Leaked documents the UK Government are trying to block / Torture

[Guest guest]

A

Fri, 30 Dec 2005 19:02:56 EST

Check out UK Torture Memos

 

 

 

 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11407.htm

 

 

Leaked documents the UK Government are trying to block under Secrets

Act - published here

 

by caribmon

12/29/05

 

It's not the al-Jazeera Memo, but these are some more documents that

the UK Government are trying to suppress with the threat of

prosecution under the Official Secrets Act. They detail our use of

intelligence extracted by torture, and legal advice the Foreign Office

received on the subject, and we need to get them out there as soon as

possible before the government act.

 

See also Our Presidents New Best Friend Boils People Alive

UK Torture Memos

 

Craig Murray torture documents pdf format

Source.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11408.htm

 

The first document contains the text of several telegrams that Craig

Murray sent back to London from 2002 to 2004, warning that the

information being passed on by the Uzbek security services was

torture-tainted, and challenging MI6 claims that the information was

nonetheless " useful " .

 

The second document is the text of a legal opinion from the Foreign

Office's Michael Wood, arguing that the use by intelligence services

of information extracted through torture does not constitute a

violation of the UN Convention Against Torture.

 

Craig Murray says:

 

In March 2003 I was summoned back to London from Tashkent specifically

for a meeting at which I was told to stop protesting. I was told

specifically that it was perfectly legal for us to obtain and to use

intelligence from the Uzbek torture chambers.

 

After this meeting Sir Michael Wood, the Foreign and Commonwealth

Office's legal adviser, wrote to confirm this position. This minute

from Michael Wood is perhaps the most important document that has

become public about extraordinary rendition. It is irrefutable

evidence of the government's use of torture material, and that I was

attempting to stop it. It is no wonder that the government is trying

to suppress this.

First document: Confidential letters from Uzbekistan

 

Letter #1

Confidential

FM Tashkent

TO FCO, Cabinet Office, DFID, MODUK, OSCE Posts, Security Council Posts

 

16 September 02

 

SUBJECT: US/Uzbekistan: Promoting Terrorism

SUMMARY

 

US plays down human rights situation in Uzbekistan. A dangerous

policy: increasing repression combined with poverty will promote

Islamic terrorism. Support to Karimov regime a bankrupt and cynical

policy.

 

DETAIL

 

The Economist of 7 September states: " Uzbekistan, in particular, has

jailed many thousands of moderate Islamists, an excellent way of

converting their families and friends to extremism. " The Economist

also spoke of " the growing despotism of Mr Karimov " and judged that

" the past year has seen a further deterioration of an already grim

human rights record " . I agree.

 

Between 7,000 and 10,000 political and religious prisoners are

currently detained, many after trials before kangaroo courts with no

representation. Terrible torture is commonplace: the EU is currently

considering a demarche over the terrible case of two Muslims tortured

to death in jail apparently with boiling water. Two leading

dissidents, Elena Urlaeva and Larissa Vdovna, were two weeks ago

committed to a lunatic asylum, where they are being drugged, for

demonstrating on human rights. Opposition political parties remain

banned. There is no doubt that September 11 gave the pretext to crack

down still harder on dissent under the guise of counter-terrorism.

Yet on 8 September the US State Department certified that Uzbekistan

was improving in both human rights and democracy, thus fulfilling a

constitutional requirement and allowing the continuing disbursement of

$140 million of US aid to Uzbekistan this year. Human Rights Watch

immediately published a commendably sober and balanced rebuttal of the

State Department claim.

 

Again we are back in the area of the US accepting sham reform [a

reference to my previous telegram on the economy]. In August media

censorship was abolished, and theoretically there are independent

media outlets, but in practice there is absolutely no criticism of

President Karimov or the central government in any Uzbek media. State

Department call this self-censorship: I am not sure that is a fair way

to describe an unwillingness to experience the brutal methods of the

security services.

