From: "georg warning" <gwarning@hotmail.com>
To: m_johann@hotmail.com, nzz@co.ru, jgasiecki@nbnet.de, dreger@taz.de, jdonker@worldonline.nl, briheu@zedat.fu-berlin.de, turkinst@zedat.fu-berlin.de, lutz.rzehak@rz.hu-berlin.de, HerbKrill@compuserve.com, StErfen@aol.com, administration@biost.de, doihh@uni-hamburg.de, pmh@turk.net, ute.einsporn@skzl.verwalt-berlin.de, h.hermann@wunsch.com, cwik@zedat.fu-berlin.de, poststelle@auswaertiges-amt.de, posteingang@bmi.bund400.de, susannefrost@firemail.de, BRAHR@bloomberg.net, mmurphy@pri.org.uk, myriam.schippers@stud.lrz-muenchen.de, redaktion@owc.de, bert.fragner@split.uni-bamberg.de, bayram@wanadoo.fr, ceyildirim@sozjur.uni-bielefeld.de, as-e-4@auswaertiges-amt.de, hicral@bluewin.ch, spichler@crisisweb.org, simorgh@gewi.kfunigraz.ac.at, zdwf-@t-online.de
Subject: Usbekistan Religionsfreiheit
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:15:20 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F144vsGOkevWWGxegIq00003d27@hotmail.com>


The post-Soviet governments of the newly independent states
of Central Asia, among them Uzbekistan, are engaged in massive
repression of civil and religious liberties ... and the US State
Department, eager to cultivate good relations with the new-old set of
tyrants who rule these resource-rich and strategic new countries, is
more than willing to make up excuses for this repression.
Below you will find a Statement of Human Rights Watch researcher
Acacia Shield.

ERK Democratic Party

======================================================================

U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on International Relations
Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights

Statement of Acacia Shields
Uzbekistan Researcher
Human Rights Watch
September 7, 2000

Hearing on "The State Department Annual Report on International
Religious Freedom for 2000"


I would like to express my appreciation for this opportunity to speak
before the Subcommittee about the repression of religious freedom
in Uzbekistan.

My name is Acacia Shields and I am the Uzbekistan researcher for Human
Rights Watch, based in Tashkent. Human Rights Watch has investigated
violations of civil and political rights in Central Asia since 1990,
and we have had a field office in Uzbekistan since 1996. For the last
year and a half, I have headed that field office. I have spent these
last 18 months investigating religious repression in Uzbekistan and
carefully documenting hundreds of cases of religiously motivated
arrests,
detention and torture of believers, and other forms of discrimination
and harassment. I have interviewed hundreds of victims and relatives
of
victims of religious discrimination, and again am profoundly grateful
to the subcommittee for this opportunity to bring their stories to
you,
and to comment on the way in which this campaign of repression is
treated in this year's State Department Annual Report on International
Religious Freedom for 2000.

The IRF Report

While this year has seen at least two dramatic and disturbing attacks
on Christian believers and several detentions of Christians for
alleged missionary activity, one of which was documented in the State
Department's report, the problem of religious repression in Uzbekistan
is first and foremost a problem of government-ordered discrimination
and violence against pious Muslims on a vast scale.

Since late 1997, Uzbek police and security forces have arrested
thousands of pious Muslims. These arrests are illegal and
discriminatory:
they target people who belong to unregistered Islamic groups, who
practice
outside state-controlled mosques, or who possess Islamic literature
not generated by the government. Police routinely torture and threaten
detainees, deny them access to medical treatment and legal counsel,
and
often hold them incommunicado in basement cells for up to six months.
Trials are grossly unfair, as judges systematically punish independent
Muslims with lengthy terms in prison for their religious beliefs and
affiliations, ignoring allegations of torture, and allowing coerced
self-incriminating statements as evidence, often the only offered
evidence, to convict.

This year's IRF report recognizes neither the anti-religious nature
of this repression, nor the human rights crisis it has produced.
It argues that victims are engaged in activity that is primarily
political, and therefore that Uzbekistan cannot be said to be
violating
the victim's religious freedom. We believe this position is misguided.
We do not believe the government of Uzbekistan has made improvements
that
merit credit, as the report suggests. We are calling for the President
to classify Uzbekistan as a country of particular concern for
religious
freedom and adopt appropriate measures, as foreseen by the
International
Religious Freedom Act.

