Oct 3, 2013 ... Seminar report elaborated by UNPO in October 2013. ... This seminar came in
the midst of a crackdown on civil society and opposition.
Seminar Report European Parliament 3 October 2013 Brussels, Belgium
Organised by Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy MEP in association with the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization
The conference was organised by Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, MEP in association with the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO). © Seminar report elaborated by UNPO in October 2013. The conference report can be downloaded from UNPO´s website. Photographs by UNPO.
Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO) Laan van Meerdervoort 70 2517 AN The Hague The Netherlands Tel.: +31(0)70 3646504 Fax: +31(0)70 3646608
[email protected] www.unpo.org
SEMINAR REPORT
AZERBAIJAN’S PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS: WHAT FUTURE FOR THE LAND OF FIRE?
3 October 2013 European Parliament, Brussels, Belgium
Contents
Foreword
1
Seminar Programme
2
Opening Remarks
3
Opening remarks by Mr Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy
4
MEP and Vice-President of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly
Speech by Mr Marino Busdachin
5
General Secretary of the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization
Panel I: The Run-up to the 2013 Presidential Elections Elections in Azerbaijan: a short overview
6 7
Caecilia van Peski, Independent Elections Expert
The political landscape in the run-up to the Presidential elections
9 Isa Gambar, Leader of the Musavat Party (member of the National Council of Democratic Forces)
The pre-election situation for civil society
10
David Nichols, Senior Executive Officer – EU Foreign Policy, Amnesty International
Panel II: Ways Forward for EU-Azerbaijan Relations A European Future for Azerbaijan
12 13
Dr. Asim Molla-zada, MP from Azerbaijan, President of the Democratic Reforms Party
Looking Ahead: the European Neighbourhood Policy and Azerbaijan 15 Dr. Pierre Dybman, Political Officer, Eastern Partnership Bilateral Division, EEAS
Democracy, Civil Society and Minorities in the Caucasus.
16
Dr. Enver F. Kisriev, Head of the Department for the Caucasus, Centre for Regional and Civilization Studies at the Russian Academy of Science
Speaker Profiles
19
About the Organisers of the Seminar
21
Media Coverage
22
Appendices
24
Foreword
1
In view of Azerbaijan’s sixth presidential elections since independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy MEP organised a seminar in association with the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO) entitled ‘Azerbaijan’s Presidential Elections: What Future for the Land of Fire?’ in the European Parliament on 3 October 2013. During the ten-year presidency of Ilham Aliyev, who was unsurprisingly reelected for a third term on 9 October, economic growth, rising living standards, as well as closer cooperation with Europe, have come to secure stability in Azerbaijan. This period has however, at the same time, also been marked by high levels of corruption, a weakened independent media and an increasing number of politically motivated arrests. This seminar came in the midst of a crackdown on civil society and opposition movements prior to the elections, and offered an opportunity to analyse the current political landscape in Azerbaijan, as well as examine the country’s fledging relations with the European Union. The first panel explored the political situation in the larger region of South Caucasus, the conduct of previous elections in Azerbaijan, the different obstacles facing opposition politicians, and the poor human rights records of the Azerbaijani government. The second panel consisted of contributions relating to the future prospects of Azerbaijan, including a reflection on the importance of promoting European culture and education in Azerbaijan, an overview of EU-Azerbaijani relations, and a presentation on the problems facing the Lezghin and other minorities in the country, in terms of cultural and linguistic expression, as well as civil liberties – of particular importance in election periods. The strong turnout of the seminar, as well as the many and emotional reactions from the floor, confirmed the relevance of the topics discussed, as well as the crucial timing of the seminar. Having brought together a range of actors from the media, academia and both governmental and non-governmental organisations, the event contributed to raising a greater awareness of the sensitive issues of national identity and minority rights in Azerbaijan. In the aftermath of the seminar and the elections, UNPO will remain alert to future steps taken by President Aliyev’s regime, especially regarding matters of freedom of expression and of the respect of cultural, linguistic and minority rights.
Marino Busdachin UNPO General Secretary
Seminar Programme
2
Opening remarks Mr Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy Member of the European Parliament and Vice-President of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly Mr Marino Busdachin General Secretary of the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization
Panel I: The Run-up to the 2013 Presidential Elections Moderator: Mr. Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy Elections in Azerbaijan: a short overview Caecilia van Peski, independent elections expert The political landscape in the run-up to the Presidential elections Isa Gambar, leader of the Musavat Party (member of the National Council of Democratic Forces) The pre-election situation for civil society David Nichols, Senior Executive Officer – EU Foreign Policy, Amnesty International
Panel II: Ways Forward for EU-Azerbaijan Relations Moderator: Mr. Marino Busdachin A European Future for Azerbaijan Dr. Asim Molla-zada, MP from Azerbaijan, President of the Democratic Reforms Party Looking Ahead: the European Neighbourhood Policy and Azerbaijan Dr. Pierre Dybman, Political Officer, Eastern Partnership Bilateral Division, EEAS Democracy, Civil Society and Minorities in the Caucasus. Dr. Enver F. Kisriev, Head of the Department for the Caucasus, Centre for Regional and Civilization Studies at the Russian Academy of Science
Closing remarks by Mr. Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy
Opening Remarks
3
Mr Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy Member of the European Parliament and Vice-President of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly
Mr Marino Busdachin General Secretary of the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization
Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy
Marino Busdachin
Opening remarks by Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, MEP Vice-President of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly
4
The main reason for organising this seminar is next week’s Presidential elections - a very important event in Azerbaijan. I have been to Azerbaijan a few times during the last couple of years, and I must say that Azerbaijan is geographically located in a rather challenging environment: next to Russia and Iran, close to Turkey, Armenia, the Caspian Sea and all those countries on the other side of the Caspian Sea. From a political point of view it is also a very important country, which is one of the reasons why I took interest in focusing on this country during my last couple of years in this house. Of course, we all know Azerbaijan is important: because of gas and oil - the engines of our current fossil fuel economy. Apart from its own gas and oil however, it is also a very important transit country for fossil fuel coming from the other side of the Caspian Sea. To the EU that is of a very high strategic importance: we are desperate to diversify our energy supply, and in this, the whole region around the Caspian Sea plays a very important role. This is also one of the reasons why I have the feeling that the EU has a huge interest in having a very stable partner in Azerbaijan. Furthermore, as far as I am concerned being a member of a party called Democrats-66, a high level of democracy, and respect for civil liberties and human rights are hugely important for the stability of a country. And this is another reason why I decided to focus on this issue. To be very open and frank, the signs have not been extremely positive this year. We have seen popular unrest in the beginning of 2013 in several parts of the country. We have seen – and I quote several reports here – an increased repression of the opposition, civil society and media. We have seen journalists being harassed and even imprisoned, and I am extremely worried about this situation. In this seminar we will focus on two issues. The first part, that I will chair, will be focusing on the current situation in the run-up to the elections and general expectations in regards to their outcome, whereas the second part, chaired by Mr. Busdachin, will focus on the way forward – what about the EU-Azerbaijani relations after the elections? And what about the situation in Azerbaijan after the elections? I am very honoured to introduce todays’ speakers. We invited the ambassador of Azerbaijan to the EU but unfortunately, he was unable to come. However, I was happily surprised that he arranged for not just one person to replace him, but four. So we have four members of the National Parliament of Azerbaijan present today, and one of them, Mr. Molla-zada, will take part in the second part of this seminar. My other announcement is that we originally expected Mr. Hasanli to also be here. To me, I must say, it was not a big surprise that he was unable to come in the end. Being the main opposition candidate a few days before the elections I can imagine it is pretty hard to fly all the way to Brussels, so this week it turned out that he was not able to come. But I am very proud that we have Isa Gambar as his replacement, so that is not at all weakening our programme. We have three speakers during our first session. The first is Caecilia van Peski, independent elections expert. Then we have Isa Gambar, leader of the Musavat party and a real senior if it concerns politics in Azerbaijan. I’ve met him in Baku once or twice and I feel very privileged to have him here. The third speaker is David Nichols, on behalf of Amnesty International.