 

Similarly, following US pressure when Karimov visited Washington, a

human rights NGO has been permitted to register. This is an advance,

but they have little impact given that no media are prepared to cover

any of their activities or carry any of their statements.

The final improvement State quote is that in one case of murder of a

prisoner the police involved have been prosecuted. That is an

improvement, but again related to the Karimov visit and does not

appear to presage a general change of policy. On the latest cases of

torture deaths the Uzbeks have given the OSCE an incredible

explanation, given the nature of the injuries, that the victims died

in a fight between prisoners.

 

But allowing a single NGO, a token prosecution of police officers and

a fake press freedom cannot possibly outweigh the huge scale of

detentions, the torture and the secret executions. President Karimov

has admitted to 100 executions a year but human rights groups believe

there are more. Added to this, all opposition parties remain banned

(the President got a 98% vote) and the Internet is strictly

controlled. All Internet providers must go through a single government

server and access is barred to many sites including all dissident and

opposition sites and much international media (including, ironically,

waronterrorism.com). This is in essence still a totalitarian state:

there is far less freedom than still prevails, for example, in

Mugabe's Zimbabwe. A Movement for Democratic Change or any judicial

independence would be impossible here.

 

Karimov is a dictator who is committed to neither political nor

economic reform. The purpose of his regime is not the development of

his country but the diversion of economic rent to his oligarchic

supporters through government controls. As a senior Uzbek academic

told me privately, there is more repression here now than in

Brezhnev's time. The US are trying to prop up Karimov economically and

to justify this support they need to claim that a process of economic

and political reform is underway. That they do so claim is either

cynicism or self-delusion.

 

This policy is doomed to failure. Karimov is driving this

resource-rich country towards economic ruin like an Abacha. And the

policy of increasing repression aimed indiscriminately at pious

Muslims, combined with a deepening poverty, is the most certain way to

ensure continuing support for the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. They

have certainly been decimated and disorganised in Afghanistan, and

Karimov's repression may keep the lid on for years – but pressure is

building and could ultimately explode.

 

I quite understand the interest of the US in strategic airbases and

why they back Karimov, but I believe US policy is misconceived. In the

short term it may help fight terrorism but in the medium term it will

promote it, as the Economist points out. And it can never be right to

lower our standards on human rights. There is a complex situation in

Central Asia and it is wrong to look at it only through a prism picked

up on September 12. Worst of all is what appears to be the philosophy

underlying the current US view of Uzbekistan: that September 11

divided the World into two camps in the " War against Terrorism " and

that Karimov is on " our " side.

 

If Karimov is on " our " side, then this war cannot be simply between

the forces of good and evil. It must be about more complex things,

like securing the long-term US military presence in Uzbekistan. I

silently wept at the 11 September commemoration here. The right words

on New York have all been said. But last week was also another

anniversary – the US-led overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile. The

subsequent dictatorship killed, dare I say it, rather more people than

died on September 11. Should we not remember then also, and learn from

that too? I fear that we are heading down the same path of

US-sponsored dictatorship here. It is ironic that the beneficiary is

perhaps the most unreformed of the World's old communist leaders.

We need to think much more deeply about Central Asia. It is easy to

place Uzbekistan in the " too difficult " tray and let the US run with

it, but I think they are running in the wrong direction. We should

tell them of the dangers we see. Our policy is theoretically one of

engagement, but in practice this has not meant much. Engagement makes

sense, but it must mean grappling with the problems, not mute

collaboration. We need to start actively to state a distinctive

position on democracy and human rights, and press for a realistic view

to be taken in the IMF. We should continue to resist pressures to

start a bilateral DFID programme, unless channelled

non-governmentally, and not restore ECGD cover despite the constant

lobbying. We should not invite Karimov to the UK. We should step up

our public diplomacy effort, stressing democratic values, including

more resources from the British Council. We should increase support to

human rights activists, and strive for contact with non-official

Islamic groups.

