The lawyer of the blogger Miraziz Bazarov, Sergei Mayorov, told the details of the criminal cases against his client in the interview.
The name of Miraziz Bazarov has recently been quoted not only on social networks and in the media. Interest in this blogger is growing due to the fact that Bazarov openly spoke about the current changes in Uzbekistan on his personal accounts over the past year. His opinion provokes a response in society.
In July 2020, Bazarov first felt interest from the State Security Service (SSS), when he analyzed how the loan funds, received by the government of Uzbekistan from the Asian Development Bank, as well as from the World Bank, were spent. In addition, Bazarov openly advocated the abolition of the article for sodomy in the Criminal Code of Uzbekistan. Already in March 2021, a full-scale persecution of the blogger began, in which not only Internet trolls, but also influential representatives of all branches of Uzbek government took part.
In a matter of days, Miraziz Bazarov was involved in three criminal cases, became the victim of a series of ordered provocations and attacks, as a result of which he received an open fracture of his leg and was operated on. He is currently under house arrest based on the court decision and is prohibited from all communications with the outside world.
Earlier, ACCA reported on the statement of authoritative international organizations. Amnesty International, International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR), Association for Human Rights in Central Asia (AHRCA), Reporters Without Borders (RSF), Freedom House (FH), Freedom now, Norwegian Helsinki Committee (NHC), the foundation “Justice for journalists”, the World Organization Against Torture and other reputable human rights organizations have spoken out in support of him while continuing to monitor the investigation.
Lawyer Sergei Mayorov answered a number of questions (including those of an ACCA journalist) that human rights defenders and journalists asked during the monitoring of the situation.
– On what grounds does blogger Miraziz Bazarov appear in three criminal cases?
– Yes, Bazarov is involved in three criminal cases.
The first criminal case was initiated by the Main Department of Internal Affairs of Tashkent city on March 28, 2021 on the fact of malicious hooliganism that took place in Amir Temur park on March 28 at about 15:00. On this day, K-popers [fans of modern Korean songs] and anime fans [fans of Japanese animated films] were to gather in the park. The initiators of the meeting were the leaders of these movements
Meanwhile, starting on March 21, a number of bloggers with a negative attitude towards sexual minorities started spreading misinformation that LGBT representatives would supposedly gather in the park, and Bazarov was announced as the organizer of the meeting. Threats of reprisal began to come in the address of Bazarov, he began to notice that he was being followed.
As a result of a homophobic campaign launched on the Internet, on March 28, aggressive young men with sticks and aggressive-minded men came to the park, and shouting ‘Allah Akbar!’, attacked casual passersby (a girl and a guy), mistaking them for LGBT people. And only the intervention of law enforcement officers saved the young couple from reprisals.
Taking this into account, Bazarov, who wasn’t directly related to the meeting of K-popers and anime fans scheduled for March 28 at the park, in the afternoon of that day published a warning on social networks about the danger of holding such an event, which eventually didn’t take place.
The press service of the Ministry of Internal Affairs announced the arrest of the hooligans. There is information that a measure of restraint has been chosen against several of them – house arrest.
I emphasize that Miraziz Bazarov had nothing to do with the gathering of fans scheduled for March 28, and this is confirmed by the testimony of persons already questioned during the investigation. In addition, there is no confirmation that there was any meeting of fans in Amir Temur park on March 28.
I am sure that it’s not so difficult to find out from the hooligans with sticks why they came to the park, who organized it, and against whom it was organized.
It seems that the purpose of this planned action was to discredit Bazarov. Therefore, the investigator, who opened a criminal case for hooliganism on March 28, appointed a political science and linguistic examination already on March 29, 2021 to assess the videos posted by Bazarov on his channel. The expert opinion was received on March 30. By the same date, on March 30, the investigator and the deputy prosecutor of the city decided to conduct a search in Bazarov’s apartment, motivating their decision by the fact that Bazarov “organized a meeting of LGBT representatives in the park on March 28”, and that he was “to blame for the attack on a young couple”.
