Did Kyrgyzstan turn into an authoritarian state overnight?

Border hassle

The dispute over which nation controls the Kempir-Abad reservoir has been occurring for many years. The reservoir, in-built 1983 in then Soviet Kyrgyzstan, feeds a canal that gives water to the Fergana Valley, which spans Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. Kyrgyzstan itself makes use of solely 14% of the water generated.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the state border between Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan remained undefined for a very long time. On 26 September 2022, the 2 nations signed an settlement on the delimitation and demarcation of the state border, which, amongst different issues, gives for resolving probably the most controversial points: the Kempir-Abad reservoir.

It was rumoured that management of the reservoir could be transferred to Uzbekistan. In response, a variety of distinguished public figures and civic activists arrange a committee to guard Kyrgyzstan’s declare to Kempir-Abad. Because of this, their houses had been searched they usually had been arrested.

On 10 October, the top of Kyrgyzstan’s safety service, Kamchybek Tashiev, confirmed the rumours, saying that Kyrgyzstan would obtain 19,000 hectares of land in return for transferring the reservoir to Uzbekistan, and would retain entry to the reservoir. The choice sparked public outrage.

In response to the mass arrests, President Japarov claimed “the detainees don’t care concerning the Kempir-Abad challenge”, suggesting they had been simply utilizing the problem as a method to “take energy”.

Japarov got here to energy after being launched from jail by his supporters solely two years in the past. It has been prompt that the unique prices towards Japarov had been politically motivated resulting from his calls for to nationalise the Kumtor gold mine – which isn’t 1,000,000 miles away from what’s now occurring to these looking for to guard Kyrgyzstan’s management of Kempir-Abad.

Assaults on the press

Kyrgyzstan’s authorities haven’t stopped at arresting opposition politicians and activists. An intensified marketing campaign towards impartial media additionally started this yr.

For a number of years in a row, Kyrgyzstan had the most effective indicators of democracy and freedom of speech in comparison with different nations of Central Asia, the place government-controlled and censored media prevail. However in 2022, Kyrgyzstan made it to the checklist of authoritarian nations for the primary time, in line with the Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index.

Kyrgyzstan’s deterioration in free speech is essentially resulting from a mix of ‘societal stress’ and new media legal guidelines.

In February, after impartial media website Kaktus.Media republished an article on the border battle from a Tajik media, outraged protesters gathered close to its workplace to demand that Radio Azattyk, Kaktus and one other impartial media outlet, Kloop, be declared ‘overseas brokers’. (Whereas Kyrgyzstan doesn’t have a Russia-style ‘overseas agent’ legislation – whereby foreign-funded organisations must mark their work as being funded from overseas – it has been beforehand thought of by the nation’s Parliament.)

An analogous rally was held in October. Activists returned to the workplace of Radio Azattyk, once more demanding its closure, together with Kloop and Kaktus.Media. By the tip of the rally, the organiser had threatened to burn the Radio Azattyk workplace down if the authorities didn’t move a legislation on ‘overseas brokers’.

Although this menace didn’t come to fruition, and whereas Kyrgyzstan has nonetheless not launched a overseas agent legislation, the Parliament has handed new legal guidelines limiting media freedom – that are already getting used.

It was one in every of these legal guidelines, designed to guard the general public ‘from inaccurate and false data’, that was used to dam Radio Azattyk with out requiring a courtroom resolution. Unbiased journalists, human rights activists and legal professionals in Kyrgyzstan tried to forestall the adoption of this legislation and demanded or not it’s rejected. Reporters With out Borders additionally warned that it could possibly be used to censor the media, calling on the federal government to instantly repeal it.

Nurbek Sydykov, a lawyer for the Media Coverage Institute public basis, informed openDemocracy that the legislation was misused within the Radio Azattyk case: firstly as a result of it’s supposed to guard the reputations of enterprise and people, and secondly as a result of an internet site block requires an utility, which, was by no means made to the tradition ministry.

The Kyrgyz authorities have additionally launched a brand new draft legislation regulating the nation’s media – which was largely copied from related Russian laws, in line with the Media Coverage Institute.

In impact, Sydykov mentioned, the proposed legislation does two issues. First, it obliges all on-line media to register with the nation’s Ministry of Justice, and second, it provides the ministry and the courts the appropriate to shut down a media that violates the principles of registration or that’s discovered to have acquired a registration ‘fraudulently’.

Sydykov famous that the draft legislation additionally introduces the idea of ‘abuse of freedom of speech’, which means that on-line media are liable to make use of ‘hidden containers and graphics’ of their publications that may ‘have an effect on a reader’s unconscious’. It stays unclear who or which physique shall be accountable for figuring out these ‘hidden methods’, however it will seemingly function one other type of stress on the media, Sydykov mentioned.

Foundations

Discontent in Kyrgyz society, criticism of presidency functioning and rumours of one other coup have provoked intolerance for criticism and excessive sensitivity among the many nation’s management, political scientist Emil Juraev mentioned.

However the present authorities have “solely made issues worse” with the latest arrests and media blocks, Juraev informed openDemocracy.

“It could be significantly better, safer and extra constructive to carry a peaceable dialogue with even essentially the most dissatisfied individuals,” he mentioned.

That mentioned, Juraev suspects that whereas the Japarov administration is at present “drawing on the expertise of neighbouring states”, it may quickly return to its earlier pro-free speech insurance policies.

“The foundations of freedom of speech in our nation are so deep that it’ll not be doable to close all the pieces down in a collection of short-term measures,” he mentioned.