 

Above all we need to care about the 22 million Uzbek people, suffering

from poverty and lack of freedom. They are not just pawns in the new

Great Game.

 

MURRAY

 

 

 

--

 

Letter #2

Confidential

Fm Tashkent

To FCO

 

18 March 2003

 

SUBJECT: US FOREIGN POLICY

SUMMARY

 

1. As seen from Tashkent, US policy is not much focussed on democracy

or freedom. It is about oil, gas and hegemony. In Uzbekistan the US

pursues those ends through supporting a ruthless dictatorship. We must

not close our eyes to uncomfortable truth.

 

DETAIL

 

2. Last year the US gave half a billion dollars in aid to Uzbekistan,

about a quarter of it military aid. Bush and Powell repeatedly hail

Karimov as a friend and ally. Yet this regime has at least seven

thousand prisoners of conscience; it is a one party state without

freedom of speech, without freedom of media, without freedom of

movement, without freedom of assembly, without freedom of religion. It

practices, systematically, the most hideous tortures on thousands.

Most of the population live in conditions precisely analogous with

medieval serfdom.

 

3. Uzbekistan's geo-strategic position is crucial. It has half the

population of the whole of Central Asia. It alone borders all the

other states in a region which is important to future Western oil and

gas supplies. It is the regional military power. That is why the US is

here, and here to stay. Contractors at the US military bases are

extending the design life of the buildings from ten to twenty five years.

 

4. Democracy and human rights are, despite their protestations to the

contrary, in practice a long way down the US agenda here. Aid this

year will be slightly less, but there is no intention to introduce any

meaningful conditionality. Nobody can believe this level of aid – more

than US aid to all of West Africa – is related to comparative

developmental need as opposed to political support for Karimov. While

the US makes token and low-level references to human rights to appease

domestic opinion, they view Karimov's vicious regime as a bastion

against fundamentalism. He – and they – are in fact creating

fundamentalism. When the US gives this much support to a regime that

tortures people to death for having a beard or praying five times a

day, is it any surprise that Muslims come to hate the West?

 

5. I was stunned to hear that the US had pressured the EU to withdraw

a motion on Human Rights in Uzbekistan which the EU was tabling at the

UN Commission for Human Rights in Geneva. I was most unhappy to find

that we are helping the US in what I can only call this cover-up. I am

saddened when the US constantly quote fake improvements in human

rights in Uzbekistan, such as the abolition of censorship and Internet

freedom, which quite simply have not happened (I see these are quoted

in the draft EBRD strategy for Uzbekistan, again I understand at

American urging).

 

6. From Tashkent it is difficult to agree that we and the US are

activated by shared values. Here we have a brutal US sponsored

dictatorship reminiscent of Central and South American policy under

previous US Republican administrations. I watched George Bush talk

today of Iraq and " dismantling the apparatus of terror… removing the

torture chambers and the rape rooms " . Yet when it comes to the Karimov

regime, systematic torture and rape appear to be treated as

peccadilloes, not to affect the relationship and to be downplayed in

international fora. Double standards? Yes.

 

7. I hope that once the present crisis is over we will make plain to

the US, at senior level, our serious concern over their policy in

Uzbekistan.

MURRAY

 

 

 

--

 

Letter #3

 

CONFIDENTIAL

FM TASHKENT

TO IMMEDIATE FCO

 

TELNO 63

OF 220939 JULY 04

 

INFO IMMEDIATE DFID, ISLAMIC POSTS, MOD, OSCE POSTS UKDEL EBRD LONDON,

UKMIS GENEVA, UKMIS MEW YORK

 

SUBJECT: RECEIPT OF INTELLIGENCE OBTAINED UNDER TORTURE

 

SUMMARY

 

1. We receive intelligence obtained under torture from the Uzbek

intelligence services, via the US. We should stop. It is bad

information anyway. Tortured dupes are forced to sign up to

confessions showing what the Uzbek government wants the US and UK to

believe, that they and we are fighting the same war against terror.

