Uzbek Newspaper Goes Too Far
Uzbek Newspaper Goes Too Far
The state of press freedom in Uzbekistan has been underlined by the dismissal of staff at an officially-approved newspaper who dared to criticise the country’s tax service. The critical reporting was sanctioned by a senior government official, and his fall from grace coincided with the Hurriyat paper becoming a target for persecution, though it is unclear which of the two events sparked the other.
On January 11, the Uzbek internet side Metronom reported that “a series of dismissals of top officials in the Uzbek media and the so-called non-government sector” was under way.
In the previous two months, Metronom said, Hurriyat’s editor-in-chief Abdurasul Jumaqulov and his deputy Khosil Karimov were removed. In the same period, Fathiddin Muhitdinov, a senior media consultant working for a presidential advisor, was dismissed, as was Jamoleddin Hokimov, head of the Public Foundation to Support and Develop Independent Print Media and News Agencies.
A source in Tashkent who asked to remain anonymous said it was Muhitdinov who authorised publication of an article critical of the way a market in the town of Chinaz was being run, which sparked an official investigation.
In theory, some media outlets in Uzbekistan are in private hands, but these are generally owned by businesses and institutions close to government or actually run by it. The material carried by such “independents” is subject to the same controls and censorship as the state media.
The Uzbek-language Hurriyat stood out from many of its competitors by make an effort to push the boundaries and publish stories that would engage the reader.
In August, for instance, it carried an article featuring a tax officer in the Pastdargam district of the western Samarkand region who was taking on senior local government officials he believed to be corrupt.
The report clearly ruffled too many feathers. As Abdurahmon Tashanov, a journalist and activist with the Ezgulik human rights group, recalls, “After the piece was published, the prosecutor’s office launched a comprehensive inspection of the Hurriyat newspaper. Shortly before the new year, the tax inspector was put in prison and Hurriyat reporter Agzam Rustam was called in by various [government] agencies.”
The article on the Chinaz market in November, which reported that traders were being prevented from working there, prompted Uzbek president Islam Karimov to order a government investigation. This concluded that the article had been written to order, and that Hurriyat’s editor was therefore in breach of journalistic ethics.
“It is quite possible that the investigation and its findings provided a pretext for dismissing Jumaqulov and his deputy [Hosil] Karimov,” said a media analyst in Tashkent. “However, we should remember that the only officials who get criticised in the Uzbek media are those who have already fallen out of favour. This criticism can be particularly scathing if it’s been sanctioned by the authorities themselves and is a precursor to the officials being dismissed or prosecuted.”
The Tashkent source noted that Muhitdinov was dismissed at the same time the government investigation produced findings that resulted in Jumaqulov’s removal. He speculated that the former could have led to the latter, as well as vice versa.
“Muhitdinov may have been dismissed for other blunders – allowing Uzbek media to publish articles that the authorities disliked or deemed too critical,” he said.
According to a journalist in Tashkent, it is not uncommon for journalists working for nominally independent media to be trapped by complex machinations. They may initially be allowed to publish critical articles and investigative reports, and these are pre-approved by censors, yet they can nevertheless face prosecution at a later stage.
“I know of a case where the editor of newspaper with independent status, who was a former state official himself, instructed a journalist to write an article denouncing a prosecutor. When the prosecutor filed a libel suit against the journalist, the newspaper refused to appear as co-defendant. With no means of redress, the journalist resigned from the paper and fled the country.”
Other commentators see the Hurriyat case as a bad sign which will negative signal and that they will only increase result in greater controls on journalists, further curtailing their activities.
“This process will make journalists even more powerless,” said Ulugbek Haidarov, an independent Uzbek journalist now in exile in Canada. “New editors have come on board at the [Hurriyat] newspaper; they have been instructed what to do and they will try to ensure there isn’t a single flash of inspiration.”
In its annual report “Freedom in the World 2010: Global Erosion of Freedom”, the United States-based watchdog group Freedom House rated Uzbekistan as one of the nine least free countries worldwide. The 2009 Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters Without Borders included the country in its list of states which are most repressive towards the media.