Speech by Marino Busdachin UNPO General Secretary
5
At a moment when Azerbaijan is moving closer to the EU than ever before, addressing the question of democracy and human rights in the country – here at the heart of European decision making – is indeed of utmost importance. In Azerbaijan, UNPO represents the largest minority group residing in the country, namely the Lezghin people, an indigenous Caucasian ethnic group divided between northern Azerbaijan and southern Dagestan, a republic of the Russian Federation. Incumbent Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev’s tenure has undoubtedly brought great prosperity to Azerbaijan and has seen the country’s relationship to the European Union grow closer in recent years. However, this has come at a high price: widespread human rights abuses and corruption are commonplace, and with the elections rapidly approaching, authorities have increasingly turned their focus towards silencing criticism. Furthermore – let me quote a Human Rights Watch report from September 2013 - “the sheer number of arrests, the adoption of harsher laws, and extensive government efforts to stop and prevent peaceful public protests indicate a new concerted government effort to curtail political and civic activism in the country”. In this context, during a fact-finding mission to Azerbaijan in late August this year, UNPO regrettably observed that minority groups have been particularly targeted. Although Azerbaijan is officially committed to the protection of minority rights through the country’s constitution and ratification of the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention on National Minorities (FCNM), in reality it is impossible for minority groups, including the Lezghin, the Farsi-speaking Talysh and the Avars, and many others, to express their ethnic identity - be it through culture, politics or business. Energy has become one of the major ties in the Azerbaijan-EU relationship. However, if the European Union wishes to not only serve its economic interests, but to also live up to its core values of democracy, rule of law and respect for human rights, increased and continued attention must be given to the grave situation facing opposition activists and minority groups in Azerbaijan. The recent European Parliament resolution (June 2013), strongly condemning the detention of opposition leader and presidential candidate Ilga Mammadov, and calling for his immediate and unconditional release, is a welcome step, but further efforts are needed in order to end arbitrary arrests on bogus charges. Regarding the standards of the last elections, and the present pre-election stage: As has been observed by the OSCE, the 2008 elections did not match international standards, meaning that although elections were held in Azerbaijan, these were not democratic elections. What we can conclude from the pre-election stage of the current elections is that they do still not match democratic standards. Let me also say a few words about the different rankings Azerbaijan has been given. Considering Transparency International’s 2012 Corruption Perceptions Index, Azerbaijan ranks 139th out of 176 countries. Furthermore, with regard to the 2013 Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters Without Borders, which measures the freedom of journalists, news organisations and bloggers in a given country, Azerbaijan ranks 156th out of 179. And finally, whereas Freedom House’s Freedom of the Press Survey for 2013 categorises Azerbaijan’s press as ‘not free’, and notes that the situation is deteriorating, others have objected that there is no freedom of association or assembly – something which we can witness at this very moment in the pre-electoral stage. Azerbaijan is a member of important human rights bodies, including the UN Human Rights Council and the Council of Europe, which means it is committed to the respect of basic human rights. The position for a Human Rights Commissioner was also created in Azerbaijan in 2002; however this office has generally been seen as ineffective. There is one main discrepancy which emerges from this discussion: While the European Union has a major interest in enlarging its membership participation in the future, it is carrying out an inconsistent, even schizophrenic approach. The rankings I quoted for Azerbaijan are more or less similar to the ones of Belarus, but what is occurring is that the European Union strongly criticises and has limited contact with Belarus. At the same time, Azerbaijan is ranking high on the preferred list of the European Union, given that it lies as much in the interest of the European Union as it does in that of Azerbaijan to reach the Association Agreement, for which negotiations are currently taking place. Europe cannot afford to exclusively evaluate its needs for energy at a good price, without strongly requesting Azerbaijan to fulfil its obligations as a member of the Council of Europe and of the UN Human Rights Council. Reaching this target is not simple, it will take a long time for Azerbaijan. Nonetheless, Azerbaijan has to change; by complying with human rights norms; releasing political prisoners; running democratic elections; and ensuring freedom of the press and freedom of assembly. Alternatively there will be no possibility for dialogue between Azerbaijan and the European Union.
Panel I: The Run-up to the 2013 Presidential Elections
6
Moderator: Mr. Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy Elections in Azerbaijan: a short overview Caecilia van Peski, independent elections expert
The political landscape in the run-up to the Presidential elections Isa Gambar, leader of the Musavat Party (member of the National Council of Democratic Forces)
The pre-election situation for civil society David Nichols, Amnesty International
David Nichols, Isa Gambar, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Marino Busdachin, Caecilia van Peski
Elections in Azerbaijan: a short overview Caecilia van Peski, independent elections expert
7
The year 2013 presents the South Caucasus with an exhilarating E-year: a full year of elections. All three South Caucasus republics are holding elections this year. By the end of 2013, Armenia (elections took place on February 18), Azerbaijan (elections scheduled for October 9) and Georgia (elections scheduled for October 27) will have inaugurated a new President (may this be the incumbent President, or a new player in the field). These invigorating circumstances create the perfect backdrop for an analysis of the current political situation in the region. After the collapse of the Soviet Union (in 1991), these three countries in South Caucasus took their own faiths in hand. In this, they chose separate paths for developing their democracies, safeguarding human rights, and boasting national economies. Although the paths that were taken were quite distinct, all three nations have been faced with hampering circumstances on their way to a vigorously sought-after prosperity. Strategically positioned, the Caucasus has for many- a -century been theatre to a high-ranked game of chess. As part of the ‘game’, players have engaged in ways of enforcing influence over the lands of earth, wind and fire. They have done so from the valleys in between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, and from the Greater Caucasus Mountain Range – where Mount Elbrus encompasses all of nature’s elements – , to the rolling plains into Iran. In addition - sometimes overt, often covert - post Cold War players Russia and Europe have been interacting in a tug-of-war to see who in the end will be the strongest. To the West, Armenia remains under the constant threat of the escalation of the conflict over NagornoKarabakh. The country is faced with high unemployment rates, resulting in approximately half of the Armenian population living in poverty, rural people being particularly vulnerable (two out of ten Armenians living in rural areas are considered to be extremely poor)1 To the North, in Georgia, the hot summer days of August 2008 brought a fiercely fought Five Days of War. Even with that particular war being over, Russo-Georgian enmity over South Ossetia could still reach a further violent peak. Only last week, after the EU's Political and Security Committee travelled to Georgia to pay a visit to the Administrative Boundary Line (or, ABL) of South Ossetia (on 30 September 2013), and to the EU Monitoring Mission (EUMM) - a mission to which I myself was deployed as Team Leader Human Rights - EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Catherine Ashton, voiced grave concern over the increased barbed-wire installation by Russian security forces along the ABL between the Tbilisi Administered Territory (or, TAT) and the regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In a statement issued by her spokesperson (on 1 October 2013), Ms Ashton said: “Such activities - which contravene Georgia's territorial integrity - create significant hardship for residents on either side of the ABL and seriously challenge stability and security in the region”2. The High Representative called on Russia to remove the barriers, reiterating the support of the European Union for Georgia's territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders. Only two weeks ago, while I was visiting some friends who live in a small town right beside the ABL, I saw with my own eyes how Concertina wire was being rolled out along vast stretches of the ABL. Also, I could see how a new military road was being constructed on the slopes of the Greater Caucasus Mountain Range (South Ossetia side). And at night, driving from Tbilisi to Gori, I could see the flickering lights of the ever growing and multiplying Russian Military Bases close to Okami (besides the M27 Highway). To the East, in Azerbaijan, the security situation is arduous because of the country’s less-than-friendly neighbors (Turkmenistan, Iran, and Armenia). Azerbaijan also has to deal with the West condemning the countries’ practices towards political prisoners, and the lack of an independent judiciary. Since its independence, Azerbaijan has been troubled by domestic power struggles, in which dissident army and police forces operated on their own account. Furthermore, the Nagorno-Karabakh issue has overshadowed Azerbaijani domestic politics. The conflict over the enclave has constrained economic investment and trade, and has resulted in the displacement of more than 700,000 people3. Meeting the immediate needs of these IDPs has distracted the government of Azerbaijan from implementing meaningful, structural reforms in key areas such as rural development, infrastructure, legal and regulatory reform, banking and the development of democratic institutions. Also, the dealings around oil fields and pipelines have been Report “Rural Poverty in Armenia” (2011). International Fund for Agricultural Development. European Union External Action Services (EEAS), Statement 131001/02, Brussels, Belgium, 01 October 2013. 3 Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) Report: “Azerbaijan: After some 20 years, IDPs still face barriers to self-reliance” (10 December 2012). 1 2
dominating Azerbaijani domestic politics.