 

2. I gather a recent London interdepartmental meeting considered the

question and decided to continue to receive the material. This is

morally, legally and practically wrong. It exposes as hypocritical our

post Abu Ghraib pronouncements and fatally undermines our moral

standing. It obviates my efforts to get the Uzbek government to stop

torture they are fully aware our intelligence community laps up the

results.

 

3. We should cease all co-operation with the Uzbek Security Services

they are beyond the pale. We indeed need to establish an SIS presence

here, but not as in a friendly state.

 

DETAIL

 

4. In the period December 2002 to March 2003 I raised several times

the issue of intelligence material from the Uzbek security services

which was obtained under torture and passed to us via the CIA. I

queried the legality, efficacy and morality of the practice.

 

5. I was summoned to the UK for a meeting on 8 March 2003. Michael

Wood gave his legal opinion that it was not illegal to obtain and to

use intelligence acquired by torture. He said the only legal

limitation on its use was that it could not be used in legal

proceedings, under Article 15 of the UN Convention on Torture.

 

6. On behalf of the intelligence services, Matthew Kydd said that they

found some of the material very useful indeed with a direct bearing on

the war on terror. Linda Duffield said that she had been asked to

assure me that my qualms of conscience were respected and understood.

 

7. Sir Michael Jay's circular of 26 May stated that there was a

reporting obligation on us to report torture by allies (and I have

been instructed to refer to Uzbekistan as such in the context of the

war on terror). You, Sir, have made a number of striking, and I

believe heartfelt, condemnations of torture in the last few weeks. I

had in the light of this decided to return to this question and to

highlight an apparent contradiction in our policy. I had intimated as

much to the Head of Eastern Department.

 

8. I was therefore somewhat surprised to hear that without informing

me of the meeting, or since informing me of the result of the meeting,

a meeting was convened in the FCO at the level of Heads of Department

and above, precisely to consider the question of the receipt of Uzbek

intelligence material obtained under torture. As the office knew, I

was in London at the time and perfectly able to attend the meeting. I

still have only gleaned that it happened.

 

9. I understand that the meeting decided to continue to obtain the

Uzbek torture material. I understand that the principal argument

deployed was that the intelligence material disguises the precise

source, ie it does not ordinarily reveal the name of the individual

who is tortured. Indeed this is true – the material is marked with a

euphemism such as " From detainee debriefing. " The argument runs that

if the individual is not named, we cannot prove that he was tortured.

 

10. I will not attempt to hide my utter contempt for such casuistry,

nor my shame that I work in and organisation where colleagues would

resort to it to justify torture. I have dealt with hundreds of

individual cases of political or religious prisoners in Uzbekistan,

and I have met with very few where torture, as defined in the UN

convention, was not employed. When my then DHM raised the question

with the CIA head of station 15 months ago, he readily acknowledged

torture was deployed in obtaining intelligence. I do not think there

is any doubt as to the fact

 

11. The torture record of the Uzbek security services could hardly be

more widely known. Plainly there are, at the very least, reasonable

grounds for believing the material is obtained under torture. There is

helpful guidance at Article 3 of the UN Convention;

" The competent authorities shall take into account all relevant

considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the state

concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass

violations of human rights. " While this article forbids extradition or

deportation to Uzbekistan, it is the right test for the present

question also.

 

12. On the usefulness of the material obtained, this is irrelevant.

Article 2 of the Convention, to which we are a party, could not be

plainer:

 

" No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a

threat of war, internal political instability or any other public

emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture. "

 

13. Nonetheless, I repeat that this material is useless – we are

selling our souls for dross. It is in fact positively harmful. It is

designed to give the message the Uzbeks want the West to hear. It

exaggerates the role, size, organisation and activity of the IMU and

its links with Al Qaida. The aim is to convince the West that the

Uzbeks are a vital cog against a common foe, that they should keep the

assistance, especially military assistance, coming, and that they

should mute the international criticism on human rights and economic

reform.