This campaign of repression based on religious beliefs and practices
is blatant and irrefutable. Government statements articulating the
state's intolerance for certain Islamic practices and beliefs are
clear
and a matter of public record. Policies restricting and forbidding
certain religious practices and activities are encoded in law. A 1998
law
on Freedom of Conscience banned all religious activity not registered
with the state. The law also outlawed proselytizing and religious
dress
in public.

The arrest and conviction of thousands of independent Muslims is now
well-documented. In addition to having conducted hundreds of victim
and
witness interviews, Human Rights Watch has monitored dozens of trials
and
obtained official court documents for several hundred additional
cases.
The majority of indictments and judicial verdicts state clearly that
the basis for the charges and convictions is their religious practice
and beliefs, which the state construes as evidence of anti-state
activity
and attempt to overthrow the constitutional order. These practices
include participating in unsanctioned prayer groups, or conducting
private
religious teaching; membership in an unregistered Islamic
organization,
or possession or distribution of literature of such an organization
alone
is grounds for lengthy prison sentences. Some pious Muslims have been
convicted on charges of anti-constitutional activity for agreeing
with the
beliefs expressed by banned Islamic groups, even if they were not
members
and did not possess the group's literature. That such convictions
constitute violations of the right to freedom of conscience is beyond
question.

Only sophistry has allowed the Administration to avoid classifying
Uzbekistan as a country of particular concern for its gross violations
of religious freedom. The IRF report would have us accept the Uzbek
government's own characterizations of those it arrests and tortures.
Uzbekistan "does not consider repression of these groups to be a
matter
of religious freedom, but instead to be directed against those who
oppose
the political order." Therefore, according to the Administration, this
repression, while it deeply violates human rights, cannot be called
anti-religious. But let us not forget authoritarian governments
everywhere
-- including those countries which the U.S. has deemed "of particular
concern" -- are threatened by the commitment to truth and justice
which
independent religious movements display. In China and Iraq, the fact
that
the governments perceive oppressed religious groups as a political
threat
has not led the U.S. to dismiss the anti-religious nature of their
repression.

The State Department's International Religious Freedom report also
creates
a false distinction between "moderate" Muslims, whom it defines as
those
who participate in government-run religious activities, and those who
"operate outside the state-run Muslim hierarchy." The Uzbek
government,
it argues, supports the former but is intolerant of the latter. In
fact,
a "moderate"  Muslim may practice within and beyond state-run Muslim
structures. The term "moderate" is also misleading, especially if it
is
taken to mean "non-violent." The overwhelming majority of pious
Muslims
convicted for illegal religious activity or supposed anti-state
activity
committed no act of violence and faced no such charges. It is their
religious affiliation or belief that brands them "enemies of the
state,"
not any purported violent acts. Members of Hizb ut-Tahrir have stated
repeatedly and categorically in interviews with me, in courtroom
testimony, and in written documents, that they oppose the use of
violence
and consider the timing of the establishment of a Caliphate to depend
on
the will of their God.

Finally, the International Religious Freedom report gives credit
for Uzbekistan's progress, when in fact none is due. Its discussion of
positive improvements, for instance, cites the release of six
Christians
last year, prior to the release of the 1999 International Religious
Freedom report, a move that we see as a calculated effort to avoid
designation as a country of particular concern and to distract the
administration from the lack of progress in the treatment of Muslims.

Religious Repression against Independent Muslims in Uzbekistan

The government's campaign against pious and independent Muslims,
those who
practice outside of state-sanctioned Islam and Islamic institutions,
began, in its current form, in late 1997. Following the murders of
several
police officers in Namangan, in the Ferghana Valley area, the
government
launched a massive crackdown on overtly pious Muslims. Police and
security
forces took men with beards directly off the streets, forced some to
shave
and arrested others on fabricated charges of possession of narcotics
or
several bullets. Followers of well-known independent religious leaders
who criticized government policies or failed to praise the government
during their religious services were rounded up, arrested, and
convicted
on trumped-up charges.