8
Even so, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Azerbaijan tried hard to establish democratic values and bring political culture to the country. But with no traditional political culture rooted in its past, and having been under Soviet Empire for 70 years, Azerbaijan lost most of the values it had accumulated during the establishment of the Democratic Republic of Azerbaijan (in 1918-1920). On October 15, 2008, the previous presidential election in Azerbaijan was held. At the time, President Ilham Aliyev of the New Azerbaijan Party was re-elected with 87 per cent of the votes in his favor. Several major political parties (including Musavat, the Azerbaijan Popular Front Party, Azerbaijan Liberal Party, and the Azerbaijan Democratic Party) boycotted the vote because of alleged poll-fixing and oppression of political opponents. More than 500 international election observers, deployed by the OSCE, the European Parliament, and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), observed the election. I myself was part of OSCE contingency. In its Final Report, the OSCE/ODIHR stated that there was progress in the elections compared to past ones, but that elections did not meet international standards because of the lack of competition to incumbent Ilham Aliyev4. Mr. Avez Temirhan of the election-boycotting AzerbaijanLiberal Party added: “This leadership is not legitimate and its election does not reflect the will of the people.”5 Two years later (on 7 November, 2010), parliamentary elections were again held in Azerbaijan. Again, a high number of international election observers were deployed (excluding myself this time, since by that time I had been deployed to the EUMM in Georgia). The OSCE stated (in its Final Report 6) that the election campaign had been marred by restrictions on media freedom and freedom of assembly, noting that many opposition candidates were unable to register themselves, thus creating an "uneven playing field”. Also, the pre-election atmosphere was assessed to be tense, with media complaining of pressure and non-transparent financial transactions of state officials. On E-day itself (Election Day), the OSCE 0bservers reported numerous cases of ballot box stuffing and identical signatures. In the 2010 parliamentary elections, President Aliyev’s ruling Yeni Azerbaijan Party got a majority of 73 out of 125 seats, (nominally independent candidates, who were aligned with the government, received 38 seats, and 10 small opposition or quasi-opposition parties got the remaining 13 seats. Civic Solidarity retained its 3 seats, and Ana Vaten kept the 2 seats they had in the previous legislature; the Democratic Reforms party, Great Creation, the Movement for National Rebirth, Umid, Civic Unity, Civic Welfare, Adalet (Justice), and the Popular Front of United Azerbaijan, most of which were represented in the previous parliament, won one seat per party), meaning that, for the first time in Azerbaijani modern history, not a single candidate from the main opposition parties (Azerbaijan Popular Front (AXCP) or Musavat) had been elected. The opposition Musavat decried the election as: "Illegitimate... [the] events had nothing to do with elections, it was the most shameful kind of election." 7 Ruling president Aliyev, however, said: “The election was fair.”8 The Central Election Commission (CEC) said the turnout was 50.1%, out of a total 4.9 million people eligible to vote. Opposition leaders suggested the low turnout was due to candidate disqualifications by the CEC, and the consequent discouragement to vote after their choice of candidate had been excluded. There is a philosophical saying that the cause of every phenomenon is to be found within the phenomenon itself. Proceeding from this point of view I come to the conclusion that Azerbaijan is not ready for democracy. I have spoken to a befriended citizen of Baku who phrases it as such: "We are given freedom, but we do not know what to do with it." (Personal Skype session in February 2013). Democracy is a process that should be asserted in all of a country’s actions. Democracy cannot be one-sided. It is a complete process, which is achieved by having a certain political culture and a wider world outlook. The legitimacy of elections is a vital concern in this, the legitimacy as to how genuinely the elections were run. When it comes to the level of democratic development in Azerbaijan, I wish to mention one more thing. The Azerbaijani government holds a very poor human rights record9. Arbitrary arrests, police beatings and
Republic of Azerbaijan, Presidential Elections 15 October 2008, OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission Final Report, Warsaw, 15 December 2008. 5 “Azeri Opposition decries Aliyev Election Victory”. Lahore, Pakistan, Pakistan Daily Times (17 October 2008). 6 Republic of Azerbaijan, Parliamentary Elections 7 November 2010, OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission Final Report, Warsaw, 25 January 2011. 7 Al-Jazeera News (English), 9 November 2010. 8 President Aliyev in a speech for ITV (National Television Company) on the eve of the 2010 parliamentary elections. 9 Human Rights Watch (HRW), Europe and Central Asia Division Report "Impunity for Torture" (2012). 4
9 suspicious deaths in custody have been documented. The opposition can operate openly but is frequently harassed, and so is the independent press. Political parties can be banned from the elections. The judiciary system often appears to be corrupt, and does not function independently. Judging from several OSCE Election Observation Reports, elections under President Aliyev have not met international standards. Azerbaijan's 2008 presidential elections were seriously flawed and produced a legislature controlled by the president's party. The 2010 parliamentary elections, while conducted under an improved election law, were also marred by cases of fraud. Election year 2013 therefore urges pressing questions as to what future Azerbaijan - and Georgia and Armenia too - are heading for. What will next week’s election outcomes in Azerbaijan predict? And, most importantly, what will be the next move – of the next player – in this region’s giant game of chess? Having come to the end of my speech I would like to express my gratitude to the organizers of this seminar for being invited to speak. It is the peoples of the Caucasus, some members present here today, that are my inspiration. With their engagement towards the development of democratic values and the safeguarding of human rights, the countries of the Caucasus – the ever so magical lands of earth, wind and fire - despite their many challenges hopefully do have a brighter future ahead. I do believe that, despite the many hampering factors –based on the persistence I observe in the peoples of the Caucasus – steps towards a more democratic, more prosperous future can and will be taken.
