The\r\nInternational Foundation for the Protection of Freedom of Speech \"Adil\r\nSoz\" conducted a study of the situation with the right to freedom of\r\nexpression, receipt and dissemination of information in Kazakhstan in January\r\n2019.
\r\nItreports:
\r\n- At the request of Adil Soz the Ministry of\r\nInformation and Communications of the Republic of Kazakhstan provided the “Report\r\non the research of domestic and foreign legislation and experience in the field\r\nof media regulation and broadcasting”, which, according to the director of the\r\nstate policy on media, will serve as the basis of the new media law.
\r\nIt’s not published on the ministry’s website,\r\nso with the permission of the authorized body we publish it at\r\nhttp://www.adilsoz.kz/politcor/show/id/242/parent/2 The ministry paid over 13\r\nmillion tenge for this research and, to put it mildly, the preliminary\r\ndiscussion of this work caused a lot of doubts. It is large, 170 pages, but we\r\nadvise you to be patient and you will find a lot of interesting things there.
\r\nAs human rights activists believe, the recommendations\r\nof the authors of the report are not encouraging:
\r\nAt the demand of Adil Soz,\r\nthe Ministry of Information and Communications sent a \"Report on the study\r\nof domestic and foreign legislation and experience in the field of media\r\nregulation and broadcasting.\" It’s not posted on the ministry’s website, so \r\nwe publish it at http://www.adilsoz.kz/politcor/show/id/242/parent/2 with the\r\npermission of the authorized body.
\r\nThe\r\nministry paid for this study over 13 million tenge and a preliminary discussion\r\nof this research caused a lot of doubts to put it mildly. The reearch is large,\r\n170 pages, but we advise you to be patient and read to, and you will find a lot\r\nof interesting things there.
\r\nThe ideas it contains are very\r\ndemocratic. The authors honestly acknowledged the “high degree of legal\r\nregulation of public relations occuring in the course of media activities,” the\r\ninconsistency of responsibility for libel with international standards, the\r\ninefficiency of state information order, etc.
\r\nThey have studied a lot of literature\r\nand well described world problems and researches related to the penetration of\r\nthe Internet into our lives.
\r\nThe recommendations do not inspire\r\noptimism. Very few of them are concrete, and most of the recommendations are\r\nfed on zealous concern for the secrecy of personal life. For example: “it should\r\nbe stipulated that a person who has information that someone intends to\r\ndisseminate information or images related to his/her private life may initiate\r\nan emergency legal process, such as a simplified procedure of temporary court\r\norder to cease the dissemination of such information, based on the court’s\r\nevaluation of the cause of the claim on intrusion upon privacy. ” “In general,\r\nKazakhstan has created a sufficient legislative base to ensure citizens’\r\ninformation rights, ”- the researchers hired by the ministry state. Their\r\nconclusion is:“ The main problem in ensuring the citizens’ information rights\r\nin Kazakhstan is the exact separation of freedom of opinion and privacy. In\r\norder to legally establish a balance between these two fundamental rights, it is\r\nadvisable to legally provide the right to be forgotten in the law on personal\r\ndata, and to bring the legislation on mass media in line with the legislation\r\non personal data.”
\r\nNothing is said about the obstacles\r\nin establishing new media, unreasonable restrictions and punishments,\r\ndevastating compensations, but there is cheap flattery to the client - the\r\nMinistry of Information and Communications. It is surprising that the Civil\r\nCode of the Republic of Kazakhstan is missing from the list of reference legal\r\nlinks (Isn\'t it the reason why unintentional infliction of emotional distress\r\nwas left unattended?). The idea that “the fact that the Information Kazakhstan\r\n2020 program has ceased to exist may indicate early achievement of the set\r\npriorities,” seems to lack logics and the very composition of the research\r\nlooks dissonant.
\r\nBut this is not the main thing. The\r\nmain thing is that this study, according to Bekzat Rakhimov, Director of the\r\nDepartment of State Media Policy, will be the basis for the new media law.\r\n“What it (the law) will be like - we are still thinking about it. We conducted\r\nresearch and now we are at the stage of receiving results. Initially, there\r\nwill be an interdepartmental discussion, where we will decide which version to\r\npresent to the public for discussion. It will be a new law on mass media, maybe\r\nit will be the law “On Mass Communication” or a law that will unify laws on\r\nmass media and on television and radio broadcasting. Perhaps it will be a code\r\non information issues, where several separate chapters will be devoted to the\r\nmedia. There are plenty of options, ” he explained at the XI Media Congress\r\n(https://forbes.kz/massmedia/ministerstvo_informatsii_hochet_bolshe_regulirovat_internet/).
\r\nAnd what about other studies that\r\nwere made by world-renowned experts? Noting is said about them. What about the\r\nrecommendations of the OSCE, UN, UNESCO? Some of them are mentioned in the\r\nstudy, 2-3 phrases are cited, but in general those recommendations were\r\nput aside. And what about national independent experts and journalists?
\r\nLast year, “Adil Soz” offered to the\r\nministry to start the work on the new law together and received an answer: wait\r\nuntil the government decides on the concept, it will take a long time to do.\r\nEveryone must silently wait till the interdepartmental hangout gives birth to\r\nthe new bill and presents it to us. That\'s when we will be allowed to bark on\r\nthe official caravan that is moving on.
\r\n- The international human rights organization Human\r\nRights Watch notes that in 2018 the situation in the field of human rights in\r\nKazakhstan remains negative.
\r\nThe international human\r\nrights organization Human Rights Watch in its annual report World Report 2018\r\nstated that there were no significant changes in the field of human rights in\r\nKazakhstan and the situation remains negative. \"Freedom of speech. HRW:\r\n“Independent journalists continue to be harassed, arbitrarily detained, and are\r\nsubject to falsified criminal charges.
