Uzbek/Tajik journalist, Urinboi Usmon should be released immediately

21.06.2011 EU has issued statement raising concern about wellbeing of Urinboy Usmonov and his continued detention

BBC issued a second statement firmly denying him being a member of banned Hizb ut Takhrir party and demanding his immediate release.

 

 

Protest in London, in front of the Embassy of Tajikistan:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/uzbek/uzbekistan/2011/06/110620_urinboy_protest.shtml

Urinboy Usmonov, stringer for the Uzbek Service of the BBC World Service has gone missing on June 13, 2011. On June 14, 2011 he appeared at home accompanied by the representatives of the Tajik Security Service. He had clear signs of being beaten up.

Five days after his arrest no formal charges were put against him. However, spokesperson of the Tajik Interior Ministry accused mr. Usmonov in being a member of Hizb-ut Takhir party and spreading literature of this organisation. He is still denied legal representation. The fact that five days after his arrest, lawyer and family members are not allowed to see him, makes his fellow journalists and colleagues suspect that he is severely beaten up.

Several international organizations have already made statements, regarding the case of Mr. Usmonov:

1. Committee to Protect Journlalists: http://www.cpj.org/2011/06/tajikistan-detains-bbc-correspondent-on-extremism.php

2. Media Representative of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe

3. Reporters Without Borders: http://en.rsf.org/tajikistan-bbc-world-service-reporter-held-in-17-06-2011,40479.html

4. US Ambassador to Tajikistan: http://www.youtube.com/user/usembassydushanbe

 

Mr Usmonov, has worked for the BBC Central Asian Service for the last 10 years. I personally know Urinboy Usmon for a long time and I can say with absolute certainty that he has never been a member of any political party or movement. He is a professional journalist and accusations against him a totally fabricated.

Please sign petition in his support: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/uusm2011/petition.html

Umida Akhmedova

Umida Akhmedova, 55, photographer was found guilty in slander and “insulting the Uzbek people” because of a book of photographs she published in 2007, and a documentary film «Burden of Virginity» produced in 2008. Despite found guilty, she was released in the courtroom after strong international pressure put on the government of Uzbekistan.

Ahmedova’s 2007 book, Women and Men: From Dawn Until Dusk, portrays rural Uzbekistan and Uzbek traditions, focusing on gender inequality. Her 2008 film, The Burden of Virginity, explores the social consequences for brides who are suspected of not being virgins. A so-called “expert panel” convened by Uzbek prosecutors concluded that “Ahmedova’s work is insulting to the people of Uzbekistan and portrayed Uzbekistan in a negative light to Western audiences.”

Below is the translation of the findings of the expert panel:

These are the results of the complex expert review by specialists who were assembled to conduct the review and who are recognized as experts on criminal activity: specialists on religion – S. Sharipov and O. Shkovorodiuk; leading specialists from the Center of Propaganda and Spirituality – G. Narzullaev and A. Akmalov; psychologists R. Khikmatulaeva and R. Rasuleva. The review was organized by the Department of Criminal Investigation in the Public Prosecutor’s Office in the City of Tashkent. O.Kh. Musayev, August 5, 2009.

The film “The Burden of Virginity” by Umida Akhmedova and Oleg Karpov was produced by the studio “NONAME” and was filmed with support from the Embassy of Switzerland in Uzbekistan in 2008.

The film “The Burden of Virginity” is composed of two parts and was produced with support from the Swiss Embassy. The examination of “Chimildik” is a well-known part of our ancient traditions. When a young couple gets married, evidence of the young woman’s virginity is demanded before her wedding. However, a young woman who plays sports, exercises incorrectly, or has an inherently flexible hymen is not able to defend her honor. In such cases, the young woman is taken to a medical institution in order to prove through scientific means whether or not she is still a virgin. This subject is raised in the film, but the problem is exaggerated. The film humiliates the honor of our women and our national dignity. Under the guise of showing our ceremonies, the authors of the documentary accuse us of backwardness. Our “Chimildik” ceremony appears uncultured and uncivilized to the Western world. A quote from the film states, “Every woman is the mistress of her own body, neither her husband, nor her mother-in-law, nor her daughter-in-law has the right to be involved in her private affairs.” This is the position of the film. We are an emotional people, so of course every young woman cries when she leaves her parents’ house; she is leaving behind her parents’ home forever, and she is obliged to live far away from her loved ones. However, this need to cry does not exist in the West. When people in the West watch these scenes, they think that the poor girl has been forced to marry. In our culture, mothers are too timid to speak with their daughters about the problems between men and women. For this reason there has always been the “Yanga,” who serves as an intermediary, yet the film criticizes the fact that mothers do not speak about such lewd themes.