The political landscape in the run-up to the Presidential elections Isa Gambar, leader of the Musavat Party (member of the National Council of Democratic Forces) This is not just a simple election. We are going to make several choices - fundamental choices that our nation is facing. I am representing the Musavat Party, one of the oldest parties in Europe. In 2011 we celebrated the anniversary of the establishment of our party and members of the ALDE party were represented at that event, as well as at our different ALDE events. We have a National Council, where different members of our party - intellectual people - are represented. And they are represented here today as well. Our aim is to participate in the elections with a single candidate, that's why we have chosen one of these intellectual people, Professor Jamil Hasanli, as our representative and our sole candidate for the presidential elections. He is a world-famous professor and his books have been published throughout the world and in different universities. I was going to represent the Musavat party, but as we have one single candidate, I am here to represent Jamil Hasanli. Time has been allocated on national TV for debates between the ten presidential candidates. However, the president himself has not been present during these debates, but has instead been sending his representatives. In the debates, Jamil Hasanli has very heavily criticised the government but he normally presents what he is going to do if elected, whereas other candidates are focused on criticising him. It is strange that they are heavily criticising him but not giving any details about their programme, and what they are going to do if they are elected. Let me stress here that the Azerbaijani people are very keen on elections and are following the elections closely. Furthermore, the government is trying to broadcast only what they are doing, their programmes. They have created a fake opposition who is given rights to go on TV and represent the opposition as awhile. You cannot see real members of the opposition on our TV. The campaign period to showcase the candidates’ programmes has been shortened - it is impossible to visit 85 regions of Azerbaijan in 22 days. As representatives of the Democratic Forces we think that - we know that - according to the constitution a person can be elected only two times. However, in 2009 there was a referendum to change this, as a consequence of which the limit to be elected only two times was lifted. We think that this restriction has to be reinstalled, not for these elections but for the coming ones. We think that President Ilham Aliyev should not be re-elected because during his ten year presidency the Nagorno-Karabakh problem, like many other problems, was not solved – just to mention one example. Taking into account all these issues we see that it is improper that he is putting forward his candidacy for reelection. It is against democratic principles. In Europe, if a country is a parliamentary republic it is normal that the chancellor or prime minister may be re-elected several times, but it does not apply in this case. In summing up all this, we are appealing to different international organisations and European institutions to pay attention to this issue.
10
For ten years Heydar Aliyev was in power, then Ilham Aliyev was in power for another ten years, and was reelected in a fake election. Heydar Aliyev was in power in Azerbaijan during the Soviet period as well, from 1969. Even if someone stays in power for ten years being the best president, he still can’t be re-elected because it’s against any principle. Corruption is rooted in Azerbaijan, and the people no longer want to see a monopoly of the economy. To change all these things, to solve all these problems we will vote for Jamil Hasanli, as Ilham Aliyev has declared several times that he is following the policies of his father. The election campaigns are under the control of the government, who are controlling the local representatives of the election committee. Elections were fake before, people were against this before, and now we want change. We - politicians and intelligent people - have to make a change. But on the other hand we need help, and therefore hope for a commitment from international organisations and European institutions to help us. The government of Azerbaijan - by signing different treaties and becoming a member of different organisations – is making responsible commitments, which should be adhered to. We have fundamental values like freedom freedom of speech and other fundamental principles that exist everywhere and are in our best interest. That is why we, as the Democratic Forces, are going to fight for those fundamental values. Lastly, I want to remind you of an article, which was called ‘To live without a lie’ - calling upon us to fight for our values and not to lie. We mustn’t lie – if we will not say the truth we cannot win.
The pre-election situation for civil society David Nichols, Amnesty International Many of you in the room will remember back to the end of 2011, when Amnesty produced a report on freedom of expression and freedom of assembly in Azerbaijan which was highly critical of the crackdown to the peaceful protest that took place. I am very sorry to say that not only do many of the problems that we highlighted in that report still exist, but what we are witnessing at the moment is a further crackdown on human rights activity and on anything that could be characterized as dissenting voices. In particular the denial of rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly, and the direct connection between those rights and the conditions in which elections can take place are matters of grave concern. I want to highlight just four things for you this afternoon. First the activities of human rights defenders, activists, journalists. Second, the defamation laws in Azerbaijan. Thirdly, I would like to highlight the denial of the right to protest in Azerbaijan. Lastly I would like to speak about the inability of human rights organizations and NGOs to operate due to the government’s restrictions. Firstly, I will speak about human rights defenders and activists, and their ability to actually work in Azerbaijan. At Amnesty at the moment we consider there to be at least 14 prisoners of conscience in Azerbaijan. That is to say, at least 14 civil society activists, journalists, and human rights defenders who have been imprisoned solely for the expression of their right to freedom of expression. That is not to say there are only 14 in Azerbaijan. What we are also witnessing in recent months is that dozens or more activists are harassed, or have been harassed, intimidated and threatened, including physical attacks by unknown individuals. What we have also witnessed is a particularly strong crackdown by the authorities on youth activists. One case I want to highlight with you to demonstrate this is the case of Dashgin Melikov, a 22-year-old youth activist who was sentenced back in July of this year (2013) to 2, 5 years in prison on charges of drug possession - charges we believe to have been fabricated in retaliation for his political activism. This political activism included the setting up of a Facebook page, which was highly critical of the Aliyev family. During his trial Mr. Melikov was prevented from speaking to a lawyer; he was not fully aware of what charges he had actually been given; the evidence was not made clear to him; he was forced to sign a statement; and in addition he was made to delete those Facebook pages. At no point have the police explained to him or anybody else how they originally knew that - or thought rather - that Mr. Melikov was in possession of drugs, so what the basis for actually going up to him in the first place was, why they decided to arrest him, why he had been part of this process, questioned about his political activity, and why he was also forced to delete a Facebook page as part of the whole process is unclear. The second issue that I wanted to raise with you this afternoon centers on defamation. Azerbaijan committed back in 2011 to decriminalize defamation. However, an actual fact that we have seen is that the legislation criminalizing defamation has actually been extended to cover more areas since 2011. In fact, in June of this year
11
it was extended to cover internet, social media and online activity. We saw the first conviction under these new terms in August, when Mikayil Talibov was sentenced to one year of corrective labor for comments that he made on Facebook about the bank that he used to work for. The third point I wanted to raise with you is around the inability in Azerbaijan to protest peacefully. In essence, peaceful anti-government protests are effectively criminalized in Azerbaijan. There is a blanket ban on such protests taking place in Baku, and an amendment coming into force in January of this year has increased the penalties for unauthorized demonstrations in Azerbaijan. At the moment, for example, there are eight activists who have had their charges extended in relation to organizing a peaceful protest in March this year, and are now facing up to twelve years in prison for planning to organize public disorder. At least one of the individuals alleges that he was beaten and it is possible that evidence has been fabricated also in this case. Once again, they were forced to sign confessions. The final point I wanted to mention concerns NGOs in general and their inability to function in Azerbaijan. Already prior to this year, it was difficult for NGOs and civil society organizations to register in Azerbaijan. However, following amendments to the law in March of this year, there are now additional requirements NGOs have to fulfil in order to register, and additional constraints on their funding possibilities. What we are increasingly witnessing is that NGOs in Azerbaijan are either being shut down or denied registration in the first place. In particular those organizations that are working on human rights and democracy, or on political activity. So in conclusion, Azerbaijan has just recently concluded the universal periodic review process within the United Nations, and the report was published just a few weeks ago. During that process Azerbaijan said that guaranteeing human rights and freedoms was the highest goal of the state of Azerbaijan. Though what we are witnessing at Amnesty International is the complete opposite of that.
David Nichols Caecilia van Peski
Isa Gambar
Panel II: Ways Forward for EU-Azerbaijan Relations
12
Moderator: Mr. Marino Busdachin A European Future for Azerbaijan Mr. Asim Molla-zada, MP from Azerbaijan, President of the Democratic Reforms Party
Looking Ahead: the European Neighbourhood Policy and Azerbaijan Pierre Dybman, Political Officer, Eastern Partnership Bilateral Division, EEAS
Democracy, Civil Society and Minorities in the Caucasus Dr. Enver F. Kisriev, Head of the Department for the Caucasus, Centre for Regional and Civilization Studies at the Russian Academy of Science.