 

14. I was taken aback when Matthew Kydd said this stuff was valuable.

Sixteen months ago it was difficult to argue with SIS in the area of

intelligence assessment. But post Butler we know, not only that they

can get it wrong on even the most vital and high profile issues, but

that they have a particular yen for highly coloured material which

exaggerates the threat. That is precisely what the Uzbeks give them.

Furthermore MI6 have no operative within a thousand miles of me and

certainly no expertise that can come close to my own in making this

assessment.

 

15. At the Khuderbegainov trial I met an old man from Andizhan. Two of

his children had been tortured in front of him until he signed a

confession on the family's links with Bin Laden. Tears were streaming

down his face. I have no doubt they had as much connection with Bin

Laden as I do. This is the standard of the Uzbek intelligence services.

 

16. I have been considering Michael Wood's legal view, which he kindly

gave in writing. I cannot understand why Michael concentrated only on

Article 15 of the Convention. This certainly bans the use of material

obtained under torture as evidence in proceedings, but it does not

state that this is the sole exclusion of the use of such material.

 

17. The relevant article seems to me Article 4, which talks of

complicity in torture. Knowingly to receive its results appears to be

at least arguable as complicity. It does not appear that being in a

different country to the actual torture would preclude complicity. I

talked this over in a hypothetical sense with my old friend Prof

Francois Hampson, I believe an acknowledged World authority on the

Convention, who said that the complicity argument and the spirit of

the Convention would be likely to be winning points. I should be

grateful to hear Michael's views on this.

 

18. It seems to me that there are degrees of complicity and guilt, but

being at one or two removes does not make us blameless. There are

other factors. Plainly it was a breach of Article 3 of the Convention

for the coalition to deport detainees back here from Baghram, but it

has been done. That seems plainly complicit.

 

19. This is a difficult and dangerous part of the World. Dire and

increasing poverty and harsh repression are undoubtedly turning young

people here towards radical Islam. The Uzbek government are thus

creating this threat, and perceived US support for Karimov strengthens

anti-Western feeling. SIS ought to establish a presence here, but not

as partners of the Uzbek Security Services, whose sheer brutality puts

them beyond the pale.

 

MURRAY

 

 

 

Second Document - summary of legal opinion from Michael Wood arguing

that it is legal to use information extracted under torture:

Michael Wood, Legal Advisor

 

13 March 2003

 

CC: PS/PUS; Matthew Kidd, WLD

 

Linda Duffield

 

UZBEKISTAN: INTELLIGENCE POSSIBLY OBTAINED UNDER TORTURE

 

1. Your record of our meeting with HMA Tashkent recorded that Craig

had said that his understanding was that it was also an offence under

the UN Convention on Torture to receive or possess information under

torture. I said that I did not believe that this was the case, but

undertook to re-read the Convention.

 

2. I have done so. There is nothing in the Convention to this effect.

The nearest thing is article 15 which provides:

 

" Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established

to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as

evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of

torture as evidence that the statement was made. "

 

3. This does not create any offence. I would expect that under UK law

any statement established to have been made as a result of torture

would not be admissible as evidence.

 

[signed]

 

M C Wood

Legal Adviser

 

 

 

 

See also Our Presidents New Best Friend Boils People Alive

 

Translate this page

 

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is

distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior

interest in receiving the included information for research and

educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation

whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information

Clearing House endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

 

Join our Daily News Headlines Email Digest

Fill out your emailaddress

to receive our newsletter!

 

SubscribeUn

Powered by YourMailinglistProvider.com

 

 

Information Clearing House

 

 

 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3943.htm

 

Our Presidents New Best Friend Boils People Alive

 

 

See Also: Just Who Is Our New Best Friend This 29 minute video

explores the reality of life in Uzbekistan

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3944.htm

 

 

06/26/03: Let me introduce you to our presidents new best friend,

President Karimov of Uzbekistan.