In the film, a male doctor shamelessly depicts sexual intercourse. Showing this on film is a foreign concept to our people.

Before leaving her father’s house before her wedding, one bride takes off all of her clothing right down to her underwear. Was it really necessary to show this? An Imam from a regional mosque (this is evident from his appearance) presents this scenario: say a Muslim woman who is born on a Friday is named Odina, Oisha, or Fatima. In Farsi, the name Odina means “Friday.” And say this girl, who was born on a Friday, has a flexible hymen. Therefore, when the girl gets married and it is discovered that she is not a virgin, it is necessary to take into consideration that she was born on a Friday. Then every seventh woman should have a flexible hymen, but statistics do not support this.

The film contains scenes that are not at all relevant to the subject of the film. These scenes have another purpose. It is as if they were filmed especially to show remote villages with squalid buildings. We understood the overall idea of the film to be “In Uzbekistan the rights of women have been violated.” This idea, which the film attempts to underscore, is flawed. On the basis of all this, we do not believe that this film fits with our morals or the morals of other countries.

In the film “The Burden of Virginity,” several people (who seem to be professionals, but who are not officially identified) talk about virginity, but who they are, where they obtained their information, on what basis they are interested in this subject all remain uncertain. The film begins with a quote, “All events and people in the film are fictitious. Any resemblance to real people and their lives is complete coincidence.” Does this mean that the people who narrate the film are also imaginary, and if so, then what is the purpose of the film, and what were the motives of authors before its creation?

In the second half of the film, a woman (who is not identified) talks about virginity, saying: “Does a woman have a right to her own body? Does her body and her hair belong to her or does her body belong to someone else?,” “And this, this tiny coating between her legs, to whom does it belong?,” “A young woman’s virginity is doubted, and she is subjected to an examination by a medical expert. The girl writes that the examination hurt her and that since that time – over the past eight years – she cannot be satisfied by her husband because on her first night as a married woman, she was subjected to a medical examination….and it was discovered that she was still a virgin. Here she writes a letter to Uktam Mukhammad Murod, a medical doctor, asking if there are other less-painful methods to verify virginity…here he gives examples and writes that they can be used even now…what does this mean…one or two women are invited to boil an egg, preferably a dove’s egg or a small chicken egg, clean this egg well, and push it into a woman’s place. If the egg goes in easily it means that the woman is not a virgin. If it does not go in or goes in with difficulty it means that she is still a virgin.”

Information that is provided in such a way, like teenage slang, will be easier to accept than information presented in an academic manner. Such absurd, baseless, and improper commentary insults the traditions of the peoples of Uzbekistan in such a way that it can be seen as slander, disparaging and disrespectful of national traditions. Using this didactic technique, the authors indoctrinate minors, pursuing the exclusive goal of undermining a healthy lifestyle and also violating all scientifically-grounded pedagogical and psychological methods for preparing the next generation for adulthood.

Our Republic has extensive services for professional psychological consultations in the homes of young married couples. Having such a questionable film, which endeavors to undermine our spiritual and moral values, is not necessary in Uzbekistan. For traditional religions, the chastity of a person before and after marriage is based on his health – the health of his body, soul, and spirit. Any doctrine advocating the teaching of free sexual relations is in opposition to a healthy way of living for both the individual and for society as a whole.

“The Burden of Virginity” does not conform with the demands of ideology because national traditions and the culture and customs of the peoples living in Uzbekistan are not taken into consideration. This film promotes a serious distortion of the next generation’s perception of values. The film is also psychological and may have a destructive influence on the development of teenagers and young people. Distribution of this film will greatly damage the spiritual values of Uzbekistan.