Asim Molla-zada, Enver F. Kisriev, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Marino Busdachin, Pierre Dybman
A European Future for Azerbaijan Mr. Asim Molla-zada, MP from Azerbaijan, President of the Democratic Reforms Party
13
First of all, here is my first impression about the discussions here. It reminds me of the Soviet period’s black and white vision, good guys – bad guys, fighting with communists. I would like to remind you that this is the 21st century, where the situation is changing fast. In Azerbaijan there are still some Soviet-type dinosaurs left. There are also dinosaurs from the opposition, fighting with the Soviet Union. And, in this situation I would like to tell you that Azerbaijan has decided for Euro-Atlantic integration. This is the issue of consensus among political parties in Azerbaijan. Mr. Gambar said that his party’s priority is Euro-Atlantic integration. The government of Azerbaijan and the majority of the Azerbaijani population think the same and see the future of the country with Europe. But it does not necessarily mean a membership in NATO. We remember when Georgia and Ukraine applied for NATO membership - there was a response by Putin’s tanks and nobody defended them. NATO was not ready for our membership. We also remember very well that when President Yushenko in Kiev spoke about the goal of Euro-integration, the EU said that Ukraine does not stand any chance, that nobody was discussing Ukrainian integration into Europe. We should take this process into account. Why would Azerbaijan like to be part of a Euro-Atlantic union? First of all, because of the values. I would like to remind you that Azerbaijan was the first secular country in the Muslim world. Even the teachers of Atatürk, who created the Turkish republic, came from Azerbaijan - this whole historical idea appeared in Azerbaijan, and is the biggest value for us. I think one of the biggest problems in former Soviet Union countries is the lack of democracy and human rights. However, you should know that there is a principal difference between us and the Baltic and Central European countries (Poland, Bulgaria, Romania), namely the fact that they never had “holodomor”, massacres. In Baku there are bones of people - of Azerbaijani intelligentsia killed by the Bolshevik and Communist regime. This year it is the 22nd anniversary of the restoration of our independence. As regards the discussion on minority issues and non-recognized ethnicities, I would like to remind you that when there were pogroms of Jews in Europe, e.g. in Holland and Russia, Jews came to Azerbaijan and lived there in peace and brotherhood among the Muslim majority. Furthermore, during the Russian Empire there were violation of the rights of Catholics, who then came to Azerbaijan, where they launched an independence movement. Based in Baku in the 19th, beginning of 20th century, they contributed a lot to the development of the country, to the culture and European vision of the Azerbaijani people. As soon as we had chance to strive for independence, we chose European values. Did we achieve them? Not yet. Here I would like to remind you of the story from the Bible about Moses. When Moses escaped with his people from Egypt, they were walking 40 years in the desert, because he had an idea to come to a new land not with the slaves but with people. In 1992 Azerbaijan was the first post-Soviet country to adopt the Law on the Rights of Minorities (readopted in 1994) and give cultural autonomy to all minorities in Azerbaijan. We have Talysh people, Russians, Lezghins, Jews and we are proud of it. We are proud that the biggest Russian community of the South Caucasus lives in Azerbaijan. It is an integral part of our country and we love our multicultural environment. This is the strategic way of the Azerbaijani nation, originating in our history. Talysh are part of Azerbaijani culture and it is a serious problem to speak about the violation of Lezghin and Talysh rights. I want to touch upon a very serious issue of Azerbaijan, being part of the Eastern Partnership. This autumn a summit on the Eastern Partnership will take place, and in this context the GUAM countries: Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Moldova have become targets of vicious attack. Why? Everybody knows that Azerbaijan has an economic potential to resist all this pressure. The State Oil company of Azerbaijan is currently investing in a big multimillion project with one of the biggest Georgian companies. Ukraine is also vitally important for Azerbaijan, as are the documents that they are planning to sign in Vilnius. The European Union raises its concern about the violation of human rights in Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova and Azerbaijan. But last year elections were held in Armenia and there were attempts to kill one of the candidates, my friend Paruir Airikyan. During Soviet times, he called upon Azerbaijanis and Armenians to join together and
14
resist the Russian Empire, and was consequently arrested by the KGB, who planned to divide the land and create a war between two countries. Last year, when Paruir Airikyan during his election campaign spoke of the role of Russia in the conflict and asked Armenians to unite with Georgia and Azerbaijan on a European path, there were attempts to kill him. Is there any discussion here about that? No. We expect our European friends to support the rights of the Armenian people who are now being pushed towards the Russian Empire. The statements of Mr. Putin are well-known. He is now building a Eurasian union, pushing all these countries to join the customs union. We do not have enough support from our European friends. Although we have some support from the US, we have never had serious support from the EU. Human rights issues and fraud during elections take place in ex-Soviet states. However, change often comes with technology, and Azerbaijan is passing through this stage. One example: There is no internet here in the European Parliament free to the public. However, if you come to our Azerbaijani Parliament, you can use internet for free. What do we need right now? What are we expecting from the EU? Why are we coming to Europe and why do we want to be part of Europe? We are now more or less economically independent and we have an important role. We are participating in security issues together with NATO and it is important for all of us. But frankly speaking, is it also making us a target for attack? Last year in central Baku one radical secular writer was killed after the fatwa of Ayatollah Lankarani, in an attempted terrorist attack by Iran. According to an interview with the former American ambassador in the Wall Street Magazine, they wanted to kill the American ambassador, the Ambassador of Israel, and the Head of the Jewish community in Azerbaijan. 150 people were arrested, some of them are on a list of political prisoners. But I do not think that this type of people and terror plans of Iran against Azerbaijan area political issue. Again, I would like to touch upon the issue of minorities, in particular in the Northern Caucasus region. Right now Northern Caucasus is a battle field, where people are dying every day. The big Soviet empire created a serious problem among all the Northern Caucasian nations and even the Chechens and Ingush that represent the same Vainakh ethnic group are in a very strong conflict at the moment. If you look at the geography of the so-called ethnic conflicts in the former Soviet Union, it absolutely coincides with the geography of the Russian military bases that actively participated in our conflicts. I would like to remind you that one of the ugliest tragedies of 20th century happened in the small Karabakh town of Khojaly, where children, women, and old people were brutally killed one night, among them a two- or three-year-old child, who was burned and killed. Do you know why they killed these people in such a brutal way? Because they were ethnically different. There is a book written by the brother of the ASALA leader Monte Melkonyan on the issue, in which the writer states that he was shocked by the fact that they burned a 12-yearold Azerbaijani girl just because she was Azerbaijani. I think that we should unite all our efforts, and that justice for Khojaly – just as justice for Rwanda and for Srebrenica – should be important for our European colleagues. We are coming to Europe, to our common family, because we need democracy, human rights, rule of law. We understand that we need time, and from our European friends we need two things: European education and European culture. Please, give us a chance to integrate a new generation of Azerbaijanis to Europe. We need new public managers, political managers, business managers, environmental managers - it is very important to us. But at the same time I definitely believe that we do not need a revolution. Support for the so-called Arab Spring shows us that there is a serious danger for all of us, for people in Western and Southeastern Europe. It is about terror, it is the use of religion for political goals. And in our part of the world this problem is very serious. Mr. Gambar talked about the Azerbaijani Opposition Union. Many times I have raised the issue of why the Islamic party of Azerbaijan is together with them. It creates suspicion. It creates a situation where they have a lack of support. We are moving towards Europe, because we share European values. It is a consensus in Azerbaijan and it is the opinion of the majority of the Azerbaijani people. As regards the minorities, I want to say that Lezghin, Talysh, Russians and Jews, who are strongly represented in my party live economically better in Azerbaijan than in Northern Caucasus, where they are faced with everyday terror.