 

President Karimov government was awarded $500m in aid from the Bush

administration in 2002. The SNB (Uzbekistan's security service)

received $79m of this sum.

 

The U.S. State Department web site states " Uzbekistan is not a

democracy and does not have a free press. Many opponents of the

government have fled, and others have been arrested. " and " The police

force and the intelligence service use torture as a routine

investigation technique. "

 

Now I would like to introduce you to Muzafar Avazov, a 35-year old

father of four. Mr Avazov had a visit from our presidents friends

security force (SNB), the photographs below detail the brutality and

inhuman treatment our tax dollars subsidize, with the full knowledge

of our president and his administration.

 

 

 

Muzafar Avazov, body showed signs of burns on the legs, buttocks,

lower back and arms. Sixty to seventy percent of the body was burnt,

according to official sources. Doctors who saw the body reported that

such burns could only have been caused by immersing Avazov in boiling

water. Those who saw the body also reported that there was a large,

bloody wound on the back of the head, heavy bruising on the forehead

and side of the neck, and that his hands had no fingernails.

 

WARNING

 

The pictures of Mr. Avazov's body are horrific and should only be

viewed by a mature audience

 

Photos:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3943.htm

 

 

 

 

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH:

 

Deaths Reveal " Horror " of Uzbek Prisons

 

(New York, August 10, 2002) Two suspicious deaths with apparent signs

of torture highlight Uzbekistan's brutal ongoing crackdown against

independent Muslims, Human Rights Watch said today. The bodies of

Muzafar Avazov and Husnidin Alimov, both religious prisoners at Jaslyk

Prison, were returned to family members for burial in Tashkent Thursday.

 

Individuals who had seen one of the bodies told Human Rights Watch

that it showed clear signs of torture. The authorities reportedly

restricted viewing of the second body. Both men had been imprisoned at

Jaslyk Prison, well-known for its harsh conditions and ill-treatment

and torture of religious prisoners.

 

Human Rights Watch has learned that the body of Muzafar Avazov, a

35-year old father of four, showed signs of burns on the legs,

buttocks, lower back and arms. Sixty to seventy percent of the body

was burnt, according to official sources. Doctors who saw the body

reported that such burns could only have been caused by immersing

Avazov in boiling water. Those who saw the body also reported that

there was a large, bloody wound on the back of the head, heavy

bruising on the forehead and side of the neck, and that his hands had

no fingernails.

 

" These deaths reveal the horror of Uzbek prisons, " said Elizabeth

Andersen, executive director of Human Rights Watch's Europe and

Central Asia Division. " It seems the small signs of progress on

torture we had seen were mere window-dressing, intended to hide

Uzbekistan's persistent problem and placate international critics. "

 

These latest incidents of serious human rights violations could

complicate Uzbekistan's relations with the United States. The United

States has allied itself closely with Uzbekistan in the war against

terrorism, but U.S. government officials have expressed concern that

Uzbekistan's harsh treatment of independent Muslims could be

counterproductive to the anti-terror effort. The U.S. government

recently adopted a law requiring that before delivering aid to the

Uzbek government, the Bush administration must determine that

Uzbekistan is making " substantial and continuing progress " in meeting

the human rights commitments contained in a U.S.-Uzbekistan March 2002

joint declaration.

 

Uzbek authorities, including numerous police officers, brought the

body of Muzafar Avazov, to the family home at about 3:30 p.m. on

August 8. Police cars surrounded the area and checked visitors who

approached the house, preventing some from entering. When the burial

occurred at 6:00 p.m. that evening, police closed the road to traffic.

Authorities from the office of General Prosecutor Rashidjon Kodirov

reportedly threatened the family not to talk to the media or give

interviews to others about the circumstances surrounding Avazov's

death. In May 2002, Human Rights Watch received reports that prison

authorities had beaten Muzafar Avazov and put him in a punishment cell

for stating that nothing could stop him from performing his prayers.