The situation took a dramatic turn from bad to worse when Tashkent,
the capital, was rocked by several bomb explosions in February 1999.
The
government immediately blamed "Islamic extremists" and security forces
were given carte blanche to use any and all means to round up these
so-called enemies of the state. Again, police planted narcotics and,
increasingly, banned religious literature, on independent Muslims to
justify the initial arrest. Brutal police interrogations routinely
centered solely on detainees' religious beliefs and affiliations and
courts ultimately convicted the men on this basis. The arrests and
convictions have continued in the year 2000 at an alarming rate.

Contrary to the contention in this year's International Religious
Freedom
report that the majority of detainees were subsequently released, our
investigations have found that very few alleged releases of Muslims
could be confirmed. Several of those well-known pious Muslims whose
releases were confirmed have, unfortunately, been rearrested this
year.
One of them, Imam Abduwahid Yuldashev, is described below.

The government's tactics in this campaign recalls some of the worst
moments of the Soviet era: It has created a climate of suspicion and
fear,
in which neighbors inform on one another, mothers turn their sons over
to police, and local authorities organize "hate rallies," in which
police,
government leaders and neighbors publicly denounce pious Muslims and
their relatives as "enemies of the state."

Family members are detained and even arrested by police. They are held
hostage by authorities, who state outright that until their relatives
are
arrested, these mothers, fathers and other loved ones will sit in
jail.
In at least one case, the father of severa overtly pious young men
who were sought by police was arrested and jailed on false charges
as punishment for his sons' beliefs. This father, Azim Khodjaev, was
tortured to death in jail and his body was returned to his family
last year. This year, two of his sons were arrested: one was sentenced
to death and another is awaiting trial.

Women are often detained and threatened with rape in front of their
husbands or sons in order to coerce the men to make self-incriminating
statements. This happened to Darmon Sultanova, who met with Ambassador
Seiple during his last visit to Uzbekistan. She recalled in that
meeting
how police came to her home and asked who in the family studied Koran
and
how many times a day they prayed. The officers arrested Sultanova's
sons,
Uigun and Oibek Ruzmetov on charges of "Wahhabism"  and detained
Sultanova
and her husband. Police stripped the elderly woman naked and
handcuffed
her to a radiator in a basement cell. They brought in her sons,
beaten and
bloody, and threatened to rape the young men's mother if they did not
confess to a range of charges, including membership in an illegal
religious group and participation in several unsolved murders
throughout
the country. The young men signed the police statements. Uigun and
Oibek
Ruzmetov's mother was then released, only to be held under armed house
arrest for the next 40 days. One officer threatened, "You are a
Wahhabi
and so is your daughter and we will shoot you all. None of you will be
left alive." Their 65-year-old father, Sarvar Ruzmetov, who was also
severely beaten by police, was convicted without legal counsel on
spurious
charges of narcotics possession and is still in prison today. Uigun
and
Oibek Ruzmetov recounted their ordeal at trial and declared their
innocence, but the judge did not investigate the charges of police
abuse,
and, declaring that the young men had taken part in "forbidden
activities
of a reactionary underground religious organization of Wahhabists,'"
found
them guilty on charges of murder, weapons possession and illegal
religious
activities and sentenced the young men to death. Darmon Sultanova
received
official documentation that the execution of her two sons by firing
squad
has been carried out. Another defendant on trial with the Ruzmetov
brothers, Shohnazar Yakubov, was reported this year to have died from
police torture in prison. He was 25 years old.

The Case of Imam Yuldashev

I would like to share one other case with you that is illustrative
of the type of wrongful arrest of pious Muslims being carried out
by Uzbek security forces today.