The photo album “Women and Men: From Dawn to Dusk” (Gender Program of the Embassy of Switzerland in Uzbekistan), Tashkent – 2007.

Produced with the support of the Swiss Embassy’s Gender Program, the album “Women and Men: From Sunrise to Sunset” contains 111 photographs by Umida Akhmedova.  The introduction to the book was written by historian Nodira Azimova.  Azimova examines the photos in the album from the point of view of gender.  Likewise, she discusses the national ceremony of the Uzbeks and Tajiks called “kelin-salom.”  In her opinion, the bride who is entering a new family must submit to all of her new family members: from the family patriarch down to the smallest child.  It is essential that the bride submits to the patriarchal structure of her new family. Our respected customs and our great values, which all young women dream about and which the bride fulfills with pride – this is the wonderful ceremony of “kelin-salom.”  To evaluate our ceremonies in relation to gender does not make sense.  However, the authors present many such ideas in the introduction to the album.  Ninety percent of the photographs in the album were taken in remote, backward villages, and the author’s aim is to show the difficult nature of life.

In particular, (pg. 19) the crying girl, covering her face with her hands.

(pg. 23) the young woman and a grazing donkey,

(pg. 25) the face smeared with flour or some other substance,

(pg. 29) carrying a basin of straw on her head,

(pg. 44) the girl sweeping the roof,

It is astonishing to see the outdated conditions of villages reflected on these pages (pgs. 24, 46, 47, 51, 106, 107, 114, 119).  Umida Akhmedova depicts our national rites “Nikokh” [the marriage ceremony in the bride’s house] and “Sunnat-tui” [circumcision] in a negative light.

The example (pg. 40) of the crying young woman saying goodbye to her father reflects the daughter’s desire for a blessing.

(pg. 41) The hands of a nervous bride, next to her – the groom’s clenched fist.  At first glance both photographs seem normal, but through these two photographs the photographer wants to convey that the young woman who is getting married has completely lost her freedom and is crying as she says goodbye to her father.  In Europe, brides do not cry when they get married because they do not have these feelings.  Any Westerner who sees these photographs will think that young women in Uzbekistan are forced to marry and that is why they cry.

The photographer is critical of circumcision. The four photographs on circumcision follow one after another.

At first, the young boy who is to be circumcised is standing (pg. 68),

Then they give him money (pg. 69),

Next, the half-naked, crying boy clings to his father (pgs. 70, 71).  This is a very cruel sight.  Through these pictures, the photographer wishes to arouse pity for the boy by demonstrating that Uzbek people are barbarians.

It is interesting that the photographer loves to take pictures of women sweeping.  It is as if cleaning is the only profession in our city.  Umida Akhmedova’s lens does not capture beautiful places, modern buildings, or prosperous villages.

This person sees the woman in the telephone booth waiting for clients (pg. 85).

A woman sells carpets with a wet head (pg. 86),

A flower seller, who looks pensively into the lens.

Also, the photographer sees the street bum, who fell asleep on the monument. (pgs. 88, 89)

The sleeping raisin seller (pg. 100),

The old beggar woman (pg. 101) – the photographer takes photos of these sorts of scenes.  The photographs in the album are presented in a definitive succession – childhood, adolescence, youth, and old age.

When one leafs through this album, one begins to wonder why people come into this world when only suffering, difficulty, and sorrow exist (pgs. 115, 118).  This is indeed the goal of the photographer.  She attempts, albeit artificially, to show the gender problems in Uzbekistan.

In the photographs of women (pgs. 23, 29, 32, 44, 45, 46, 63, 74, 79, 85, 86, 87, 90, 91,93, 101, 108, 115, 117), the women are only occupied with everyday concerns and difficult work.

While the men (pgs. 56, 57, 59, 60, 61, 68) are mostly occupied with wrestling, cock fighting, eating plov, and entertainment.  The album does not say where the photos were taken.

