Information concerning paragraph 30 of the concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee (CCPR/CO/71/UZB) on the consideration of the initial report of Uzbekistan on the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
1. Death penalty
to its international obligations,
2001, the number of crimes that carry the death penalty was further reduced.
In accordance with Act No. 254-P of
On 13 December 2000, at the thirteenth session of the Oliy Majlis, the death penalty was abolished as a form of punishment under two more articles of the Criminal Code: article 151 (Aggression) and article 153 (Genocide). Thus, the Criminal Code of Uzbekistan currently contains only two articles (art. 97, para. 2, and art. 155) that prescribe the death penalty as the highest form of punishment.
Moreover, pursuant to article 51 of the Criminal Code, the death penalty may not be applied: first of all, to women; secondly, to persons under the age of 18 who have committed a crime; and, thirdly, to men over the age of 60.
2. Torture, inhuman treatment, and abuse of power by officials
I. The Criminal Code of Uzbekistan prohibits the torture and cruel treatment of persons suspected of crimes. With a view to defining “torture” more precisely, in August 2003 the Oliy Majlis introduced an addition to article 235 of the Criminal Code, which provides that in criminal legislation the term “torture” is now defined on the basis of article 1 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; this was confirmed in a decision adopted on 19 December 2003 at a plenary session of the Supreme Court. Thus, the term “torture” means “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity”.
Evidence obtained by the use of torture, force, threats, deception, other cruel or degrading treatment or other illegal means, as well as violation of the right of a suspect or an accused person to a defence, shall be inadmissible and shall not constitute the basis of the accusation.
The investigator, procurator or court (judge) must always ask persons who have been brought before them from places of detention how they were treated during the initial inquiry or pre-trial investigation and under what conditions they were held in custody. Every complaint of the use of torture or other illegal methods of inquiry or investigation is subject to a thorough verification of the facts, including the conduct of a forensic examination, and measures of a procedural or other legal nature must be taken on the basis of the results, up to and including the institution of criminal proceedings against the officials in question.
Any act related to the use of torture, violence or other cruel or degrading treatment is regarded as a serious crime in criminal legislation. Uzbek criminal law stipulates that law enforcement officers shall be liable for acts of torture or cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment.
In addition to being outlawed by the general principles of justice, torture and cruel treatment are also prohibited by a special section of the Criminal Code, namely chapter XVI, articles 230-241, entitled “Offences against justice”. In order to address the problem of criminal prosecutions of persons known to be innocent, articles 230-236 of the Code make it a criminal offence for judicial officers to prosecute a person known to be innocent of a socially dangerous act, to hand down an unjust verdict, to fail to enforce a judicial decision or unlawfully to detain a person or remand him in custody.
Articles 234 and 235 provide for criminal liability for knowingly unlawful detention, that is, short-term restriction of a person’s liberty, and for coercion to testify, namely the mental or physical pressuring of a suspect, accused person, witness, victim or expert by means of threats, blows, battery, cruel treatment, torture, the infliction of actual or moderate bodily harm, or other unlawful acts. In both cases, criminal liability ranging from a fine to eight years’ deprivation of liberty is prescribed for special categories of persons, namely law enforcement officers (persons carrying out an initial inquiry or pre-trial investigation and procurators).
The Code of Criminal Procedure also contains safeguards against torture and cruel treatment of suspects; these are to be found in articles 11 to 27, which deal with the rules and principles of the criminal justice system.
The special rule contained in article 17 of the Code of Criminal Procedure states that “Judges, procurators and persons carrying out initial inquiries or pre-trial investigations are under an obligation to respect the honour and dignity of persons involved in a case”. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the same article state that “no one shall be subjected to torture, violence or other cruel, humiliating or degrading treatment. It is prohibited to perform acts or hand down judgements that humiliate or demean a person, will lead to the dissemination of details of his or her private life, thereby endangering the person’s health, or cause unjustified physical or mental suffering”.
