Stockholm, October 25, 2023—Kyrgyzstan’s parliament should reject Russian-inspired legislation that would classify externally-funded media rights groups and nonprofits that run news outlets as “foreign representatives” and could force many nonprofits to close, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Wednesday.

On Wednesday, Kyrgyzstan’s parliament passed in a first reading a bill requiring nonprofits that receive foreign funding to register as “foreign representatives,” according to news reports.

Semetey Amanbekov, a member of local advocacy group Kyrgyzstan Media Platform, told CPJ by telephone that the main aim of the legislation is to stigmatize nonprofits as “untrustworthy foreign agents,” saying authorities could use it to target media rights organizations as well as nonprofits that run several of Kyrgyzstan’s prominent independent news websites.

The bill would require organizations to provide regular, detailed reports on their activities, including an audit of funds received from foreign sources and the use of those funds, the composition of their management, and the number of employees and their salaries. In addition, they would have to publish a report on their activities in the media every six months.

Local human rights group Bir Duino said the requirements were “excessively burdensome” and provided “a path to the destruction of civil society organizations,” and the U.S.-based news organization Eurasianet warned that the costs involved could prove “unsustainable” for smaller non-governmental organizations (NGO).

“Amid Kyrgyz authorities’ ongoing campaign to silence leading independent media, plans to copy Russia’s foreign agent legislation threaten to seriously hamper the work of press freedom groups and further restrict the country’s beleaguered free press,” said Gulnoza Said, CPJ’s Europe and Central Asia program coordinator, in New York. “Kyrgyzstan’s parliament must show that it still respects its international obligations to safeguard human rights and freedom of expression by rejecting any attempts to stigmatize nonprofits as foreign agents and criminalize their work.”

In addition, the bill introduces a fine or up to 5 years in prison for creating an NGO that “incites citizens to refuse to perform civil duties or to commit other illegal acts,” and a fine or up to 10 years in prison for “active participation” in or “propaganda” of such NGOs. In an October 13 statement calling on Kyrgyzstan’s parliament to reject the law, a spokesperson for the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights called this offense “ill-defined, broad and open to subjective interpretation” and said it could be used for “selective prosecution of legitimate human rights advocacy.”

Under the proposed law, state authorities would also have the right to request NGOs’ internal documents and to send government representatives to participate in NGOs’ internal activities, according to an analysis by the Washington, D.C.-headquartered International Center for Not-For-Profit Law.

On October 6, three United Nations special rapporteurs urged Kyrgyzstan to withdraw the bill as some provisions were contrary to the rights to freedom of association and freedom of expression, the right to non-discrimination, and the right to privacy. It said that proposals to give authorities the right to conduct unscheduled inspections could constitute “a tool of potential intimidation, surveillance, and harassment by authorities, which could be used against organizations that voice criticism or dissent.”

A similar “foreign agents” bill was submitted to parliament a decade ago but was rejected in its third reading in 2016 after facing opposition from civil society. In November 2022, a new version was presented, with the term foreign agent replaced with “foreign representative.” In May 2023, 33 lawmakers introduced the latest draft to parliament for discussion.

The bill defines nonprofits as “performing the function of a foreign representative” if they receive funding from foreign sources and participate in political activities, which it defines as “the organization and conduct of “political actions” aimed at influencing government policy or the “formation of public opinion”—a definition that the U.N. criticized as “overly vague”.

Organizations that fail to declare themselves as foreign representatives could have their activities and banking operations suspended for six months.

CPJ’s emails to Kyrgyzstan’s parliament and lawmaker Nadira Narmatova, who introduced the bill to parliament, did not receive any replies.

This year, authorities blocked and applied to shutter major independent outlets Kloop and Radio Azattyk, the local service of U.S. Congress-funded broadcaster Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and in 2022 prominent Kyrgyzstan-born investigative journalist Bolot Temirov was deported in retaliation for his work. 

In September, Kazakhstan published a register of organizations and individuals, including journalists and media outlets, receiving foreign funding without explicitly labeling them foreign agents.

In March, Georgia’s government withdrew a bill that would have labeled media outlets as foreign agents after public protests.

Source: CPJ News

The post CPJ Calls on Kyrgyzstan Parliament to Reject Russian-style ‘foreign Agents’ Bill appeared first on Tashkent Citizen.

It is believed that he had the greatest significance for the country.

On September 26, 1999, a national referendum on amendments to the Constitution of the republic was held in Tajikistan. This was the second popular referendum in the history of independent Tajikistan. The main amendments concerned increasing the presidential term from five to seven years and the establishment of a bicameral parliament.

The referendum was planned for the first half of 1998, but it was postponed indefinitely for various reasons. After lengthy debates between the government and the opposition, on June 30, 1999, the parliament of Tajikistan (at that time unicameral) finally approved the date of the referendum – September 26, 1999. At this time, the republic had a Constitution in force, adopted by a popular referendum in 1994, at the height of the civil war.