One begins to wonder if these photos were taken in Uzbekistan or in Afghanistan (pgs. 104, 105). Something that is most interesting is that “Tashkent 2007” is written on the first page of the album, but on the other side of the page “Print-S, city of Almaty” is written.  This means that it is possible that the photos may have been taken in different places.  Additionally, Umida Akhmedova’s biography, which is in the album, states that she participated in a photo exhibit in Tbilisi.

Knowing this, on pages (96, 97, 98, 99, 103) in the album the photographs resemble places in Georgia.  This is especially true when one sees the photo of the old woman holding flowers in front of the pay phone with an inscription in Georgian.

Opening the album, we see the reflection of a woman coloring her hair and holding a camera, and we assume that this is the photographer.  Usually women do not allow strangers to see these sorts of scenes.  Here we see a tasteless woman with heaps of clothing and bags in the background, and it ruins the onlooker’s mood.  A pessimistic mood reigns throughout the photo album.  Life is not shown to be very beautiful in this collection of photographs.  A foreigner who has never been to Uzbekistan, but who is familiar with this album, will conclude that this is a country where people live in the Middle Ages.  The photographer purposefully underscores the difficulty of life, and especially attempts to show our women as victims.

Even the picture taken in one of our capital’s squares is of a woman with a downcast head.  Umida Akhmedova’s entire album is done for her own ends.  The author shows the relationships between men and women, and the problems of gender in general, inadequately.  The photo album does not conform to aesthetic demands.  In summary, it is essential to stop this album’s distribution among the broader public.

The following quotations are from the annotated sections of the album “Women and Men: From Dawn to Dusk” (the description was written by Nodira Azimova, a historian and representative of the sociological center “Shark va Tavsia”):

“The album provides persuasive evidence of the renaissance of Islam and local traditions.”

“It is for this reason that we do not choose the road, but the road chooses us. The photograph of the children in the clay pots – tandir- is symbolic.  The patriarchal and traditional relations in the family force young boys and girls into unequal gender roles, which they struggle out of, only to break the tandir. “

“A young woman must start her life with her husband in accordance with conditions that were dictated many generations ago.  Ceremonies and customs, in which gender roles are inevitably contained, were detailed and prescribed centuries ago and direct women and men back to the sources of patriarchy.

«The yanga acquaints the bride with each member of her new family, and forces the bride to submit to each new relative.”

This sort of information can influence the rising generation’s perception of the validity of the spiritual and moral values of Uzbekistan.  The visual nature of the book exerts significant psychological influence over young people.  The quality of the album’s publication predisposes young people to adopting its ideas about the moral principles of our people and the basic condition of our national ideology.

Signatures of the experts: R. Rasulev, R. Khikmatullaev (University TGPU “Nizami”); Specialists from the Committee on Religion: S. Sharipov, O. Shkovorodiuk; Specialist from the Center “Manaviyat Markazi” (Spiritual Center): Z. Gafarov; Specialists from the Center of Education and Spirituality: G. Narzullaev, A. Akmalov

Translation prepared from the Russian translation (by Aleksei Volosevich) of the Uzbek original.

Khayrulla Khamidov

Khayrulla Khamidov, a famous sports commentator and radio talk show host, is sentenced to 6 years in prison on charges of participation in religious organization. He was arrested on January 21, 2010.

We believe that Khamidov’s arrest is politically motivated and can be attributed to official displeasure regarding a radio programme Khamidov hosted in September 2009 during which he made reference to the teachings of the well-known imam Abduvali Mirzoev, who disappeared in 1993.

Dilmurod Sayid

Dilmurod Sayid, 48, was sentenced to 12 years in prison in July 2009 on charges of extortion and forgery, charges for which only the flimsiest evidence was presented during his trial.

Dilmurod Sayid was an outspoken critic of human rights situation in Uzbekistan and came under severe pressure by the authorities after publishing critical articles in newspaper Advokat Press (“The Lawyer’s Press”), which was shut down shortly after these articles were published. Last year, his wife and six-year-old daughter were killed in a car accident while on their way to visit him in prison.

Ortiqali Namazov

Ortiqali Namazov, 47, was sentenced to 5 andn a half years in prison on charges of embezzlement and tax evasion on August 16, 2004.