Looking Ahead: the European Neighbourhood Policy and Azerbaijan Pierre Dybman, Political Officer, Eastern Partnership Bilateral Division, EEAS
15
Although the title of this panel is ‘What is the future of the EU-Azerbaijan relations’, let me begin with the past. If only because it is much easier to recall than to predict the future, and also somehow because it is the basis for our relations. I think we can make a separation between the political relations, the technical assistance, and the energy relations we have. From a political point of view we started with the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement in 1996 that entered into force in 1999. The next document is the Neighbourhood ENP Action Plan in 2006, and we've been negotiating the Association Agreement since July 2010. We also have negotiations on mobility, i.e. the visa facilitation and readmission, since March 2012. In 2006 we signed a Memorandum of Understanding on a strategic energy partnership, which recently led to the choice of TAP for the Western Gas Corridor. And in terms of assistance we have been going through TACIS until 2006, then ENPI (European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument) from 2007-2013 and from 20142020 we will be under a new legal basis, the ENI (European Neighbourhood Instrument). That is the past. What are we doing now? As has been said by some speakers, we are perhaps at a slower pace than with other Eastern Partner countries when it comes to negotiating the Association Agreement between the EU and Azerbaijan. We are not as far as with Moldova or Ukraine or Georgia, because we cannot negotiate a deep and comprehensive agreement in the area, for the reason that Azerbaijan is not yet a member of the WTO, which we deplore. We are also negotiating visa issues and we have a deep, I would say closer relation in terms of energy with Azerbaijan, the country wanting to become a gas hub to Europe - if I quote what I heard recently in Baku. Furthermore, we are trying to engage in the diversification of the economy and the modernization of the country through the new instruments that we are in fact negotiating between the Commission, the Council and the European Parliament. For future ENI we will focus on three priorities, and I know that one of the priorities that Azerbaijan would like the EU to cooperate on, is education, which could somehow be seen as a request for helping new generations get closer to the EU. And what is the EU about? Well, I have also heard it today: it is about common values, about going towards deep democracy, about different comprehensive free trade, about the single market. Basically it is about all the freedoms - freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of thinking, freedom of movement, freedom of trade. It is also about peace, it is about peaceful settlement of conflicts and avoiding new conflicts. We have a yearly exercise where the EU assesses the progress that a country makes on this path. In March we publish progress reports for all the countries in the region (in the neighbourhood in fact, because it is not only the East, it is also the Southern countries), in which we explain the weaknesses, the failings, the regresses, the progresses, and this is a complex framework that analyses all the countries. I've also heard that this is a progressive path and I think the EU recognizes that all those rules, norms and principles cannot be adopted in one day, although they can be adopted quickly. But they need to be implemented fully, which takes much more time and we regularly encourage these countries, including Azerbaijan to live up to its commitments and to constantly improve their progress on this difficult path. The EU not being a monolithic animal, but something which is complex - you have the European Parliament and people voting one way or the other, you have the Council of the European Union, you have the member states, you have the Commission, you have the EEAS - not everybody has exactly the same opinion or the same objectives in the relations with a given country. Therefore, it is not abnormal to hear one branch of the EU criticizing Azerbaijan for not going fast enough on human rights and another congratulating it for signing and enabling the Southern corridor. As long as our institutions are as complex as they are, I think we will continue to have difficulty being very consistent in the messages we come up with. I have also heard that we should try to be consistent when we judge different countries and I believe that, as we produce all those reports at the same time we are going in this direction. However, being a very small part of the European Union I believe we cannot be held responsible for any discrepancies that we have had in the past, that we have now, and that we for sure will continue having in the future.
Democracy, Civil Society and Minorities in the Caucasus Dr. Enver F. Kisriev, Head of the Department for the Caucasus, Centre for Regional and Civilization Studies at the Russian Academy of Science
16
I am a representative of the Russian Academy of Science and my presentation is dedicated to the issue of the protection of the civic and ethno-cultural rights of the Lezghins, including the preservation and development of their ethnicity, indigenous culture and language. Our appeal to you stems from the desire to tell about the problems that the Lezghin and other ethnic minorities encounter in the Republic of Azerbaijan, and subsequently find possible solutions to these problems. It is widely known that Caucasus is an extremely polyethnic region, inhabited since long by peoples speaking many different languages and adhering to different religions. In terms of traditional society these aspects did not have any social significance. Interethnic interaction was a daily and usual reality. As a rule, every socially active Caucasian knew more than one language and had neighbors, friends, business partners, and often relatives representing other ethnic groups. The Lezghins are one of the peoples of the Caucasus. Their historical development, like that of all other ethnicities currently residing geographically close to them, goes back to ancient times. What is already scientifically confirmed - one of the earliest written sources clearly mentions tribes that are the direct ancestors of the present peoples who speak languages of the Nakh-Dagestani language family. Over the course of history, the Lezghins happened to inhabit wide areas on both sides of the Samur River, reaching from the highlands of the Greater Caucasus Mountains to the Caspian Plain. 200 years ago, during the administrative demarcation that took place after the annexation of the Eastern Caucasus to the Russian Empire, the Samur River became a convenient excuse for the establishment of a boundary between the Lezghins. So it remained also under the Communist regime. Samur became the border between the Republic of Azerbaijan and Dagestan. However, back then this borderline was conditional, as all of us lived in the same country. Radical changes took place after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the formation of independent states. Half of the Lezghins became citizens of Azerbaijan, whereas the other half remained in the Republic of Dagestan, subject to the Russian Federation. One nation, for which the waters of Samur were seen not as a barrier, but as a bounding integrator of intraethnic connections, has been divided ever since by the state border. The situation is aggravated by the fact that the ruling elite of Azerbaijan, in its policy of building a new state, has chosen the doctrine of Turkism: “The Azerbaijani nation is a Turkic ethnic group”. One can certainly understand such a policy trend aiming at cohesion in the young nation. The Azerbaijani (Turkic) language is the official language and all citizens of the state are ethnic “Azerbaijanis” – the way it should be implied in civilized nation states. However, this principle that is common for the civilized world appeared not to be enough in this case. The ruling party in Azerbaijan clearly set a course for ethnocide of all the existing ethnic communities, whose ethnic substrate differs from the Turkic one. I use the notion of ethnocide not as a witticism, but in a strict sense and with full certainty. The ongoing Azerbaijani policy towards national minorities is an absolutely pure casea case of ethnocide. Lezghins and other representatives of the indigenous peoples of the Caucasus are not being persecuted or neglected in Azerbaijan, but under one important condition: namely, they must recognize themselves as “ethnic Azerbaijanis” and not publicly express their specific ethnicity nor attempt to express their ethno-cultural distinctiveness. If you do it, you immediately become an alien element, an enemy to the Azerbaijani people. Therefore I allow myself to call this policy an ethnocide. According to the definition of the Working Group on Indigenous People of UNESCO, the term ethnocide means: “any action aimed at the destruction of ethnic features and identity, all forms of national assimilation or integration, enforced transition to an alien way of life and any propaganda against indigenous peoples”. This definition has some semantic errors: There might not necessarily be requirements in terms of the “transition to an alien way of life”, etc. The essence of ethnocide is the conscious effort to influence the historical memory of a nation, to change ethnic identity, and forget the native language and culture. Usually, when a nation (ethnicity) is being defined, the definition comprises the history of the formation and political development of the nation, its historical territory of residence, language, culture and identity. With regard to all these segments of ethnic identity, national minorities in Azerbaijan are under pressure