The referendum took place exactly on the appointed day, September 26, without any special incidents. Polling stations were open to voters from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m.

According to official data, the turnout at the elections was 92.53% – 2 million 591 thousand 905 people voted (citizens of the country with the right to vote numbered 2 million 800 thousand 947).

75.31% of Tajik citizens voted for the amendments to the Constitution, while 24.69% of voters voted against. 0.01% of ballots were declared invalid.

After the referendum, a bicameral parliament was created in Tajikistan, consisting of the Majlisi Milli (upper) and the Majlisi Namoyandagon (lower).

The term of office of the President of Tajikistan after the presidential elections on November 6, 1999 became seven years.

And the main opposition Islamist Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan was officially registered and received the right to participate in the next parliamentary elections in 2000, conditions were provided for the registration of religious organizations, freedom of speech was protected by law…

During the existence of the Tajik SSR, four Constitutions were adopted: – in 1929, 1931, 1937 and 1978. And today we remember how many times it changed over the years of independence, how many amendments were made to it and, most importantly, how much it cost us…

First edits
The country’s constitution was adopted at the most difficult time for Tajikistan, when the republic was plunged into civil war, negotiation processes between the conflicting parties were just beginning, and about a million Tajik citizens were in forced migration.

At the request of the warring parties, parliament introduced dozens of amendments to the country’s Constitution. Later, the head of the working group for developing the draft of the main document of the country, the then first deputy head of the Supreme Council of the country, Abdulmajid Dostiev, said that so many amendments had been made to the basic law that it was impossible to list them all.

The draft of the first Constitution of independent Tajikistan was published in the press for public discussion in the spring of 1993; for more than a year the people of the country could speak out on this issue.

True, given the situation at that time, there was no discussion as such – the people thought, first of all, about their safety and their daily bread.

On November 6, 1994, a referendum was held in Tajikistan on a new Constitution, which restored the post of president, and presidential elections were also held. Emomali Rakhmonov won them. Before this, the country lived according to the Constitution of the Tajik SSR, which was adopted back in the seventies of the 20th century.
The authors of the country’s basic law were such famous jurists as Ashurboy Imomov, Zarif Alizoda, Khalifabobo Khomidov, Shavkat Ismailov, Abdulmajid Dostiev.

Witnesses of those years say that the people were literally forced to vote for the new Constitution – the streets were filled with armed people, no one guaranteed safety.

“The Constitution was turned into a kind of “draft”
Over the course of 22 years, additions and changes were made to the Constitution of the country three times. The first amendments were made in 1999, the next referendum on amending the basic law of the country was held in 2003, and the third in May 2016.

Rakhmatillo Zoirov, chairman of the country’s Legal Consortium and former presidential adviser, says that due to inexperience, our officials have turned the Constitution into a kind of “draft.” In his opinion, the Constitution adopted in 1994, compared to the Constitutions of 1999, 2003 and 2016, was more stable.

“Then in 1994, the Constitution was not adopted in a hurry; people without political ambitions and interests worked on it, objectively,” he says. – It became unstable when additions and amendments began to be made to it later. The people who developed the amendments practically did not give the people a choice (at the 2016 referendum – ed.), giving them only the opportunity to answer “yes” or “no” regarding all 50 changes at once. Changes were made, as a result of which the shortcomings were not only not eliminated, they were increased, both quantitatively and qualitatively, Zoirov believed.

Major changes
The next Constitutional referendum in Tajikistan took place in September 1999. He, perhaps, had the greatest significance for the country.

A little less than four years later, in 2003, Tajikistan again decided to “amend” the Constitution. This time it was proposed to make 56 changes and amendments, the main of which again concerned the fourth chapter – and the new amendment made it possible to be elected president for two terms of seven years.

Legal experts then complained that the practice of introducing 56 additions and changes at once in one referendum was only in Tajikistan. Many were dissatisfied with the fact that Tajikistan made changes to the basic law twice over the course of nine years, which indicated the instability of the country’s Constitution.

The referendum on May 22, 2016 lifted the remaining restrictions on the “Leader of the Nation” – President Emomali Rahmon. In addition, the minimum age for presidential candidates has been reduced from 35 to 30 years. Many experts said that this measure, if desired, would allow the son of the head of state, 29-year-old Rustam Emomali, to nominate his candidacy for the presidency in 2020.

One of the most important amendments adopted at the last referendum was the ban on parties of a religious and atheistic nature.

Almost unanimously in favor
According to AP information from government circles, a total of over 40 million somoni was spent from the state budget of Tajikistan to conduct four Constitutional referendums.