 

The authorities also returned the body of 34-year old Husnidin Alimov

to his family in Tashkent on August 8, but they reportedly restricted

viewing of the body. Prior to the death, relatives of people

imprisoned in Jaslyk told Human Rights Watch that prison officials had

placed Alimov in a punishment cell. He was reportedly placed there

before the end of June and spent many weeks there before his death.

Prisoners are often placed in such cells for praying or refusing to

ask for forgiveness from Uzbek President Islam Karimov. Conditions are

reportedly severe and beatings common. " Deaths under such

circumstances are highly suspicious, " said Andersen. " The Uzbek

government must ensure that full and open investigations are conducted

into these deaths and into the conditions and treatment of prisoners

in Jaslyk. There is an urgent need for regular, independent,

international monitoring of conditions there. " A large number of

police accompanied Alimov's body and were present during the funeral.

 

The father of another man who died in May, apparently after terrible

beatings in Jaslyk, was reportedly detained by police directly after

the funeral and sentenced Friday to 15 days in custody on an

administrative charge, related to his attendance at the funeral.

Police reportedly questioned him about how he heard about the funeral

and why he attended. Both men were serving prison sentences on charges

related to their religious activity. Since 1997, the government of

Uzbekistan has waged a campaign against religious Muslims who practice

their faith outside of state controls. The peaceful expression of

independent religious views has landed thousands in prison on charges

of extremism. The government has particularly targeted members of Hizb

ut-Tahrir, a banned Islamic group that calls for the peaceful

reestablishment of the Caliphate in Central Asia. Uzbek authorities

routinely prosecute those accused of affiliation with the group on

charges of anti-state activities or possession or distribution of

" illegal religious materials. " " Torture is an unmistakable feature of

this campaign, " said Andersen. In the past fifteen months alone, Human

Rights Watch has documented 11 deaths arising from suspicious

circumstances in custody. According to information from the human

rights group Memorial, Alimov was sentenced in 1999 to 16 years in

prison, on a range of charges, including spreading religious

" extremist " materials. Avazov was sentenced in mid-2000 to 20 years in

prison. He had been accused of membership of Hizb ut-Tahrir. His

sentence was reduced on appeal in February 2001 to 19 years.

 

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3943.htm

 

 

 

 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3944.htm

 

Just Who Is Our New Best Friend

 

This 29 minute video explores the reality of life in Uzbekistan

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3944.htm

 

 

 

Uzbekistan, key U.S. ally, plagued by torture

 

 

 

By Sebastian Alison

 

TASHKENT, June 18 (Reuters) - The police came late one evening in May.

 

" They said my brother was in detention, " Karima Eshonova recalled. " They said he

was seriously ill and we had to go. "

 

So she and her elder brother made the long journey from their home outside the

capital, Tashkent, to the town of Karshi, where her brother Orif was being held.

 

The next day, after a long, fruitless search, they were told at the prosecutor's

office that Orif had been suffering from high blood pressure, and had died from

water on the lungs.

 

Then she saw his body.

 

" He had a broken finger. Sharp objects had been forced under his finger nails.

There were bruises all over his arms and body. He had been beaten on the soles

of his feet, " she told Reuters.

 

Orif Eshonov, 38, had just become Uzbekistan's latest victim of torture -- a

plague which New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) says has claimed 10 lives

in the last 18 months, since the country became a crucial ally of the U.S. in

its " war against terror " , started in neighbouring Afghanistan.

 

Eshonov's crime was membership of an Islamic party, Hizb ut-Tahrir, which

Karima, 44, freely admits he belonged to.

 

Uzbekistan's authoritarian President Islam Karimov is clamping down on all

religious practice not directly organised by the state, fearing that extremists

fuelled by groups such as the Taliban across the border in Afghanistan are a

threat to the fabric of Uzbekistan.

