articles of the criminal code, such as terrorism,” he told CPJ. Because terrorism is such a grave charge, the crime is less likely to be challenged by the public, Huseynov said. “In Russia, few journalists report on the Chechen war,” he said, “because that could be assessed as a support of terrorism.”
Now Azerbaijani authorities are starting to use a similar approach, he told CPJ. Huseynov noted the October 30 conviction of Eynulla Fatullayev, the embattled editor of two popular independent newspapers that were forced to shut down after authorities imprisoned him in April. Fatullayev, convicted of terrorism and incitement of ethnic and religious hatred, was sentenced to eight and a half years in jail because of a critical piece on President Ilham Aliyev’s foreign policy regarding Iran. Authorities are growing more inventive, Huseynov said. “Today, it’s terrorism charges. Tomorrow, it will be revealing state secrets or extremism. ... It’s no longer only defamation. The practice is shifting.”
The climate is changing in the region, too. Aleksei Simonov, head of the Moscow-based Glasnost Defense Foundation, said Russian journalists have not yet been marginalized as dangerous dissidents. “Not yet, not yet, not yet,” he said. “But the climate is changing very rapidly.” Toward what? He paused and said: “Toward winter.”
http://www.cpj.org/attacks07/europe07/eur_analysis_07.html
-------------------------

This web log(blog) is dedicated for ‘Freedom of Expression’, as a means/measure/ manoeuvre of social service, all news and information posted herein, are collected from mostly electronic media/ online (published) news. The source party/ or the name who has the credit of the news shoulders all responsibility of the concerned news have been mentioned along with the posted/published news at bottom of every news, maintained and updated by Albert Ashok on behalf of http://rainbowartistsandwritersfoundation.blogspot.com a non-profit artists’ and writers’ organization defends ‘Freedom of Expression’ and ‘Human Rights’.If you find any news/information is incorrect/wrong then please bring it to our knowledge for immediate correction, we express our unwilling ignorance and ready to make information correct. email : rawfoundation@ymail.com Please visit us