(NBCA is an IWPR-funded project to create a multilingual news analysis and comment service for Central Asia, drawing on the expertise of a broad range of political observers across the region. The project ran from August 2006 to September 2007, covering all five regional states. With new funding, the service has resumed, covering Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.)
On January 11, the Uzbek internet side Metronom reported that “a series of dismissals of top officials in the Uzbek media and the so-called non-government sector” was under way.
In the previous two months, Metronom said, Hurriyat’s editor-in-chief Abdurasul Jumaqulov and his deputy Khosil Karimov were removed. In the same period, Fathiddin Muhitdinov, a senior media consultant working for a presidential advisor, was dismissed, as was Jamoleddin Hokimov, head of the Public Foundation to Support and Develop Independent Print Media and News Agencies.
A source in Tashkent who asked to remain anonymous said it was Muhitdinov who authorised publication of an article critical of the way a market in the town of Chinaz was being run, which sparked an official investigation.
In theory, some media outlets in Uzbekistan are in private hands, but these are generally owned by businesses and institutions close to government or actually run by it. The material carried by such “independents” is subject to the same controls and censorship as the state media.
The Uzbek-language Hurriyat stood out from many of its competitors by make an effort to push the boundaries and publish stories that would engage the reader.
In August, for instance, it carried an article featuring a tax officer in the Pastdargam district of the western Samarkand region who was taking on senior local government officials he believed to be corrupt.
The report clearly ruffled too many feathers. As Abdurahmon Tashanov, a journalist and activist with the Ezgulik human rights group, recalls, “After the piece was published, the prosecutor’s office launched a comprehensive inspection of the Hurriyat newspaper. Shortly before the new year, the tax inspector was put in prison and Hurriyat reporter Agzam Rustam was called in by various [government] agencies.”
The article on the Chinaz market in November, which reported that traders were being prevented from working there, prompted Uzbek president Islam Karimov to order a government investigation. This concluded that the article had been written to order, and that Hurriyat’s editor was therefore in breach of journalistic ethics.
“It is quite possible that the investigation and its findings provided a pretext for dismissing Jumaqulov and his deputy [Hosil] Karimov,” said a media analyst in Tashkent. “However, we should remember that the only officials who get criticised in the Uzbek media are those who have already fallen out of favour. This criticism can be particularly scathing if it’s been sanctioned by the authorities themselves and is a precursor to the officials being dismissed or prosecuted.”
The Tashkent source noted that Muhitdinov was dismissed at the same time the government investigation produced findings that resulted in Jumaqulov’s removal. He speculated that the former could have led to the latter, as well as vice versa.
“Muhitdinov may have been dismissed for other blunders – allowing Uzbek media to publish articles that the authorities disliked or deemed too critical,” he said.
According to a journalist in Tashkent, it is not uncommon for journalists working for nominally independent media to be trapped by complex machinations. They may initially be allowed to publish critical articles and investigative reports, and these are pre-approved by censors, yet they can nevertheless face prosecution at a later stage.
“I know of a case where the editor of newspaper with independent status, who was a former state official himself, instructed a journalist to write an article denouncing a prosecutor. When the prosecutor filed a libel suit against the journalist, the newspaper refused to appear as co-defendant. With no means of redress, the journalist resigned from the paper and fled the country.”
Other commentators see the Hurriyat case as a bad sign which will negative signal and that they will only increase result in greater controls on journalists, further curtailing their activities.
“This process will make journalists even more powerless,” said Ulugbek Haidarov, an independent Uzbek journalist now in exile in Canada. “New editors have come on board at the [Hurriyat] newspaper; they have been instructed what to do and they will try to ensure there isn’t a single flash of inspiration.”
In its annual report “Freedom in the World 2010: Global Erosion of Freedom”, the United States-based watchdog group Freedom House rated Uzbekistan as one of the nine least free countries worldwide. The 2009 Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters Without Borders included the country in its list of states which are most repressive towards the media.
(NBCA is an IWPR-funded project to create a multilingual news analysis and comment service for Central Asia, drawing on the expertise of a broad range of political observers across the region. The project ran from August 2006 to September 2007, covering all five regional states. With new funding, the service has resumed, covering Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.)