\r\n”Freedom of the Internet. HRW: “The\r\nauthorities have blocked websites, including social networks,” the report of\r\nthe international organization says.
\r\n- The\r\ncriminal case on charges of impeding the professional activities of the\r\njournalist Oleg Gusev by the managers of ArcelorMittal Temirtau was suspended\r\ndue to the absence of corpus delicti. The journalist intends to file a\r\ncomplaint with the prosecutor’s office about the decision of the investigating\r\nauthorities.
\r\nAs it was\r\nreported the story began in October 2018. The origin of the case was a claim\r\nfor protection of the business reputation of ArcelorMittal Temirtau against\r\nOleg Gusev. During the trial the\r\njournalist presented an agreement between him and the company. According to the\r\ndocument, the journalist must fully admit the stated claims and stop publishing\r\nany negative information about the activities of AMT. For its part, the company\r\nundertakes to \"unblock\" the contractor where the relative of the\r\njournalist works. Oleg Gusev considered this to be blackmail and posted a\r\nrelevant statement on Facebook. The police of the Karaganda region while\r\nmonitoring the social network, discovered this statement and opened a criminal\r\ncase under part 2 of Article 158 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of\r\nKazakhstan (Impending the legitimate professional activities of a journalist).
\r\nThe\r\njournalist’s legal representative, Kamil Karimov, disagreed with\r\nrecharacterization and dismissal of the case: “At first, they recharacterized\r\nthe case from the second part to the first part of the article, removing all\r\nqualifying signs and discontinuing the pretrial investigation, referring to the\r\nabsence of corpus delicti in the actions of the suspects. We certainly do not\r\nagree, but I cannot disclose the grounds of our disagreement - it\'s secret\r\ninformation. The complaint was prepared, we will go to the Attorney General. We\r\nintend to advocate our rights to the end, ”said Kamil Karimov to the Kursive\r\ncorrespondent.We remind you that responsibility for impeding the professional\r\nactivities of a journalist has been in the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan\r\nsince 1998. Some cases were initiated under this article, but none was sent for\r\ntrial.
\r\n- Yermurat Bapi informed that some “bearded people in civilian clothes” are\r\nbuying in bulk the latest issue of the newspaper “DAT. Social position in\r\nAlmaty.
\r\nOn\r\nJanuary 31, the “reader-in-chief” of the newspaper “DAT. Social position”\r\nYermurat Bapi told on his Facebook page that in Almaty some “bearded people in\r\ncivilian clothes” are buying in bulk the latest issue of the newspaper at\r\nkiosks, trading stalls in the markets and from large wholesale buyers of\r\nprinted materials. \"It was a well-known and everlasting technology, when,\r\nat the behest of the authorities, the entire circulation of the newspaper was\r\nbought in bulk, so that certain information would not leak to the masses. This\r\n“Akimat (city mayor\'s administration) operation” was mainly carried out by internal policy specialists and the Committe\r\nof the National Security. But this time the wholesale purchase of the newspaper\r\nwas made by “bearded people\" and you can probably guess who they are”\r\nwrites Yermurat Bapi.The reader-in-chief of DAT believes that “bearded people”\r\nare the people of the millionaire Dinmukhamed Idrisov, the hero of the\r\npublications “Who challenged Nursultan Nazarbayev?” (DAT, 01.17.2019) and “Who\r\ncovers the Cheater?” (DAT , 01/31/2019).According to Bapi, on January 17 there\r\nwas exactly the same situation in the markets of Almaty and Shymkent.“We remind\r\nhim (the organizer of the wholesale purchase ) the words of Winston Churchill:“\r\nTo fight a newspaper like cutting a pig - \r\nlittle wool, but a lot of squeals, ”writes Bapi.
\r\n- The UN Human Rights\r\nCommittee accepted the complaint of Ratel.kz.
\r\nIn accordance with the procedures, Kazakhstan\r\nhas three months give a responce regarding the admissibility of the case. The\r\nstate may take six months to respond on the admissibility and merits of the\r\ncomplaint.The complaint was prepared by the international organization Article\r\n19. It deals with violations in lawsuits initiated by businessman Zeinulla Kakimzhanov\r\nagainst journalists of Forbes Kazakhstan and Ratel.kz. As it was reported, in\r\naccordance to court rulings, journalists had to pay 50 million tenge.
\r\n2 judicial acts\r\nwere issued against media and citizens in connection with the exercise of the\r\nright to freedom of expression , the receipt and dissemination of information\r\non cases of protection of honor, dignity and business reputation in February.\r\nBoth were in favor of the media, journalists and citizens.
\r\nThe following actions chrges were\r\nfiled in February in connection with the exercise of the right to freedom of\r\nexpression:
\r\n- 3 criminal charges, including 2 in\r\ncourt.
\r\n- 8 claims\r\nand suits in civil procedure. Among them, 7 claims and lawsuits for protection\r\nof honor, dignity and business reputation.
\r\n- Claims\r\nfor compensation for non-pecuniary damage amounted to 51 million tenge in\r\nFebruary. The courts collected 1 million 450 thousand tenge.
\r\nThe monitoring was done\r\naccording to reports of the Adil Soz Foundation\'s correspondents and\r\ninformation from open sources.\r\n
Head of monitoring\r\nservice of Adil Soz Foundation Elena Tsoi
\r\ne-mail: lena@adilsoz.kz
For all questions\r\nregarding the monitoring, you may also contact
\r\ninfo@adilsoz.kz