Coercion to testify, namely the mental or physical pressuring by a person carrying out an initial inquiry or pre-trial investigation or by a procurator of a suspect, accused person, witness, victim or expert by means of threats, blows, battery, cruel treatment, torture, the infliction of actual or moderate bodily harm, or other unlawful acts with a view to extorting evidence is punishable by rigorous imprisonment for up to six months or by deprivation of liberty for up to five years. When such action entails serious consequences, it is punishable by deprivation of liberty for between five and eight years (Criminal Code, art. 235).
In accordance with Order No. 25 of 20 September 1996 of the Procurator General, on strengthening of the procurator’s supervision of the observance of the constitutional rights of citizens in cases of detention, criminal prosecution and remand in custody, each specific case involving the illegal criminal prosecution of citizens is examined and a decision is taken on the liability of the officials of investigation bodies who allowed such violations of the law.
In 2002, organs of the Procurator’s Office received 90 complaints and allegations concerning the use of threats, cruel treatment or other coercive methods, 98 concerning illegal detention, 143 concerning illegal preventive measures, 57 concerning illegal searches and confiscations, and 765 complaints and allegations concerning the lack of impartiality in the conduct of initial inquiries and pre-trial investigations.
Of that number, 690 complaints and allegations concerned illegal acts on the part of officials of internal affairs bodies, 121 concerned officials of organs of the Procurator’s Office and 37 concerned illegal acts on the part of officers of the National Security Service; 73 complaints and allegations were admitted, 100 were partly admitted and the rest were dismissed and reasons for dismissal were given.
The verification of complaints and allegations led to the institution of 73 criminal proceedings, while criminal proceedings were refused in 406 cases; 265 law enforcement officers were subjected to disciplinary measures.
Together with other law enforcement bodies, the organs of the Procurator’s Office is studying the conditions and reasons for the illegal criminal prosecution of citizens and is taking the necessary steps to prevent and prohibit such action.
II. In November 2002, at the invitation of the Government
of Uzbekistan, the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture of the United
Nations Commission on Human Rights, Mr. Theo van Boven, visited
During his visit, he held official meetings with high-ranking officials of government bodies, representatives of civil society institutions, international organizations and foreign embassies. In particular, the Special Rapporteur met the Prime Minister of Uzbekistan, Mr. Sultanov, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Kamilov, the Minister of Internal Affairs, Mr. Almatov, the Minister of Defence, Mr. Gulyamov, the Minister of Justice, Mr. Polvon-Zoda, the Procurator General, Mr. Kadyrov, the Acting Chairman of the Supreme Court, Mr. Ishmetov, the Deputy Chairman of the National Security Service, Mr. Mustafaev, the State Secretary on law enforcement agencies at the Presidential Office, Mr. Azizov, the Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs in charge of the execution of sentences, General Kadirov, the Ombudsman, Ms. Rashidova, and the Director of the National Centre for Human Rights, Mr. Saidov.
Theo van Boven visited the following places where persons deprived of their
liberty are held: the holding facility
(IVS)/remand centre (SIZO) of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in
Special Rapporteur met persons who themselves or whose relatives had allegedly
been victims of torture and other forms of ill-treatment. He also received verbal and written information
from NGOs and members of civil society, including Mothers against the Death Penalty
and Torture, the Legal Aid Society, the Human Rights Society for Uzbekistan,
the Independent Human Rights Organization of Uzbekistan, Freedom House,
Mazlum, Ezgulik Human Rights Organization, the Committee for Legal Assistance
to Prisoners, the Initiative Group for Human Rights, the Centre for Democratic
Initiatives and the Tashkent Group for the Defence of Human Rights.
Finally, he also met with representatives of the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP) in
Mr. Theo van Boven submitted to the Government of Uzbekistan a report in which he summed up the results of his visit. In April 2003, the report of the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture was officially disseminated, including on the Internet.
With a view to taking further measures to combat and prohibit this phenomenon in Uzbek law enforcement bodies, on the basis of the Special Rapporteur’s recommendations, and with assistance from the United Nations and OSCE, a national plan of action was drawn up to implement Mr. Theo van Boven’s recommendations. It is expected that the implementation of the plan of action will involve such institutions as the Supreme Court, the National Security Service, the Office of the Procurator General, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Ombudsman, the National Centre for Human Rights, NGOs active in the field of human rights, and international organizations and foreign embassies.