I am not allowed to see the materials of this criminal case. And I will not be able to provide documentary evidence that the investigator and the prosecutor had no legal grounds to suspect Bazarov of “organizing a meeting of LGBT representatives in the park on March 28”, just as there was no reason to conduct a search in Bazarov’s apartment. However, I have many reasons to believe that a clearly planned action in the park is a reason to break into Bazarov’s apartment, get into his phones and gadgets, and order an examination of his video calls. Most likely, all these actions are aimed at stifling his right to speak out and freely assess current events in the country.
The second criminal case was initiated on March 29, 2021 by the Main Department of Internal Affairs of the city of Tashkent on the fact of intentional bodily harm inflicted on Bazarov during the attack on him on the evening of March 28, 2021. It happened at about 11 pm, at the entrance to his apartment.
After the initiation of the second criminal case, Bazarov was isolated from access to communications and the Internet. For many days, as his lawyer, I was not allowed to meet with him. Bazarov’s mother was allowed to visit her son only once a day for 10 minutes. Under the pretext of preserving his life and health, there was a round-the-clock security in the hospital, which was removed only on April 29 – a month after the attack on the blogger, who was actually under arrest all that time. It’s an absurd situation – having become the victim of the attack, Bazarov was also under undercover arrest.
The third criminal case was also initiated by the Main Department of Internal Affairs of the city of Tashkent only on April 24, 2021. It was separated from the materials of the first criminal case.
As it has now become known, within a month, 28 applications were filed against Miraziz Bazarov to law enforcement and judicial authorities. I will comment on just a few examples that became the basis for claims against Bazarov.
Firstly, these are the materials of the forensic complex examination of March 30, 2021, according to the conclusion of which, Bazarov allegedly slandered the teachers of school No. 110. This is probably the collective appeal of 28 teachers of the school No. 110 in relation to Bazarov. The teachers’ statement is not yet available to me, as his lawyer, or to my client, Miraziz Bazarov. This collective statement was announced by the press service of the Main Department of Internal Affairs of the city of Tashkent.
Secondly, these are, of course, the statements of bloggers who unleashed harassment against Bazarov on the Internet: Abror Abduazimov (Abror Mukhtor Aliy), Shukhrat Musayev and Abusalikh Salimov (AbuSolih Fox), who, unexpectedly, were recognized as “victims” – allegedly through the fault of Bazarov. The posts of three bloggers with deliberately false and slanderous information about Bazarov, which became the initial cause of the riots and the attack on the activist, were deleted immediately after March 29, but some of the posts remained available online.
As a result, on May 8, 2021, Bazarov was charged with committing a crime under paragraph “г” of part 3 of article 139 of the Criminal Code (“Libel for selfish or other vile motives”). Bazarov’s “victims of crimes” were: teachers of the school No. 110, based on what Bazarov said about school teachers in his video, and the three bloggers mentioned above, because Bazarov calls them “SSS bloggers” in his videos.
One of the bloggers, in response to my question, in what he sees slander on the part of Bazarov, explained that when ISIS come to Uzbekistan, they would first kill all employees of the State Security Service and then all bloggers who serve the State Security Service. And since Bazarov accused bloggers of working for the State Security Service, then they, bloggers, will be killed by ISIS immediately after the State Security Service officers. This is the logic of their claims and, apparently, the defense. At the same time, these bloggers didn’t have any ideas how to protect the Fatherland from ISIS.
According to the logic of the organizers of the criminal proceedings against Bazarov, if I hear the phrase that “all lawyers are swindlers” in the subway or a supermarket, I can file a statement against this person demanding that he/she be brought to criminal liability for libel. But this is absurd! Sometimes just one word “No” or “Yes” can offend another person just because it sounded offensive to someone. So should these words be prohibited to use? How can criticism, value judgments and general judgments be equated with slander against someone in particular? A dangerous practice arises when charges of defamation are formed on the basis of the personal perception of the applicant, and not according to legal criteria, as provided by the current legislation. It turns out that if I think that a generalized statement without specifying a name is perceived as offensive, then this is enough for me to consider it slander in relation to me. If this is not stopped, then in our country the right to freely express one’s opinion will never be ensured, and freedom of speech will be banned. Public relations should still be regulated both in pre-trial practice and through open discussion, and not only through the punishment provided by the Criminal Code. And the persecution and mass censure of the Stalin era is generally an extremely dangerous phenomenon.