Imam Abduwahid Yuldashev was deputy to an outspoken and independent-
minded
religious leader, Obidhon Nazarov, who has since fallen afoul of the
Uzbek government. Nazarov is believed to have fled the country, but
his
two brothers and two other relatives have been imprisoned in his
place.
Estimated hundreds of his former students and young men who attended
his
mosque have also been sent to jail. Yuldashev, was also the leader of
an official, registered mosque. In February 1999, police called him
out
of the mosque one day after prayers, put him in handcuffs, and planted
narcotics in his pocket. At trial, Yuldashev denied the drugs charges
and
described how police beat him brutally in detention. His attorney,
who was
allowed to meet with him only once during his detention, was witness
to
the bruises and other signs of physical mistreatment dealt out to him
by
police and also spoke of this in court. The court ignored the charges
of
physical abuse and sentenced the imam to four and a half years in
prison.
Yuldashev was, however, released on appeal shortly before the
publication
of last year's International Religious Freedom report. This release
was
lauded by State Department officials as a sign of progress.

However, this is not the whole story. After authorities released
Yuldashev, they still required him to report every week to his local
police station to sign a document regarding not the alleged narcotics
charges, but his religious beliefs, stating: "I, Abduwahid Yuldashev,
am
not a member of any religious sect and do not approve of these sects."
Most worrying, Imam Yuldashev has met the same fate as many others who
were released in anticipation of the publication of the Religious
Freedom
report last year, he has been re-arrested. This time, authorities, who
arrested him on July 24, have charged him with "Wahhabism"
and "spreading
jihad ideas." This time, they have denied him access to a lawyer.
After
he was forced to reject his family attorney, his relatives hired a new
one. This lawyer saw him for several minutes and reported that
Yuldashev
was covered with bruises and welts. In the presence of this lawyer,
guards
beat the imam with a nightstick and demanded that he reject legal
counsel.
Yuldashev is today languishing in his second month of incommunicado
detention in the basement of the Ministry of Internal Affairs building
in Tashkent, without access to legal representation or medical
treatment.

Another former imam, Abdurahim Abdurahmanov, was also re-arrested
this year and sentenced to 17 years in prison on charges of anti-state
activities.

There are many others like him. Just yesterday, on September 6, 15 men
charged with membership in Hizb ut-Tahrir were sentenced to prison
terms
ranging from 12 to 16 years. They were charged also with possession
of banned religious literature, including a leaflet ironically titled,
"Uzbekistan's authorities are against Muslim beliefs." I received
letters
from the men while they were in detention, letters in which they
describe
how police sodomized them with bottles and nightsticks, raped them,
and
beat them in the kidneys, on the bottoms of their feet, and on their
heads
with truncheons and metal bars to the point where some lost
consciousness;
all this in order to force them to give testimony against each other
and
admit to the supposed crime of membership in an unregistered religious
group. These men stood up and made these same allegations at trial,
but
the court ignored them. We cannot.

U.S. Policy

This year's State Department report on international religious freedom
notes the efforts made by the U.S. to remind Uzbekistan of its
obligation
to respect freedom of conscience, to differentiate between terrorists
and peaceful Muslim believers. But this message is not getting
through.
Visiting U.S. officials have raised concerns, issued demarches on
specific
cases, and pressed for changes in the domestic laws. But the
government
of Uzbekistan has only intensified its campaign against observant and
independent Muslims and the condition of religious freedom has only
deteriorated.


More must be done. As you know, the International Religious Freedom
Act
was designed in part to ensure a clear and consistent U.S. policy on
freedom of religion. Unfortunately, this is not the case with respect
to Uzbekistan. While the Uzbek government sometimes receives sharp
criticism from US officials, it also received estimated $30 million
in U.S. assistance in 1999.  Since 1995, Uzbekistan also received
$980 million in credits from the US Export-Import Bank. Awarding
this kind of privilege and benefit in the face of egregious violations
of religious freedom turns legitimate human rights concerns into
victims of 'wink and nod' politics. It casts doubt on the United
States'
commitment to religious freedom and gives abuser states such as
Uzbekistan
the impression that they can carry on with repressive policies and
still
profit.

Conclusion

   Uzbekistan is in a profound human rights crisis, at the center of
which
is religious persecution. The administration should abide by its
legislative obligations, and designate Uzbekistan as a country of
particular concern for religious freedom. And the measures specified
under
the International Religious Freedom Act, including denial of Export-
Import
Bank and OPIC credits and imposition of sanctions, should be
implemented.


ERK Demokratik partisinin Web sayfasi
http://www.uzbekistanerk.org

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
erkinfo-unsubscribe@egroups.com


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.