3. Treatment of offenders and
the use of force to obtain statements,
conditions in detention centres and penal institutions.
Length of detention of accused persons prior to sentencing and court proceedings to determine the reasons for arrest
I. Article 25 of the Constitution of Uzbekistan proclaims and guarantees the freedom and inviolability of the person.
In accordance with the Criminal Code of Uzbekistan, knowingly unlawful detention, that is, the short-term restriction of a person’s liberty by an officer conducting an initial inquiry or pre-trial investigation or by a procurator, in the absence of legal grounds, is punishable by a fine of up to 50 times the minimum wage or by rigorous imprisonment for up to six months.
Knowingly unlawful remand in custody is punishable by a fine of between 50 and 100 times the minimum wage or by deprivation of liberty for up to three years (Criminal Code, art. 234).
Detainees must be held separately from persons remanded in custody as a preventive measure or persons serving a sentence. Detainees held on suspicion of having committed a crime are placed in detention rooms that comply with the following conditions of isolation:
1. Men and women shall be separated;
2. Minors and adults shall be separated; in exceptional cases, with the procurator’s authorization, adults may be held in minors’ rooms;
3. Particularly dangerous recidivists shall be held separately from other detainees.
A person detained on suspicion of having committed a crime shall be entitled to use his clothes, footwear and other necessary items the list of which is established by law.
Persons detained on suspicion of having committed a crime shall be held in premises that comply with the health and hygiene regulations of the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
The medical treatment of detainees and health care in premises where they are held shall be organized and dispensed in accordance with the law.
Detainees shall be provided with food, sleeping quarters and other daily necessities free of charge, in accordance with established norms.
Visits to detainees by relatives and other persons shall be granted by the administration of the place where they are being held only with the written authorization of the officer conducting the inquiry or investigation, or a judge, who are in possession of the documents relating to the detention. Parcels containing clothes and foodstuffs may be received once a week.
Persons detained on suspicion of having committed a crime shall be released if:
1. The suspicion that they have committed a crime is not confirmed;
2. There is no need to remand the detainee in custody as a preventive measure;
3. The statutory detention period has elapsed.
A detainee shall be released by the head of the detention centre on the order of the officer conducting the inquiry, the officer conducting the pre-trial investigation, the procurator or a judge. The release order shall be given immediate effect when it is received by the detention centre.
If the officer conducting the inquiry or the investigation establishes that there are no grounds for further detention, he shall immediately free the detainee.
If, in the statutory detention period, no decision of the procurator or officer conducting the inquiry or investigation to release the detainee or to remand him in custody as a preventive measure has been received by the detention centre, the head of the detention centre shall release him and notify the procurator or officer conducting the inquiry or investigation accordingly.
If necessary, the administration of the detention centre shall provide persons released therefrom with free travel to their place of residence; at their request, it shall issue a certificate indicating the period during which they were at the detention centre.
Full compensation shall be paid for any harm caused to a person by unlawful detention, if he is subsequently acquitted or his case is closed for reasons set out in article 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Uzbek law provides that persons carrying out initial inquiries or pre-trial investigations and procurators who knowingly cause an innocent person to be prosecuted for a socially dangerous act shall be punishable by deprivation of liberty for up to five years.
If the prosecution brought in such circumstances is for a serious or particularly serious socially dangerous act, the offending official shall be punishable by deprivation of liberty for between five and eight years (Criminal Code, art. 230).
The issuance of an unlawful judgement, decision, ruling or order shall be punishable by deprivation of liberty for up to five years.
Should such an offence result in a person’s death or other serious consequences, it shall be punishable by deprivation of liberty for between 5 and 10 years (Criminal Code, art. 231).
Knowingly unlawful detention, that is, the short-term restriction of a person’s liberty, by a person conducting an initial inquiry or pre-trial investigation or by a procurator shall be punishable by a fine of up to 50 times the minimum wage or by rigorous imprisonment for up to six months.
Knowingly unlawful remand in custody shall be punishable by a fine of from 50 to 100 times the minimum wage or by deprivation of liberty for up to three years (Criminal Code, art. 234).