– Sergei Alexandrovich, how is the investigation going?
– Unfortunately, in the case of Bazarov, the investigating authorities are investigating in a biased and unqualified manner, with gross violations of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Constitution of Uzbekistan, as well as the norms of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Uzbekistan has ratified.
I, as his lawyer, cannot, during the preliminary investigation of these criminal cases, find out about all the violations committed by investigators, prosecutors and judges until the investigation is completed. But I have enough evidence of the illegality of the actions of representatives of state bodies in relation to Bazarov, these are:
– false reports by the press service of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Main Department of Internal Affairs of the city of Tashkent, which used false information from the three above-mentioned bloggers. At the same time, the homophobic videos of the blogger Musayev, defaming Bazarov, contain inbuilt footage from ISIS videos, where people, sentenced to death, are taken out of the cell, and also contains a call for the murder of Bazarov with an indication of his home address. On what basis are the actions of this blogger now being used against Bazarov?
– groundless searches in the apartments of Bazarov and his mother;
– illegal detention of Bazarov from March 29 to April 29, 2021. International law qualifies this isolation as “arbitrary arrest”. As far as I know, international lawyers are preparing a complaint to the UN working group on arbitrary detention.
– use of an illegal measure of restraint to Bazarov in the form of house arrest on April 29, 2021;
– groundless accusation of Bazarov of libel against teachers of the school No. 110;
– Bazarov’s unfounded accusation of libel against three bloggers;
– falsifications when appointing and carrying out two examinations of devices;
– conducting confrontations in violation of the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of Uzbekistan.
– It turns out that there is a reason to consider the prescription of house arrest to Miraziz Bazarov unlawful, isn’t it?
– This is an example of blatant illegal persecution for the right to express one’s opinion. Tell me, does an independent court of an independent state have the right to make a knowingly illegal decision? The arrest of Bazarov, starting from March 29, 2021, and the court decision on the prescription of house arrest from April 29, 2021, are, in fact, an inadequate and arbitrary manifestation of the actions of law enforcement and judicial officials.
The “libel” charge brought against Bazarov is punishable by up to three years in prison. Therefore, according to the Criminal Procedure Code, a measure of restraint in the form of arrest cannot be applied to Bazarov, since during the investigation it would have been enough to sign up for proper conduct or bail.
– What statements of blogger Miraziz Bazarov most of all caused a sharp reaction from the authorities and a part of society?
– Statements of Bazarov about the abolition of article 120 of the Criminal Code of Uzbekistan. At the same time, Bazarov never and nowhere promoted the ideas of the LGBT community. But in order to discredit Bazarov in the eyes of our citizens, who, in the absolute majority, are intolerant of sexual minorities, controlled bloggers labeled Bazarov as a propagandist and LGBT representative, spreading deliberately false and slanderous information about him. And for some reason no one has yet brought to justice those who, with their statements, endangered Bazarov’s life and caused damage to his health. Moreover, the bloggers, known to the investigation, actually provoked an attack on Bazarov by misguided young people. However, these bloggers not only didn’t appear before the law, but apparently received security guarantees, allegedly becoming “victims” of Bazarov’s statements. And why has the investigation still not raised questions to these bloggers about the dissemination of the home addresses of Bazarov and his mother, numerous threats and calls to deal shortly with them? Until now, insults and false information about my client are spread on the Internet. Why Bazarov’s equal rights are not observed in this situation?
My client Bazarov, in his videos, expressed the opinion that the article of the Criminal Code on voluntary sodomy should be decriminalized, referring to the norms of international law that ensure equal rights for all citizens, including sexual minorities. By the way, Uzbekistan has undertaken to fulfill these norms and bring national legislation in line with international standards. In addition, according to the legislation of Uzbekistan, public expression of one’s opinion, including on the decriminalization of homosexual voluntary relationships, is neither a crime nor an offense.
– How is the search for those who attacked Bazarov conducted?
