Interview with leading rights activist, Evgeny Zhovtis

On the streets of the Kazakh commercial capital Almaty, Evgeny Zhovtis is a well-known figure. As director of Kazakhstan’s International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law, one of the largest rights group in Central Asia today, the 47-year-old trained lawyer is one of the most outspoken and respected activists in the country today. In an interview with IRIN, he described some of the many issues and challenges facing Kazakhstan in the field of human rights. But he's not optimistic. "We are now further from our goals than we were in the beginning," he said. QUESTION: How would you describe the current state of human rights in your country? ANSWER: Well that depends on who you want to compare us to. If you compare us to other Central Asian countries such as Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and others, our situation is better. But if you are comparing us to countries in western Europe or even Central or Eastern Europe, with the standards put forth by the OSCE [Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe] or the United Nations; or if you are comparing the human rights situation in 2003 to the situation in 1993, the situation is deteriorating. This is particularly true from the point of political rights and civil freedoms. Q: What are the most pertinent issues at the moment? A: First of all is the issue of free speech and mass media. On a practical basis, there is no independent mass media that can cover a broad scope of issues without any kind of self-censorship. [Additionally] there is the problem of freedom of movement and the rights of migrants and refugees, as well as the lack of due process of law and related issues. Moreover, there are problems encountered by those individuals with politically opposing views of what is happening in the country. These are the issues we are most concerned about. Q: Recently there have been reports that the government has struck out at critical media and opposition politicians in an apparent effort to shield itself from pressure to reform. What is the current situation? A: The situation is clearly deteriorating. From 1991 to 1995 was the period of liberalisation. During that time, NGOs first began to be created in a post-Soviet society and political parties were first organised. Independent mass media, including radio and television channels were established. Starting in 1997, however, conditions declined and the government began to crackdown – maybe not in a direct manner – but using economic and political pressure. [As a result] practically all independent mass media was closed or found themselves barely able to sustain themselves financially. The same is true with political parties. In the beginning of 2003, a law was adopted by parliament requiring at least 50,000 signatures to register a political party. In a country with a population of only 15 million, coupled with an authoritarian regime pressing the opposition, you can imagine the impact. Aside from perhaps the Communist Party, which was based on the former Communist party during the Soviet time, we have no other political opposition parties. Of course it is a problem for mass media and opposition parties. And of course the situation is worse than what it was in the beginning. Q: Are there any particular groups that you feel are more vulnerable to human rights abuses than others? A: If you are talking of political rights and civil freedom, this would of course be migrants and refugees. If you are talking about economic and social, this is of course pensioners, people with disabilities and to some extent juveniles. One of the recommendations of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child to the Kazakh government this year was to promote juvenile justice. There is a lack of juvenile justice. Aside from those people with politically opposing views I think these groups are most vulnerable. Q: There have been reports of repression of religious freedom involving Hizb ut-Tahrir or Party of Liberation [a non-violent group that advocates the re-establishment of the Islamic Caliphate or state]? A: Every year there are some efforts to restrict religious freedom or freedom of conscience, but on this, the political policy of the government is rather tolerable. We cannot say that it is a serious situation. But sometimes they want to make amendments to the religious law with some restrictions and the society tries to resist, thanks to the international community, including the OSCE and US representatives, who also opposed such efforts. Unfortunately, the situation is not in conformity with international covenants or conventions, but to a certain degree it is acceptable. At least it’s not like in Uzbekistan. Q: What about the issue of torture? Is that a problem in Kazakhstan? A: Yes, it’s a problem in this country. Especially from the point of view of so-called illegal investigations or interrogations as is written in our law. Hopefully, this year for the first time, the definition of torture was included under a special article in the criminal code. In terms of practice [however], it is widespread around the country and used by the police or sometimes by the [Kazakh] Committee of Security, as they also have the right to conduct investigations. It remains a problem of our law enforcement system. Q: How would you compare the human rights situation in Kazakhstan with the other four Central Asian nations? A: I would rather not be compared with our neighbours. Clearly, we share some similarities with Kyrgyzstan, with the same pluses and the same minuses. Of course, it is much better than the situation in Turkmenistan. What is happening there is really unthinkable. It is better than Uzbekistan, though there are some signs that there could be some changes ahead, while in Tajikistan, we have also seen certain positive steps being undertaken to improve the situation. I could say at this point that Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan are the leaders. But again, I don’t want to compare our situation with our four neighbours. I want to compare all five us by international standards and more developed countries. Comparing us with our neighbours is not the answer. Q: You are particularly interested in the democratisation process in the country. Can you update us on that? A: If we talk about Kazakhstan, we should recognise the progress in the sphere of micro-economic reform. The structural reforms have been made, the financial credit and banking system has been created. It is near to a market economy infrastructure. The problem is that the former Communist elite did everything that was done. The current president of the country [Nursultan Nazarbaev] was the former secretary of the former Communist party of Kazakhstan. And this ruling elite, has to a certain point exhausted the moral resources to go further. They have completed their historical mission, but should now go on. Next, we need to destroy the Soviet system of power as a mental and psychological way of thinking. That is how the authorities are dealing with the public. We should start to politically create a new state, not a Soviet state. I don’t think this ‘elite’ will be able to do this. And this is where the process of democratisation practically stops in my view. They can’t manage the country in any other fashion. Their fashion is authoritarian. Q: How open is the government in reforming their legislation to further enhance the state of human rights in the country? A: It is not open at all, but more and more closed. If you were to compare the law of public association, which was adopted in the early 1990s, with the draft law on NGOs which was proposed by the government this year, that law was much more democratic. Every media or election law, law on public association, peaceful assembly, or every draft law proposed by the government now is worse than the previous. This is not a question of openness. This is question of closeness. This is the influence of the Soviet mentality. They want to control. They don’t want to give people freedom. Q: What role do you think the international community can play in engaging with Kazakhstan to further political reform? A: It should be very clear for the government, but also the Kazakh public, a very clear approach that there are certain standards which Kazakhstan, as a member of the international community and signatory of many international treaties and conventions, should follow. The question is to what speed it should come to these standards, but it should follow. The international community should not take the excuse that Kazakshstan [gaining independence in 1991] is a young country, burdened with a history of 80 years under Soviet control. Instead, the approach to be taken with Kazakhstan is the same that should be taken with Belgium or North Korea. To accept that Turkmenistan has the right to violate human rights from all points of view or that Kazakhstan cannot fulfill its obligations under the OSCE, serves only weaken the criteria and standards we strive for. This is not the way to deal with the issue. We should accept the problems, the trends, and the time that we need – but we shouldn’t accept excuses. We are now further from our goals than we were in the beginning. And that means there is something wrong with the international community’s influence as well. Q: In terms of human rights, what do you think is the biggest challenge ahead for Kazakhstan? A: There are two challenges…The most difficult task ahead will be to reform or introduce real rule of law in the country. That is when the judiciary is independent and will be governed only by the rule of law and when the executive branch of power will not use its political influence to bring about a preferred decision. This is the main challenge ahead. The second challenge is how to overcome what I describe as a Soviet mentality. How one perceives the relations between the individual and the state. This is a big problem in this country. The people have to free themselves. This could take 10 years to achieve or perhaps two or three generations.