Coercion to testify, that is, the mental or physical pressuring by a person carrying out an initial inquiry or pre-trial investigation or by a procurator of a suspect, accused person, witness, victim or expert by means of threats, blows, battery, cruel treatment, torture, the infliction of
actual or moderate bodily harm, or other unlawful acts with a view to extorting evidence shall be punishable by rigorous imprisonment for up to six months or by deprivation of liberty for up to five years.
When such action entails serious consequences, it shall be punishable by deprivation of liberty for between five and eight years (Criminal Code, art. 235).
II. The legal situation of convicted persons, the rights and obligations of administrations of penal institutions and all related issues are regulated by the provisions of the 1997 Penal Enforcement Code. The Code stipulates that convicted persons have the following rights:
- To be informed of the procedures and conditions for serving their sentence, and of their rights and their obligations;
- To submit suggestions, statements and complaints in their native language or in another language, to the administration of the institution or body carrying out the sentence, other State authorities and public associations;
- To receive replies to their suggestions, statements and complaints, in the same language. If this is not possible, the reply shall be given in the Uzbek language. The reply shall then be translated by the institution or body carrying out the sentence into the language of submission of the person sentenced to rigorous imprisonment, sent to disciplinary premises or deprived of his liberty;
- To provide explanatory material and engage in correspondence, using the services of a translator where necessary;
- To use educational, artistic and other information materials;
- To receive health care, including medical care as an outpatient and an inpatient, depending on the medical findings;
- To receive social welfare, including a pension, in accordance with the law.
Depending on the type and seriousness of the crime, convicted persons serve their sentence in penal institutions. These comprise the following:
1. Prisons (for those who have committed particularly dangerous crimes);
2. Colonies with an intensive regime;
3. Colonies with a strict regime;
4. Colonies with a general regime;
5. Re-educational labour colonies for persons under the age of 18 who have committed crimes.
The procedures and conditions under which convicted persons serve their sentences are strictly regulated by the Penal Enforcement Code.
III. The decision adopted on
A suspect or accused person must be interrogated immediately or, at the latest, within 24 hours following his or her detention, appearance pursuant to a summons for interrogation, remand in custody or arrest in accordance with the provisions of article 111 of the Code of Criminal Procedure concerning the first interrogation of a suspect or accused person.
In general, investigations may be conducted only between and , except in the cases set out in article 88, paragraph 2 (3), of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
IV. The Act of
Uzbekistan’s penitentiary system, which is under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, is one of the most open to the general public. In this regard, it is important to note the agreement concluded in January 2001 between the Government of Uzbekistan and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) on the provision of humanitarian assistance in places of deprivation of liberty. In the first nine months of 2003 alone, ICRC made 26 visits to various places of detention. Over the past two years, penal institutions have been visited by deputies of the European Parliament, the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, ambassadors of foreign States and representatives of international organizations accredited in Tashkent, and representatives of local and foreign media.
4. Independence of judges
I. The Uzbek judiciary is independent of the legislature and the executive, political parties and other public associations. This is guaranteed in article 106 of the Constitution.
The constitutional provisions on the activities on the judiciary are further developed in the Constitutional Court Act, the Courts Act, the statute on the organization of military courts, in the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Code of Civil Procedure, the Code of Economic Procedure, the Administrative Liability Code, the Labour Code, the Penal Enforcement Code and others, including the relevant commentary on the Criminal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Administrative Liability Code. Moreover, the activities of the judiciary are analysed and generalized in the work of the plenary session of the Supreme Court, which issues appropriate decisions on the basis of the constitutional principle of the supremacy of the Constitution and the law (principle of legality) with a view to ensuring the more effective, legal, well-founded and fair administration of justice.
At present, the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court and the Higher Economic Court of Uzbekistan, the supreme courts of the Republic of Karakalpakstan for civil and criminal matters, the provincial and Tashkent municipal courts for civil and criminal matters, inter‑district, district (municipal) courts for criminal matters, military courts, the Economic Court of the Republic of Karakalpakstan and the provincial and Tashkent economic courts are in operation in Uzbekistan. Uzbek courts specialize in either civil or criminal cases.
In accordance with the Constitution, the Supreme Court and the Higher Economic Court have the right to introduce legislation in the Oliy Majlis.