– As I said, the materials of the criminal case are not available to me. But I have no doubt that these are not Muslims, or rather not true Muslims. I know from a friend of Bazarov that when she tried to protect him from the attackers, they threw her away from Bazarov, accompanying the violence with choicest Russian swearwords. I am convinced that the Main Department of Internal Affairs imitates the search for criminals. They will never be found. Moreover, they are “looking for” not specific people, but “phantoms”. When a photofit of one of the attackers was drawn up on March 29, Bazarov firmly stated that he didn’t at all look like a criminal, asking in no case to use this photofit, as it would prevent the investigation. However, a month after making the photofit, according to which it was impossible to find anyone, it was nevertheless sent out for search.
The witnesses and the victim described the car in which the criminals pursued Bazarov before the attack, and the car from which the hired bone breakers came out and attacked Bazarov. However, the Main Department of Internal Affairs announced a search for completely different colors and makes of cars.
I learned that law enforcement officials are summoning for interrogation the drivers of cars who are wanted according to the descriptions compiled by the investigation (but not according to the descriptions offered by the witness and Bazarov). The drivers are asked where they were on March 28 at 23:00. At the same time, they find out how these drivers relate to Bazarov’s views on LGBT people and to Bazarov’s invitation to the meeting in the park. Naturally, many of these drivers have no idea who Bazarov is and what he did on March 28. This is not a search for criminals. This is a search for people who, by their naivety, express a negative attitude towards Bazarov, creating an atmosphere of indignation towards the blogger.
I remember a famous phrase that became a saying “I have not read Pasternak, but I condemn”. It was uttered during the popular condemnation of Boris Pasternak, the author of the novel “Doctor Zhivago” and received the Nobel Prize for it.
One can disagree with Bazarov’s views and the form of their expression. However, disagreement with him doesn’t give anyone the right to encroach on his health and life.
– How would you assess the evidence on the basis of which the charges were brought against Miraziz Bazarov?
– In the interests of my client, I don’t want to publicize all the comments and violations that I see. The investigation and even the court use expert opinions on Bazarov’s case prepared and drawn up by the Agency under the Presidential Administration in violation of the Criminal Procedure Code of Uzbekistan and the Law “On forensic expertise”. If necessary, I am ready to substantiate my conclusion based on the expert opinion of the Administration of the President of Uzbekistan, or I will have to do this already during the trial.
So far, I can only say that in Bazarov’s case, I again encountered a forgery of evidence, as it was in the case of the journalist Bobomurod Abdullaev (pseudonym – Usman Khaknazarov). To “consolidate” the evidence of Abdullaev’s guilt in “overthrowing the constitutional order”, the National Security Service entered into his personal computer a plan to overthrow the current government called “Harvest”. The journalist hasn’t yet been rehabilitated. Therefore, there is a real danger that some files can be added to Bazarov’s gadgets, and “experts” will recognize these files as “criminal”.
– How do you assess the content of the personal Internet pages of blogger Bazarov?
– He is a brave and educated author. Bazarov informs his subscribers about the state of affairs and negative phenomena in Uzbekistan, compares our country with other countries. The topics, that he raises, are the talk of the town. However, his statements are not always popular. And if his playful, sometimes sarcastic manner of discussing burning questions is absolutely normal for the younger generation, then the conservative part of the population doesn’t always perceive it adequately.
Despite the fact that Bazarov’s statements are mostly educational in nature, they are also aimed at combating corruption in the country. And this doesn’t in any way contradict the course of reforms carried out by our President Shavkat Mirziyoev. Another question is how in this situation some people distort the blogger’s statements and organize harassment against him.
– Criminal cases against Bazarov were opened on the eve of the presidential elections and during the discussion of a new version of the Criminal Code of Uzbekistan, which introduced new articles regulating responsibility for statements. Isn’t the pursuit of Bazarov aimed at suppressing his independent voice?
– Time will tell. I don’t yet have access to all the statements on the basis of which Miraziz Bazarov was charged. Of the materials that I had the opportunity to familiarize myself with, the accusations are based on false and inaccurate information. The development of further events may be different. And I would like to remain attentive to the case of Miraziz Bazarov and to do everything possible to ensure that the investigation into it is carried out objectively and fairly.
Leave feedback about this