Ortiqali Nazazov was an editor-in-chief of state Pop Tongi newspaper and also was a correspondent the state newspaper Qishloq Hayotti. He came under the radar of authorities for publishing articles criticizing local government in Namangan region for mismanagement. According to Mutabar Tajibaeva, human rights defender, asserts that evidence against him was falsified and his trial was politicaly motivated.

Despite serving his prison sentence he still remains in prison.

Gayrat Mehliboev

Gairat Mehliboev, 31, was sentenced an independent journalist, was sentenced to 8 years in prison on charges of instigating national, racial and religious conflict, attempt to overthrow constitutional regime, setting up illegal religious organisation, participation in religious and other illegal organisations on Ferbuary 18, 2003. (Source: Association for Human Rights in Central Asia)

Gairat Mehliboev was a correspondent for officially registered Hurriyat and Mohiyat newspapers. Repression against him started after he started writing critical articles, one of which was presented as evidence during his trial.

Gayrat Mehliboev was arrested on 24 July 2002 at the Chorsu market in Tashkent organised by the Hizb ut-Tahrir Islamic group (banned). According to the prosecution, literature from the organisation was found in his room. Mehliboev has denied that he had possessed banned literature but admitted that he had studied Hizb ut-Tahir ideology which he had referred to in an
article published April 2001 entitled “The Scales of Justice”. He added that he had suffered beatings in prison and had been forced into signing a letterof remorse. (Source: Centre For Journalism in Extreme Situations).

According to his relatives, he is badly tortured and needs urgent medical attention.

Djamshid Karimov

Djamshid Karimov, 42 was sentenced to compulsory psychiatric treatment in the hospital in Samarkand on September 12, 2006. He is still detained there despite being and always having been in good mental health. He has worked in the city of Jizzakh for the London-based Institute for War and Peace Reporting, and for various independent journals and websites. He was an outspoken critic of his uncle, President Islam Karimov and his policies. His detention is a consequence of his reporting on the massacre in the city of Andijan on May 13, 2005.

After going missing for two weeks in September 2006, Djamshid Karimov was found in a psychiatric hospital in Samarkand. French non-governmental organization, Reporters Without Borders reported in August 2007, that he smuggled a message out of hospital that said that his health was deteriorating due to the use of pschotropic drugs. He complained of memory loss, difficulty concentrating and partial loss of vision.

His family is not allowed to visit him, nor they have any information about the state of his mental health.

Irmoq magazine case

Five journalists of officially registered Irmoq socio-political magazine were convictected and sentenced on February 26, 2009 during a single trial on charges of «authoring and spreading materials which pose a threat to state security” and “setting up a religious and extremist organization.” Information about their cases was gathered by the Associaion for Human Rights in Central Asia.

Ravshanbek Vafoev, 39, was sentenced to 10 years in prison. The court declined all motions for expert examinations, submitted by his lawyer. The court also ignored testimonies of witnesses in favour of Ravshanbek Vafoev.

Abdulaziz Dadakhonov, 33 was sentenced to 8 years in prison. According to his lawyer, he admitted his guilt and testified against himself under severe moral, psychological and physical pressure.

Botyrbek ESHKUZIEV, 32, was sentenced to 8 years in prison. During the trial, his lawyer said that his client was subjected to torture and was pressurised to testify against himself and his colleagues.

Salijon Abdurakhmanov

Salijon Andurakhmanov is an independent journalist who worked for independent internet news service Uznews.net and freelanced for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Voice of America and Institute for War and Peace Reporting his home in his native Karakalpakistan, a part of Uzbe kistan, which has the status of an autonomous republic.

Salijon was sentenced to 10 years in prison on October 10, 2008, after being arrested on charges of drug possession. According to the independent news agency Uznews.net, police stopped his car and planted drugs in the trunk of his car. His guilt was not proven during the trial and he himself has never admitted to either taking or selling drugs. According to Igor Vorontsov, Uzbekistan researcher for Human Rights Watch, “Abdurakhmanov often criticized local authorities, including law enforcement. His arrest is yet another example of the Uzbek government’s policy of silencing critics.”

Salijon is being held at prison UYA 64/51 near Karshi city, Kashkadarya region. His relatives say that he is in poor health and needs urgent medical attention.

