KYRGYZSTAN MISSION REPORT MAY 30-JUNE 6, 2010
Marcie Mersky, Bogdan Ivaniševi?, Eugene Huskey
Executive Summary
During the last five years, Kyrgyzstan has experienced two popular uprisings-in March 2005 and April 6-7, 2010-that have led to the overthrow of the government and the deepening of political and social divisions in the country. In both cases, the uprisings came as a reaction to governments that were increasingly corrupt, repressive, and authoritarian. After former president Kurmanbek Bakiev fled on April 7, 2010, an interim government made up of opposition political leaders took power. A nationwide referendum held on June 27 approved a new constitution, with a number of potentially democratizing reforms, and confirmed Roza Otunbaeva as the country's president. Elections for a new parliament are now set for October. In the wake of the April uprising, the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) undertook a weeklong mission in Kyrgyzstan to assess whether a transitional justice approach might assist the country in its transition process. In this sense, the mission was not an inquiry into past abuses, but an assessment of how Kyrgyzstan might address them by providing effective mechanisms for acknowledging past human rights violations and other abuses of power, securing accountability for those abuses and reparations for victims, and preventing a repetition of patterns of abuse and impunity. This assessment report draws heavily on the results of some 30 interviews conducted by ICTJ's expert team in Bishkek, with a broad range of Kyrgyzstani civil society leaders and high-level government officials. Until very recently, Kyrgyzstan's past did not correspond neatly to the circumstances for which transitional justice mechanisms are generally used. While political opponents and journalists were clearly the target of state repression in recent years, there was not a history or systematic pattern of massive violations of the most fundamental human rights, such as the right to life and to physical integrity. The violence in the country's southern region in June 2010, which erupted just days after the ICTJ mission, adds a significant new dimension to the situation. The atrocities and destruction committed there revealed much deeper divisions and a greater degree of deterioration-of respect for human rights, state institutional capacity, and national unity-than had been acknowledged before.
The ICTJ team found that in the vibrant Kyrgyzstani civil society community there is a strong demand for accountability and recognition of the importance of exploring other means to that end in addition to criminal prosecutions. In this context, a transitional justice approach designed to engage broad sectors of Kyrgyzstani society, especially those who have suffered abuses or been marginalized from public participation, could potentially help Kyrgyzstan achieve accountability for past crimes, move toward national reconciliation, and solidify the commitment to democratic governance.
In general terms, well-designed and implemented transitional justice measures could contribute to these objectives by demonstrating and giving formal recognition to the fact that serious human rights violations and other abuses of power have affected the lives of thousands of Kyrgyzstani citizens of all economic and ethnic groups, and by providing some forms of redress for them. Such measures would also document and help correct the systematic and system-wide abuses in law enforcement agencies and the justice system; open a public discussion and establish a broader social consensus regarding the moral and ethical rules for acceptable political practice; and generate a greater sense of inclusion and greater public trust in state institutions.
In the debate about future transitional justice work-which would need to happen among Kyrgyzstani activists and political leaders-in addition to the necessary focus on grave human rights violations, serious consideration should be given to broadening the efforts to cover other kinds of rights violations and pervasive abuses of state power. The latter could include corruption, electoral fraud, system-wide abuses by law enforcement and justice institutions, and discrimination on religious and ethnic grounds. These are the issues that civil society and political leaders identified as major, long-standing sites of impunity and major impediments to breaking the deepening tendency toward authoritarian rule and conflict.
There is already considerable work under way in Kyrgyzstan that falls broadly into a transitional justice framework. This includes event-focused commissions of inquiry, criminal proceedings on past crimes (although these have focused on corruption cases rather than on human rights violations), an economic compensation program for victims of the April uprising, and broad constitutional reform that provides for some important modifications of justice sector and law enforcement institutions. Nonetheless, the impact of these initial efforts could be hampered by insufficient transparency (in the case of the government commission of inquiry into the April events and the prioritization of cases for prosecution), or the limited scope of the measures (in the case of the compensation program and the reform efforts).
With regards to particular, future, transitional justice measures, the ICTJ assessment suggests that the following could prove beneficial in the Kyrgyzstani context:
- A truth commission: While decisions about how it would function and its scope should be based on public discussion and backed with some form of official recognition, consideration should be given to defining a framework that encompasses all of the periods of repression and forms of abuse in order to help identify systemic problems and patterns of violations (in addition to clarifying specific cases or incidents). Consideration should also be given to incorporating public hearings as a part of the process because they facilitate public involvement and social debate on the issues.
- A comprehensive reparations program: This could extend to all victims of serious past human rights violations, including those of the June events, and provide them not only with material compensation and rehabilitation, but also undertake symbolic measures aimed at affirming to the society as a whole that the victims are full citizens of Kyrgyzstan, whose rights and dignity must be respected, independent of their ethnic origin, religion, or political beliefs.
- Criminal prosecutions: A key step forward could be the creation of a transparent prosecutorial strategy based on a systematic mapping of abuses committed in the past and during the events of June, with cases that led to death and serious harm to physical integrity given priority in investigation and prosecution. Decisions on prosecution for human rights abuses should not depend on the political affiliation, status, or ethnicity of the suspects and victims.
- A vetting process in law enforcement and justice sector institutions: While the pertinence of implementing a thorough vetting process (through reappointment or review) is for the post-election government to decide, such a process, if carried out with transparency and well-defined professional criteria, could be very helpful for removing the worst offenders and establishing a clear set of standards for professional behavior in the future. Obstacles to vetting, such as resistance within the existing institutions, are easy to envisage, but can be overcome if the political will exists.
In any discussions in Kyrgyzstan about whether to go forward with new transitional justice measures, it would be important to ensure consultation with all of the stakeholders, especially the victims of the violations and abuses, and promote transparency in decision-making and proceedings. Final decisions regarding these measures might best be made once the new parliamentary government is installed, since that would provide the strongest legitimacy and demonstration of political will. In preparation, over the next few months efforts could focus on activities that open a debate on these issues, generate interest and political will, and introduce international experiences with transitional justice measures to Kyrgyzstani civil society and political leaders, as there has been relatively little access to that experience until now.