17
ideologically, legally and administratively, including through direct violence from the authorities or via specifically organized illegal measures. The border of the Samur River has become for Lezghins an insurmountable barrier. Due to the connivance of the Russian authorities, Azerbaijan takes away 90 percent of the Samur water supply in favor of its capital and to the disadvantage of the households situated on both sides of the border. The Lezghin agriculture is experiencing an acute shortage of water. In 2010, residents of the Lezghin village Khrakh-Uba, living on the right (Azerbaijanian) bank of Samur, expressed their desire to retain Russian citizenship after the signing of the Border Treaty by Russia. As a result, they were humiliatingly expelled from their land and deported to Russia. Censuses consistently demonstrate a steady and rapid growth of the “Azerbaijanis” and a decline in the numbers of national minorities. Some ethnicities simply disappear from the list of ethnic composition, and then reappear again but have clearly declined in terms of numbers. Already during the Communist regime, denial to enroll as “Azerbaijani”, and instead indicating one’s ethnicity – “Lezghin” or “Avar” etc. – was considered to be a hostile act, which could even lead to the deprivation of career opportunities. Nowadays, many prominent citizens of Azerbaijan, while not being “Turks” by origin, but by presenting themselves as “Azerbaijanis”, guarantee for themselves a high status and the complete trust of the authorities. Their true ethnic origin does not matter; what matters is that it is not publicly declared. The history of Azerbaijan is being falsified, alleging that the regions, which in fact were the historical home of the mountaineers of the Caucasus, have since ancient times been inhabited by Turkic tribes. We recently reported that a lot of young Lezghins consider themselves to be migrants in their own land, that they “arrived here from Dagestan”, when, in fact, their direct ancestors had lived here for thousands of years. This is the result of the conscious propaganda of historical falsification. Recently, a famous social activist, Abbas Abbasov, head of the Azerbaijani NCA in Russia, visited Dagestan for the celebrations of the victory of Dagestanis over the Persian Nadir Shakh in 1741-43. The ruling “Yeni Azerbaijan Party” made a very critical statement against him, calling Nadir Shakh “Azerbaijani”, Abbasov a “traitor”, and the residents of Dagestan as “Dagestani and Lezghin separatists”. If the residents of Dagestan have been considered as “separatists” by Azerbaijan, then what do they think about the original inhabitants of the Azerbaijani territories, where highlanders have long lived? The territory of historical Lezghin settlements is mainly inhabited by Turkic-speaking settlers, who moved there from other regions of the Republic. Historical names, which obviously indicate the ancient history of the Caucasian mountaineers of these lands are being changed. Announcements and signs in the native languages of the local residents are being prohibited. Everything possible is being done to prevent public use of the native languages of indigenous peoples. The branches of Dagestanian universities, where teachers in mother tongue were being educated, have been closed down. There is only one newspaper (commercial edition) containing texts in the Lezghin language in Azerbaijan nowadays, and this is a limited edition in three languages – Azerbaijani, Russian and Lezghin. Civic initiatives to create media in native languages are nipped in the bud. Antique monuments that bear witness of the life and activities on the lands of the Caucasian peoples, who now have become a “national minority” in Azerbaijan, are being destroyed. Destructions are conducted either by alleged “archaeological” excavations or by direct criminal means, such as the destruction of ancient tombs, which bear witness to Lezghin ancient history in the cemeteries. The “Lezghin Mosque” of the 12th century has always been a characteristic landmark in Baku - the inscription on this ancient building bore witness of Lezghin history However, in the beginning of 1980s the first attempt to erase this inscription, to remove the name “Lezghin” from the ancient monument was made. For a while, these attempts were successfully fought off, but currently it is impossible. At the moment, there must not be any “Lezghin mosques” in Azerbaijan. A new attack with a religious dimension has recently started. Whereas the Turks (Azerbaijanis) are Shia, the representatives of North Caucasian ethnicities are Sunni. Sunnis account for 30 percent in Azerbaijan, which is also an indirect indicator for the number of persons with North Caucasian roots in Azerbaijan. Currently, according to official statistics, all the minorities together make up less than ten percent. Previously, Sunnis were persecuted, but now, due to the deterioration of Azerbaijani relations with Iran and improvement of relations
18
with Turkey, the authorities have initiated a religious shift in favor of Sunni Turkey. As a result, there is a tendency to the “azerbaijanization” of the Sunni confession. In order to show and explain each aspect of the sophisticated tactics of ethnocide in Azerbaijan, a lot of your time and attention is needed - something which is impossible to achieve through a short speech. I want to specifically highlight that we do not question the internationally recognized borders of Azerbaijan nor its political status. We also understand that it is unreasonable to speak about “historical rights” of peoples for political self-determination. However, the human rights regarding ethnic identity and the preservation of ethnicity, language and culture cannot be questioned. Any deliberate policy of ethnocide should be identified and exposed. This shameful practice should be fought against through efforts of civil society in Azerbaijan and efforts of the international community. Currently it is impossible to create an information blockade and we can see that young Azerbaijanis belonging to national minorities show increased interest in their ethnic roots. There is also a growing interest in the advancement of language skills, national history and culture. However, it is met by the furious reaction of the authorities, who classify young people as Lezghin or Avar separatists and even terrorists for publically demonstrating their ethnic belonging. Many times thrown into prison because of this, these young people are unable to reach for help, in a context of strong national assimilation policies pursued by the authorities. On the very eve of Putin’s visit to Azerbaijan, the Azerbaijani authorities, without any reason, imprisoned three close relatives of one of the FLN-CA leaders: Eldar Mamedov, Javid Babayev, and Tariel Sarkarov (the firstmentioned holds Azerbaijani citizenship, and other two Russians). This case demonstrates the kind of actions the Azerbaijani government is capable of taking with regard to its citizens, who will try to defend their right to be Lezghin, Avar, Tsakhur, Talysh, etc. It also shows how the sophisticated and cynical policy of ethnocide transfers into direct physical violence against the civil rights, honor and dignity of the person. We want you to be aware of it, it must be resisted.
Asim Molla-zada
Pierre Dybman
Enver F. Kisriev
Speaker Profiles
19
Mr. Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy
MEP and Vice-President of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly As Vice-President of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly Mr. Gerbrandy has worked extensively to enhance the parliamentary dimension of the Eastern Partnership - the policy launched by the European Union for its Eastern neighbours to bring them closer, avoiding new dividing lines, and to conclude far reaching Association Agreements, including Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas. In April 2012 he paid a visit to Azerbaijan to promote political and economic integration between the EU and its Eastern Partners. During the visit he had the opportunity to discuss possible improvements to democracy, human rights and freedom of press with President Aliyev personally.
Mr. Marino Busdachin UNPO General Secretary
After serving as UNPO Executive Director from 2003 to 2005, Mr. Busdachin was elected UNPO General Secretary in 2005. He was a member of the extraordinary executive board of the Transnational Radical Party (2000-2002), and is currently a member of the General Council of the TRP. He led the TRP to recognition by the UN as an NG of the first category, and led and coordinated the TRP in Yugoslavia (1991-1993) and the Soviet Union (1989-1993). He founded the NGO “Non c’e’ Pace Senza Giustizia” in Italy (1994-1999) as well as “No Peace Without Justice USA”, for which he served as President from 1995 to 2000. Mr. Busdachin campaigned for the establishment of the International Criminal Court.
Ms. Caecilia van Peski Independent elections expert In her capacity as an independent diplomat and senior expert on International Relations and Foreign Affairs, Ms. van Peski has displayed above average expertise on Democratisation, Elections and Human Rights. She has worked with various governmental and non-governmental organisations, amongst which the United Nations, the European Commission, Council of Europe, OSCE/ODIHR, the Carter Centre, The National Democratic Institute and NORDEM. Her geographical areas of operation lay mainly in the Balkans, the Russian Federation, the Caucasus and Central Asia. Since 2002, she has been involved in Election Observation for the EU and OSCE, specialising in democratic development in post-conflict regions. She has participated in over thirty Election Observation Missions and is a frequent trainer of both international and domestic election observers.