Petition to Free Jailed Uzbek Journalists

On February 6, 2006, Uzbek journalists abroad and their colleagues signed a petition calling for the release of 14 Uzbek journalists who are currently in jail and under arrest. The text of the petition is below. This petition is now closed for signatures and has been sent to the addressees mentioned in the petition. We will update you about their replies.

To:

Miklos Haraszti, OSCE Representative of Freedom of the Media

Pierre Morel, European Union Special Representative for Central Asia

Richard Holbrook, Special Ambassador to Afghanistan and Pakistan, United States Department of State

Rolf Timans, Head of Human Rights and Democratization Unit, Directorate-General for External Relations, European Commission

Paolo Bartolozzi, Chairman of Delegation to the EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committee, European Parliament

Ben Cardin, United States Senator, Chairman of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, United States Congress

Alcee Hastings, United States Representative, Co-Chairman of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, United States Congress

Robert Blake, Assistant Secretary of State for Central and South Asia, United States Department of State

‪George Krol, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Central Asia, United States Department of State

Michael Posner, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, United States Department of State

Maria Otero, Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs, United States Department of State

CC:

Human Rights Watch

Amnesty International

Reporters Without Borders

Press Now

International Federation for Human Rights

International Women’s Media Foundation

Committee To Protect Journalists

We the undersigned, journalists from Uzbekistan who live and work outside of our country, along with concerned Western journalists, ask for your help in securing the release of our colleagues—journalist inside Uzbekistan who have been imprisoned for their independence and commitment to free speech.

We hereby call on governments and international organizations to put pressure on the government of Uzbekistan to stop its policy of persecution and harassment against the independent media. Eight journalists have been arrested in the past year alone, and in total there are at least 14 journalists in Uzbek prisons. The full list of these imprisoned journalists is attached in an Appendix to this petition. In every one of these cases, the charges have politically motivated and part of the campaign against free speech in Uzbekistan. We call for the immediate release of all of these colleagues, and an end to the harassment of others.

Uzbekistan’s judiciary is neither independent nor fair-minded, and in all of the cases against journalists with which we are familiar, there has barely been a pretense of having a fair trial. Evidence of guilt is simply stated by the prosecutor and accepted by the judge, without any requirement for proof. Meanwhile the defense is typically not allowed to present any evidence of its own.

One of the latest victims of this campaign was Umida Akhmedova, a famous Uzbek photographer and filmmaker, who was detained on charges of slander and “insulting the Uzbek people” because of a book of photographs she published in 2007, and a documentary film produced in 2008.

Ahmedova’s 2007 book, Women and Men: From Dawn Until Dusk, portrays rural Uzbekistan and Uzbek traditions, focusing on gender inequality. Her 2008 film, The Burden of Virginity, explores the social consequences for brides who are suspected of not being virgins. A so-called “expert panel” convened by Uzbek prosecutors concluded that “Ahmedova’s work is insulting to the people of Uzbekistan and portrayed Uzbekistan in a negative light to Western audiences.” She is now facing the likelihood of three years in prison, although her trial has not yet been scheduled.

On January 7th, six journalists—Vasily Markov, Sid Yanishev, Abdumalik Boboev, Khusniddin Kutbiddinov and Alexey Volosevich—were summoned to the state prosecutor’s office to give an explanation about their professional activity. We consider such actions by the authorities to be a clear form of intimidation amounting to a threat to these journalists to stop their professional activity.

Uzbekistan is one of the worst offenders against media freedom in the world. The 2009 Press Freedom Index published by the non-governmental organization Reporters Without Borders places Uzbekistan 160th out of 175, confirming that it has one of the repressive media environments in the world. It is almost impossible for independent journalists to work in Uzbekistan. All Internet sites questioning or criticizing the present political regime and leadership are blocked by local service providers. It is illegal for journalists to work for any foreign media organization without accreditation from Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which is nearly impossible to obtain.

Many journalists have had no choice but to flee their country in the face of threats to their freedom and their lives; an increasing number of those who remain are in prison.