 

Karimov enjoys huge support from the United States -- last year it gave $500

million in aid, and it maintains an airbase in the country -- but diplomats and

rights groups say Uzbekistan tortures all prisoners arrested for religious

" crimes " .

 

" I strongly condemn the use of torture in Uzbekistan, " Craig Murray, the British

ambassador to Tashkent, told Reuters. " It is widespread and systematic. It

affects thousands of people, many of whom are completely innocent and are being

persecuted for their religious beliefs. "

 

Torture has been rife in Uzbekistan for years, but the issue hit the headlines

last December when Karimov finally allowed the United Nations rapporteur on

torture, Theo van Boven, to visit.

 

Van Boven said then that the use of torture " is not just incidental but...is

systemic in this country. "

 

RAPE BY POLICE

 

In May the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development held its annual

meeting in member state Uzbekistan, despite criticism that doing so implied

approval of the government.

 

Before the meeting started, bank president Jean Lemierre told a news briefing in

London that Karimov would give a televised statement publicly condemning

torture.

 

In the event Karimov broke his word and said nothing.

 

Since the meeting ended, the pace of torture has stepped up, says Matilda

Bogner, Tashkent representative of HRW.

 

" There are reports of female relatives of religious prisoners being raped by

police in retribution for protesting about torture and treatment in jail, " she

told Reuters.

 

" That's new. It's not new to threaten rape, but it's new to carry out those

threats. "

 

Bogner said she knew of two such cases, one of rape and one of " what looks like

attempted rape and beating. "

 

" I think the human rights situation is not getting worse, it's staying the

same, " she added. But she did say there had been a small improvement in freedom

of association -- some minor street protests have been allowed, unthinkable a

year or so ago.

 

A Reuters team went to one, where a group of just three protestors outside the

state broadcasting company demanded the resignation of its head and the

introduction of a free press.

 

In a sign of the state's unease, at least five police watched the three, and a

police car drove past several times. When a Reuters reporter approached the

protestors, several unidentified young men appeared and started filming.

 

Undeterred, one protestor, Abduzhamil Boimatov, told Reuters as they filmed:

" Democracy, Uzbek-style, means unemployment and torture in prisons. "

 

Even the Uzbek government, stung by relentless criticism from the United Nations

and western governments, is now facing the fact that it has a problem, if only

with its image.

 

A highly placed Uzbek government official -- who would not be named, nor did he

want his ministry identified -- told Reuters the state had set up both a torture

ombudsman and a centre for monitoring human rights.

 

" That means it is officially acknowledged that there are such problems, " he

said.

 

CREATING FUNDAMENTALISM

 

Many fear that the heavy-handed religious repression, coupled with a creaking

economy which sees average Uzbeks earning an estimated $27 a month and unable to

import goods as the borders have been sealed, could lead directly to the very

extremism Karimov says he is trying to stamp out.

 

" The corruption, economic mismanagement and deepening poverty, combined with

political repression, is creating Islamic fundamentalism, " states British

ambassador Murray.

 

U.S. officials, aware of the controversy over their support for Karimov, insist

their role is beneficial and that they are pressing him to reform the economy

and stamp out torture.

 

" I believe the human rights situation has been better in the last 18 months than

in the five to 10 years before that and that's due to the U.S. connection, " said

one U.S. official in Tashkent, declining to be named.

 

" But we also believe the human rights situation remains very poor and more

progress is needed, " he said, although he disputed HRW's claim that 10 people

have died in the last 18 months.

 

Such disputes do little to help Karima Eshonova and her family -- another

brother, Maruf, was sentenced to 16 years in jail in 2000.

 

Sitting on floor cushions around a low table in her traditional Uzbek home,

Karima, wearing a full length gown and a headscarf, felt helpless against the

state's onslaught.

 

" We don't know who to turn to, or how. We're just facing a wall. "