Mr. Isa Gambar
Leader of the Musavat Party (member of the National Council of Democratic Forces) In his role as leader of the Musavat Party, Mr. Gambar has played a major part in the spring 2011 demonstrations inspired by other protests throughout the Middle East. He and his party have organised protests, occasionally joining with fellow opposition groups like the Popular Front Party to rally in Baku, despite a government ban and the steadfast efforts of security forces to disperse gatherings and arrest activists. In 1992 Mr. Gambar was elected Parliamentary Speaker and acted as President of the Azerbaijan Republic, until what has been widely described as a coup, took place in 1993. In Azerbaijan’s 2003 presidential elections he participated as the single presidential candidate for the opposition bloc “Bizim Azerbaijan” (“Our Azerbaijan”), officially winning 14% of the vote. However, several independent (both local and international) organisations that had been observing and monitoring the election declared Mr. Gambar winner. In 2000, Mr. Gambar was awarded the “Friend of Journalist” prize by the “RUH” Azerbaijani Committee for Protection of Journalists. Mr. Gambar withdrew his presidential candidature in 2013 in favour of Prof. Jamil Hasanli, the presidential candidate on behalf of the National Council of Democratic Forces.
Mr. David Nichols
Senior Executive Officer - EU Foreign Policy Amnesty International Mr. Nichols works as Senior Executive Officer on EU Foreign Policy at Amnesty International’s European Institutions Office in Brussels. The European Institutions Office coordinates and promotes lobbying of the European institutions and aims to ensure that the European Union and Council of Europe (CoE) put human rights at the heart of all their policies.
Dr. Asim Molla-zada
Member of Parliament from Azerbaijan, President of the Democratic Reforms Party Mr. Molla-zada, member of the Parliament of Azerbaijan, has acted over eight years as Chairman of the Democratic Reforms Party, an Azerbaijani political party established in 2005 (he was re-elected three times: in July 2008, October 2011 and June 2013). He is a member of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly, as well as President of the Euro-Atlantic Center, which seeks to foster the integration of Azerbaijan to the Euro-Atlantic
20
community and create bridges between political players of the NATO countries and Azerbaijan. Dr. Molla-zada has directed high-level conferences on subjects such as South Caucasus Security Policies; Azerbaijan and NATO Enlargement; Azerbaijan’s Perspective Membership in the CE, EC; Minority Problems, and a variety of other issues.
Dr. Pierre Dybman
Political Officer, Eastern Partnership Bilateral Division, EEAS As political officer in the Eastern Partnership Bilateral Division of the European External Action Service, Dr. Dybman acts as Executive Secretary for the Association Agreement negotiations between the EU and Azerbaijan. Between 2004 and 2010, he acted as Head of Good Governance Section at the EU Delegations in Russia and Serbia. Dr. Dybman holds a PhD in economics from University of Lecce, his doctoral thesis focusing on EU cofinancing of local development projects.
Dr. Enver F. Kisriev
Head of the Department for the Caucasus, Centre for Regional and Civilization Studies at the Russian Academy of Science. Prior to his current post, Dr. Kisriev worked as Senior Scientific Researcher at the Centre for Regional and Civilization Studies at the Russian Academy of Science in Moscow. Between 1988 and 2000 he acted as Head of the Sociology Department of the Institute of History, Archeology and Ethnography of the Daghestan Scientific Centre of the Russian Academy of Science (Makhachkala, Daghestan). His fields of research include ethnopolitical issues in modern social processes in Daghestan and North Caucasus; theoretical analysis and sociological surveys of social conflicts; the religious (Islamic) constituent of modern political tendencies in the North Caucasus; and the investigation of the impact of traditional structures on the nature of social and political processes. Dr. Kisriev has issued 221 publications, many of which in English, as well as 12 sociological surveys and manuscripts.
About the Organisers of the Seminar
21
Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, MEP (ALDE) As Vice-President of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly Mr. Gerbrandy has worked extensively to enhance the parliamentary dimension of the Eastern Partnership - the policy launched by the European Union for its Eastern neighbours to bring them closer, avoiding new dividing lines, and to conclude far reaching Association Agreements, including Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas. In April 2012 he paid a visit to Azerbaijan to promote political and economic integration between the EU and its Eastern Partners. During the visit he had the opportunity to discuss possible improvements to democracy, human rights and freedom of press with President Aliyev personally.
Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO) The Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO) is an international, nonviolent, and democratic membership organization. Its members are indigenous peoples, minorities, and unrecognized or occupied territories who have joined together to protect and promote their human and cultural rights, to preserve their environments, and to find nonviolent solutions to conflicts which affect them. Although the aspirations of UNPO Members differ greatly, they are all united by one shared condition: they are not adequately represented at major international fora, such as the United Nations. As a consequence, their opportunity to participate on the international stage is significantly limited, as is their ability to access and draw upon the support of the global bodies mandated to defend their rights, protect their environments, and mitigate the effects of conflict. In a world where over 90 percent of conflicts are intra-state, the UNPO has been established to fill this gap by providing an international forum through which its members can become effective participants and contributors to the international community. In an increasingly interdependent world, it is ever more important that those who continue to be denied their rights or remain excluded be given an opportunity to present their cases. The UNPO therefore works to address the consequences of marginalization, working with its Members to promote their democratic causes, to provide information, and to articulate creative and nonviolent strategies for progress. Above all, the UNPO works to ensure that the voices of its members are heard. Founded in 1991 at the Peace Palace in The Hague, the UNPO is unique as an international organization in that it is built entirely by its members. Through this strong connection to those suffering the consequences of this exclusion that the organization seeks to address, the UNPO has since grown into a prominent respected international organization. The UNPO’s membership has also grown steadily from its original fifteen founders, and now represents almost 50 Members worldwide. The work of the UNPO adapts continually to meet the challenges of its Members and the nature of the international political climate. Members remain committed to respecting the five principles enshrined in the UNPO Covenant: nonviolence, human rights, democracy and self-determination, environmental protection, and tolerance. The UNPO remains committed to offering an increasing number of nations and peoples an entry point into the international community, enabling its members to learn from one another, lending support where setbacks are encountered, and sharing successful experiences.
Media Coverage
22
3 October 2013 Homepage ALDE: Azerbaijan: Human Rights Violations Continue in Run-up to Presidential Elections http://www.alde.eu/press/press-and-release-news/press-release/article/azerbaijan-human-rights-violationscontinue-in-run-up-to-presidential-elections-42280/
4 October 2013 Contact.az: Hearing in the European Parliament on the Presidential Elections in Azerbaijan www.contact.az/docs/2013/Politics/100400052193en.htm
6 October 2013 Homepage of the Federal Lezghin National and Cultural Autonomy: UNPO Conference in the European Parliament Discusses the Azerbaijani Elections http://flnka.ru/digest/4181-unpo-conference-in-european-parliament-discusses-azerbaijani-elections.html
23
7 October 2013 APA: Planned Provocation Committed against Azerbaijan at Event Organized by European Parliament http://en.apa.az/xeber_planned_provocation_committed_against_az_200677.html
8 October 2013 News Az: Attempts to Harm Relations with EU Doomed to Failure - MPs http://www.news.az/articles/politics/83259
8 October 2013 Today.az: Azerbaijani MPs Stand against Provocation in European Parliament http://www.today.az/news/politics/127041.html
Appendices
24 Appendix 1
Seminar Poster
Appendix 2 Invitation
Appendix 3 Press Release 4 October 2013
