Tajik media professionals are concerned about the recent amendments in the domestic Criminal Code establishing responsibility for “libel” and “defamation”. Eight articles of the Criminal Code have been amended regardless of numerous appeals by the media and public organizations. Moreover, the lawmakers have “equated” online outlets with printing and broadcasting media.
“The new legal provisions are ridiculous, — says an IT specialist from a web providing company in Dushanbe. — It is extremely difficult – almost impossible – to trace online authors. Technically speaking, the authorities would need to encharge the local Internet providers to hunt down the sources, from which “aspersive postings” are coming to the web”.
According to the Asia Plus weekly, during the last three years, public officials and government bodies have initiated 8 criminal cases and 14 civil suits against journalists and editors. All these cases are related to the journalists’ professional activities and “facts of defamation” in their publications where they dared to criticize certain public servants.
The most recent is the case of Dodojon Atovullo, a 53-year old journalist, the founder of the first private newspaper in Tajikistan and the leader of the Vatandor (Patriot) opposition movement in exile. For many years, Atovullo has been living abroad – mainly in Russia and Germany. In October, he decided to move from Moscow to France apprehending revenge from the Tajik authorities, who called him “information terrorist” and promised to bring him to justice by any available means. In his newspaper “Charogi Rouz” (it mainly exists in online version), Atovullo unmasks corruption in Tajikistan. The authorities accuse the dissident – inter alia – of defamation of the President’s family and attempts to undermine the constitutional order in Tajikistan.
Media communities and human rights watchdogs say that the recent alterations in the legislation expand possibilities for persecution of journalists for “slander and insult”. Any publication containing criticism of the power can be seen as a deliberate offence. These limitations only strengthen self-censorship, which has become commonplace in the Tajik media. The New York-based NGO Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has invoked the Tajik President Emomali Rakhmon to set a veto on the introduction of these amendments in the legislation.
A similar concern was voiced recently by Miklosh Kharashti, the OSCE Representative for Freedom of Media in Vienna. He said that such concepts as “the Internet”, “information” and “dissemination” in the new Tajik legislation are very nebulous. “This might lead to wide interpretation and discretionary application of the new provisions for criminalization of discussions on socially important themes”, — said Kharashti. He called the Tajik authorities to canceling the recent amendments in the Criminal Code limiting the freedom of speech. He also spoke about the necessity of bringing Tajikistan’s legislation to conformity with the country’s membership commitments to OSCE.
The OSCE experts repeatedly criticized the Tajik system of registration of media outlets, and emphasized that artificial impediments and multi-staged process of registration impede the development of mass media in the country. Similar concerns about the freedom of expression in Tajikistan have been voiced by authoritative international NGOs, such as the Freedom House.
Nuriddin Karshibayev, Chair of Tajikistan’s National Association of Independent Media (NANSMIT) said that “the overall situation with freedom of expression in the country has not had essential positive changes over the last years, while artificial obstacles created by bureaucracy of relevant state agencies with regard to licensing and registration of new media entities interfere with development of new independent mass media”. Karshibayev says that the two major concerns among his colleagues are the lack of access to information and the licensing of broadcasting entities.
According to NANSMIT, more than a dozen of private TV and radio companies have been waiting for their licenses for years. In response to numerous complaints, the licensing commission under the State Committee on Television and Radio says that “applicants cannot properly fill in the application forms” or “unable to collect and present needed registration documents”. The NANSMIT Monitoring Service interviewed several managers of Tajikistan’s private TV and radio stations, who complained that the licensing commission servants impose ridiculous technical and logistical requirements, which are impossible to fulfill. Last year, the licensing officials carried out a raid at two private radio stations in Dushanbe, where they were checking even play lists, “recommending” to remove certain music (which they personally didn’t like) from the air.
Tajik media organizations repeatedly applied to the government and parliament with a proposal to discharge the licensing body since its very existence is not justified – over the last several years, the commission gave only two new licenses to small provincial broadcasting companies. Media professionals also suggested to replace the commission with a public council – similarly to what has been done in many of the CIS countries.
However, broadcasters keep fighting for their rights. In October, the Dushanbe Economic Court held a hearing on the statement of claim from the Somoniyon TV (the first private Tajik TV company founded in 1993) against the State TV and Radio Committee. All eleven members of the licensing commission were called to the court as codefendants.
Managers of TV Somoniyon stated that the ungrounded termination of its broadcasting license has led to a material loss in the amount of 88 thousand Somoni (about $26 thousand). The court proceedings are under way, and if the judges determine the guilt of the licensing body it will dilapidate itself.

According to the newly adopted amendments in Tajikistan’s Criminal Code, “libel, offence or false information, as well as indecent words humiliating human dignity and disseminated not only via public speeches and media, but also through the Internet, are considered a crime in Tajikistan”. The law prescribes compulsory physical work (180-240 hours), or penalty in the amount from 500 to 1 thousand minimal monthly wages, or imprisonment up to two years.

Defamation is not considered a crime in the US legislation. Criminal responsibility for libel and offence is not prescribed in most of the EU States. Over the last several years, a number of post-Soviet countries – Estonia, the Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova and Azerbaijan have abolished criminal punishment for defamation. Legislation in these countries establishes only civil responsibility for dissemination of slanderous information.

Konstantin Parshin

Источник: NANSMIT