Justice in Uzbekistan is administered solely by the court. The establishment of special courts is prohibited.
The adoption in 2000 of a new version of the Courts Act was an important step in the reform of the judiciary and in measures to ensure the independence of judges. The new version of the Act is based on international standards and experience in reforming the judiciary.
Pursuant to the Courts Act adopted in 2000, Uzbek courts must uphold the civil rights and freedoms proclaimed in the Constitution and legislation of Uzbekistan and in international human rights instruments, and the rights and legally protected interests of enterprises, institutions and organizations. Uzbek courts endeavour to ensure the supremacy of law, social justice and civil peace and harmony.
Under the Courts Act, judges are elected or appointed for a period of five years.
Judges are persons vested by law with the authority to dispense justice. All judges in Uzbekistan have the same status. Judges have the right:
1. To require officials and citizens to carry out their orders relating to the dispensation of justice;
2. To receive from official and other persons such information as is necessary for the dispensation of justice;
3. To form associations.
Judges may also have other rights in accordance with the law.
The State bodies, officials, public associations and other legal and natural persons must comply strictly with judges’ requirements and orders relating to the dispensation of justice. At the request of a judge, the information, documents and copies of documents necessary for the dispensation of justice are submitted free of charge. Failure to comply with judges’ requirements and orders entails liability under the law.
In their consideration of civil, economic and criminal cases and cases relating to administrative offences, judges must abide strictly by the Constitution and the laws of Uzbekistan, protect civil rights and freedoms, citizens’ honour, dignity and property, and the rights and legally protected interests of enterprises, institutions and organizations; they must be impartial and fair.
Judges must strictly observe the honour of judges and refrain from any actions that might diminish the authority of the judiciary or the dignity of a judge or give rise to doubts about a judge’s impartiality.
Judges may not divulge the secrecy of judges’ deliberations or information received during in camera sessions.
Guarantees of the independence of judges
The independence of judges is guaranteed by:
1. The legally established procedure for their election, appointment or dismissal;
2. Their immunity;
3. The strict legal procedure for the dispensation of justice;
4. The secrecy of judges’ deliberations in reaching decisions, and the prohibition regarding the divulging of secrets;
5. Liability for contempt of court or interference in the settlement of specific cases, and violation of judges’ immunity;
6. The material and social guarantees that judges receive at State expense in conformity with their legal status.
State and other bodies, enterprises, institutions and organizations, officials and citizens must respect and observe the immunity of judges.
Contempt of court or the commission of acts that demonstrate an overt disregard for the court entail liability under the law.
Interference in judges’ dispensation of justice is prohibited.
Any attempt to influence judges with a view to obstructing the thorough, complete and impartial consideration of a specific case or to obtain an illegal court ruling entails criminal liability under the law.
It is prohibited to require judges to provide any explanations on the substance of cases that they have considered or are considering, or to make them available to anyone for information, except in cases and in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law.
In their reports, the media are not entitled to predetermine the outcome of legal proceedings in a particular case or in any way influence the court.
The person of the judge is inviolable. The inviolability of judges applies to their domicile, office, means of transport and communication, correspondence and personal effects and documents.
In order to ensure their personal safety, judges are issued firearms in accordance with a list established, respectively, by the chairman of the Supreme Court, the chairman of the Higher Economic Court and the Minister of Justice. Where necessary, the chairman of the relevant court may decide to instruct an internal security body to provide a judge and his or her family with an armed guard.
A criminal case against a judge may be brought only by the Procurator General of Uzbekistan.
A judge may not face criminal prosecution or be remanded in custody without the consent of a plenary session of the Supreme Court or a plenary session of the Higher Economic Court. A judge may not be subject to administrative proceedings without the consent of the appropriate qualification board of judges.
The violation of a judge’s domicile or office or means of transport, and the conduct of an inspection, search or seizure, the tapping of his telephone conservations, the personal inspection or personal search of a judge, as well as the inspection, confiscation or seizure of his correspondence, personal effects or documents may take place only with the authorization of the Procurator of the Republic of Karakalpakstan, a procurator of a province or of Tashkent or by a court decision.