In the 1994 referendum, of the total number of participating electorates, which amounted to 2 million 535 thousand 777 people, 90 percent voted “For”, 10% voted “Against”, there were no invalid ballots.

In the referendum on June 22, 2003, out of 2 million 436 thousand 496 people in the electorate, 92.8% voted “For”, 7.2% “Against”.

And at the last referendum – May 22, 2016, according to official data, the constitutional changes were approved by 96.6% of voters. The turnout, according to official data, was 92 percent.

Source: Asia Plus TJ

The post Presidential Term, Bicameral Parliament and Freedom of Religion appeared first on Tashkent Citizen.

The newly elected Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim became the country’s 10th leader after decades of tumultuous political journey that saw him being ousted as deputy prime minister in the 1990s, sent to jail twice and repeatedly written off by rivals as an also-ran politician.

Anwar’s rise to power marks a stunning comeback for a man who at the peak of his political career was suddenly sacked by the government of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad in the 1990s. Anwar was also convicted and jailed on corruption and sodomy charges, which were widely believed to be politically motivated. Although the court overturned the first conviction in 2004, a year after Mahathir left office for the first time, more allegations of sodomy were made against Anwar and he returned to jail in 2014.

In a stunning twist, with Anwar still behind bars, he and Mahathir joined forces for the 2018 election to topple the government of then prime minister Najib Razak, whose administration had become embroiled in a corruption scandal surrounding the state investment fund 1 Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB). Mahathir vowed that should they succeed, he would free Anwar and step aside for him after a couple of years in power. While Mahathir stuck to the first promise, with a royal pardon freed Anwar soon after the election, he backtracked on the second.

Following the general election that was held on Nov. 19, Anwar finally took his oath as prime minister on Nov. 24 before Malaysian King Sultan Abdullah bin Sultan Ahmad Shah, who named him to the post after Anwar established a “unity government”. Anwar’s multiethnic Pakatan Harapan (Alliance of Hope), led with 82 seats, short of the 112 needed for a majority in the 222-seat parliament. To secure the PM position, Anwar established a unity government with the National Front (BN), which has 30 lawmakers in the parliament, the Sarawak Parties Alliance (GPS) that has 23 lawmakers and the Sabah People Alliance (GRS) that places 6 lawmakers.

Meanwhile, his rival candidate Muhyiddin Yassin’s right-leaning National Alliance (PN) won 73 seats. Within the alliance, Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party has emerged as the single biggest party with 49 seats. Muhyiddin had served briefly as the country’s eighth prime minister and was vying to return to power.

Among his first pledges as Malaysia’s new prime minister, Anwar said he “would not take” a salary as a show of solidarity with Malaysians struggling with the rising cost of living. He also promised to help the country embrace multi-culturalism. Malaysia has long adopted a policy of institutionalized affirmative action favoring the ethnic Malay majority over its sizable Chinese Malaysian and Indian Malaysian minorities.

Within a week of his appointment, Anwar has been under fire after the new ministers were sworn in on Dec. 3 as the Cabinet line-up includes two deputy prime ministers: BN’s Ahmad Zahid Hamidi and GPS’s Fadillah Yusof. Ahmad Zahid, who was the deputy prime minister in the Najib Razak administration, recently faced 47 corruption charges in court.

Anwar was also criticized for keeping the post of Finance Minister for himself. Research executive Halmie Azrie Abdul Halim of the think-tank Ideas is concerned about the new Premier holding the finance portfolio as Finance Ministry is arguably the second-most influential in the Cabinet and there could be a lack of oversight if the Prime Minister holds the position. Halmie also reminded that former prime minister Najib Razak also helmed the Finance Ministry during the 1MDB saga.

Economic Affairs Minister Rafizi Ramli defended Anwar’s decision of to concurrently hold the finance portfolio, saying that Anwar was a “suitable” candidate for the post considering the “extraordinary circumstances” in his unity government. However, Rafizi also expressed hope that the current government would do this only as a temporary arrangement.

Regardless of the controvery, Anwar has kept his promise to establish a small cabinet, which only comprises 28 ministers, leaner than the Cabinet teams under Ismail Sabri Yaakob and Muhyiddin Yassin. Under the Ismail Sabri administration, there were 31 ministers and 38 deputies. Meanwhile, Muhyiddin had a Cabinet of 32 ministers and 38 deputies. Anwar has yet to announce the list of deputy ministers. The new cabinet ministers have agreed to cut their monthly salaries by 20 percent until the economy recovers, after Anwar chaired first Cabinet meeting on Dec. 5.

The honeymoon period for the new Malaysian PM proved to be quite short, and Anwar and his cabinet would have to work fast to establish reforms and economic recovery to the Southeast Asian country.

The post Anwar Ibrahim Became Prime Minister appeared first on Tashkent Citizen.