Repression against independent media intensified after government troops killed hundreds of innocent people in Uzbek city of Andijan on May 13, 2005. In the wake of this massacre the offices in Uzbekistan of the BBC, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the Institute for War and Peace Reporting, Freedom House and other international media organizations were shut down. The litany of arrests described in the Appendix to this letter shows that repression against journalists has become worse yet following the decision by the European Union to lift its mild sanctions against Uzbekistan in October 2008.

We appeal to you and your organizations to support us in our demands, and to do everything possible to secure the release of our colleagues from the horrors of Uzbek prisons, where torture is systematic, and to begin the process of restoring justice in Uzbekistan.

Sincerely,

Uzbek journalists abroad:

1. Shahida Tulaganova, independent journalist and contact person (shahidayakub@gmail.com), UK
2. Galima Bukharbaeva, editor, Uznews.net, Germany
3. Umida Niyazova, Uzbek German Forum for Human Rights, Germany
4. Daniil Kislov, editor, Ferghana.ru, Russia
5. Alisher Sidikov, editor, RFEurope/RL Uzbek Service, Czech Republic
6. Shukhrat Babajanov, RFE/RL Uzbek Service, Czech Republic
7. Kudrat Babajanov, Uzbek Video Journalists NGO, Sweden
8. Zafar Omon, RFE/RL Uzbek Service, Czech Republic
9. Farruh Yusupov, RFE/RL Uzbek Service, Czech Republic
10. Gafur Yuldashev, RFE/RL Uzbek Service, Czech Republic
11. Shamsiya Qosimova, RFE/RL Uzbek Service, Czech Republic
12. Shamsiya Qosimova, RFE/RL Uzbek Service, Czech Republic
13. Zamira Eshanova, RFE/RL Uzbek Service, Czech Republic
14. Natalia Bekzhanova, wife of imprisoned journalist, Muhammad Bekjan
15. Shakhnoza Nazarova, Radio Zamaneh, Netherlands
16. Sirojiddin Tolipov, UK
17. Khayrullo Fayz, UK
18. Ulugbek Haidarov, Canada
19. Kamoliddin Rabbimov, France
20. Umida Khaknazar, Kyrgyzstan
21. Lutfulla Shamsuddinov, USA
22. Muhiddin Abdurasulov, Turkey
23. Tulkin Karaev, Sweden
24. Gulasal Kamolova, Uzbekistan
25. Seed Yanishev, Uzbekistan
26. Vasili Markov, Uzbekistan
27. Bobur Isoyev
28. Nodir Shams
29. Oktambek Karimov
30. Shodiyor Sayf
31. Kamoliddin Hamzayev
32. Barnohon Isakova
33. Zafar Abdullaev

Western journalists:

1. Saida Kalkulova, Czech Republic
2. Elin Jonsson, Sweden
3. Turkhan Karimov, Azerbaijan
4. Shahvalad Chobanoglu, Azerbaijan
5. Tengiz Ibragimov, Kazakhstan
6. Pi Overgaard, Netherlands
7. Oleg Panfilov, Russia
8. Veli Radev, UK
9. Daryush Rajabian, UK
10. Orhan Aip, Azerbaijan
11. Shahla Aliguliyeva, Azerbaijan
12. Alex Higgins, UK
13. Per-Axel Janzon, Sweden
14. Nata Huseynova, Azerbaijan
15. Stefan van Hees, Netherlands
16. Marcel van der Steen, Netherlands
17. Nies Medema, Netherlands
18. Peter Schat, Netherlands
19. Jaap van den Bergen, Netherlands
20. Henk van Maanen, Netherland
21. Marcus Bensmann, Germany
22. Elmurad Jusupaliev, Kyrgyzstan
23. Mehmet Tugay, Turkey
24. Firdevs Robinson, UK
25. David Hoffman, USA
26. John McCarthy, UK
27. Kiaa parsa Aalipour
28. Mohammad Tajdolati
29. Nina Vahab
30. Akhtar Ghasemi
31. Lida Hosseini Nejad
32. Masoumeh Naseri
33. Kibret Mekonnen
34. Kaywan Ghadiri
35. Rummam Hamdam
36. Umar Bakiev
37. Mojtaba Pourmohsen