A criminal case against a judge of an inter-district or district (municipal) court or a district and territorial military court is under the jurisdiction of the highest court and, in criminal cases against judges of other courts, under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
All the guarantees of immunity of judges apply to lay judges during the performance of their judicial duties.
The life and health of judges are under special State protection and are subject to compulsory State insurance funded by the budget of Uzbekistan.
The State insurance bodies pay benefits in the following cases:
1. Death of a judge during his term of office or following expiry of his term of office, provided that death resulted from bodily injuries or impaired health related to the performance of his duties; in such case, the judge’s heir receives 50 times the judge’s monthly salary;
2. Disablement of a judge or impairment of his health during the performance of his duties that prevents him from continuing his professional activities; in such case, benefits are equivalent to 25 times the judge’s monthly salary;
3. Infliction of bodily harm to a judge or impairment of his health during the performance of his duties that does not result in a disability that would preclude the continuation of his professional activities; in such case, the benefits are equivalent to five times the judge’s monthly salary.
If, in the course of the performance of his duties, a judge is disabled or his health is impaired to such an extent that he is unable to continue his professional activities, he receives monthly compensation in the form of the difference between his salary and the amount of his pension, without taking account of the payments received under compulsory State insurance.
If a judge dies as a result of bodily injuries or impaired health related to the performance of his duties, his family dependants who are unable to work receive monthly compensation equivalent to the difference between that part of his salary intended for their support and the amount of his pension, without taking account of the payments received under compulsory State insurance.
The loss caused by the destruction or damaging of property belonging to a judge in connection with his official duties is subject to compensation, paid in full either to him or to the members of his family.
II. Pursuant to the recommendations of the Committee against Torture, Uzbekistan is currently studying the institution of habeas corpus. Thus, on 20 and 21 October 2003, the National Human Rights Centre, together with the American Association of Jurists, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights and UNDP, and with the participation of the central investigation department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Tashkent Bar Association, held a round table entitled “Criminal Procedure Code Reform: Judicial Supervision and Protecting of the Rights of Accused in the Investigative Process”.
The round table considered international experience. The American expert, Professor Stephen C. Thaman, an expert in the field of comparative criminal law, acquainted the participants in the round table with the experience of developed and developing countries in this area. The participants in the round table considered the advisability of introducing the institution of habeas corpus in Uzbekistan and drafted the relevant recommendations.
5. Internal resettlement of several communities in Uzbekistan
At the end of 2000, the political situation in the Central Asian countries deteriorated, particularly on the Kyrgyz-Tajik border and the Uzbek-Tajik border, where bands of guerrillas from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, a terrorist organization, with the tacit consent of the leaders of the Taliban of Afghanistan, and owing to the helplessness of the Government of Tajikistan, carried out repeated sorties from Tajik territory into the territories of bordering States. It should be noted that the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan has been recognized as a terrorist organization by the State Department of the United States of America and by the Government of the United Kingdom, which have underscored the need to halt the financing of that organization and to arrest its leaders and members.
At the end of 2000, a number of border mountain villages in Surkhandarya province came within the zone of confrontation between the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and the armed forces of Uzbekistan. In considering this question, it is particularly important to note that the inhabitants of these villages were cut off from the amenities of the modern world: the settlements lacked elementary sanitary conditions and children did not attend school. The guerrillas of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan took advantage of those conditions. Available information indicates that members of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan use these villages as staging posts and have accomplices there.
In this connection, and also with a view to ensuring the personal safety of the inhabitants of these villages, the Government of Uzbekistan adopted a decision on their resettlement to the flat country of Uzbekistan in the region of Sherabad and Shurchi settlements.
In all, 1,333 persons were resettled. A special government decision was issued on this question. In the places where the inhabitants of the mountain villages were resettled, social and medical conditions were created to ensure the normal continuation of their everyday activities.
Government commissions, headed by the khokim (governor) of Surkhandarya province, and with the participation of representatives of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the United Nations, ICRC and other international organizations, have made frequent visits to Sherabad and Shurchi, the places where the inhabitants of the mountain villages were resettled.
The leaders of Uzbekistan are continuing to monitor this question.
National Centre for Human Rights of Uzbekistan