Here is a photograph of Jahongir, the young man the British government is so very eager to hand over to the Uzbek security services. I can state with absolute certainty that a young man with facial hair like Jahongir will immediately be detained and tortured as an Islamic “extremist”.
could he not shave off the facial hair before he travels?
I think the point was made to illustrate just how repressive the regime is.
could he not shave off the facial hair before he travels?
Quite a few Muslims believe there is a religous obligation to wear a beard. That is why they are arrested for it in Uzbekistan. Yes, of course he could shave it off, but that may well violate his religious beliefs.
As I am sure you are aware Craig with or without a beard if the Uzbek authorities want to cause him suffering they do not need the excuse of a beard.
Beard or no beard this gives a face to the man who the Brirish government are shipping off to face the most horrendous torture and possible death.
Craig
I am trying to get my MP on the case and although he sees himself as some sort of human rights champion, and is planning to talk to the foreign office about the case next week to find out more; he is reluctant to get up on his soap box and write to the press about this issue as he simply doesnt know enough about the case, not even to the point of what Sidikov is accused of or for what reason he is being deported.
He feels that as the Uzbek regime is autocratic and practices human rights abuses, we are legally required not to deport people for anything if they might be tortured. Why the courts haven't so far thought that this rule applies is another unknown. If you have any more facts about this he'd be interested and may well make some more noise.
He doesnt seem to have been accused of anything.
http://freecommonwealth.blogspot.com
/2007/11/jahongir-sidikovs-story.html:
"Jahongir's asylum claim has failed because the court didn't believe that there is a genuine threat to his life in Uzbekistan. The court also didn't believe that Jahongir will be subjected to torture and human rights abuses in Uzbekistan . The court doubted that the letters submitted by the leader of the ERK Democratic Party of Uzbekistan , Muhammad Salih and the President of the Association for Human Rights in Central Asia, Nadezhda Ataeva are genuine. The court refused to postpone the hearing so that former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, who was on a visit to Africa, could give evidence."
UN COMMITTEE SAYS TORTURE 'ROUTINE' IN UZBEKISTAN
http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/art…
/quote/
In a highly critical assessment, the United Nations' antitorture panel has concluded that torture and ill-treatment remain "widespread" in Uzbekistan.
The UN Committee Against Torture scrutinized Uzbekistan's torture record earlier this month, during its periodic review of that country's compliance with the UN Convention Against Torture.
In their resulting concluding observations issued on November 23, the 10 independent experts making up the panel noted a range of concerns about what the committee termed "numerous, ongoing, and consistent allegations concerning routine use of torture…committed by law enforcement and investigative personnel, or with their instigation or consent."
…
/endquote/
Is there perhaps another subtext here, i.e. one of "establishment vs Craig Murray" as per the following,
"The court refused to postpone the hearing so that former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, who was on a visit to Africa, could give evidence".
I do not find it hard to believe that the civil service establishment would play fast and loose with somebody's life just to score a point against Craig.
Does anyone know anything more about the judge in this case? Was he really that ignorant or is he not truly independent?
Jahongir hasn't been accused of anything. The court sumply did not accept that:
a) He is a political activist
b) Uzbekistan is that bad
I think this incredible result happened because of process. Jahongir was fast-tracked by the Home Office which meant he was locked up and his whole case went from hearing to appeal to deportation in just a fortnight. The courts seem to accept that the "Fast track" identifies administratively the bad cases and their role is just to process and chuck them out as fast as possible. In this case, they got it disastrously wrong as a result.
Received a response from the letter I sent to my MP regarding Jahongir on Thursday.
It said:
Dear [QT],
[Your MP] has asked me to thank you for drawing this to his attention:
assuming the deportation has not already taken place, he will
investigate with a view to raising this with the FCO.
Yours sincerely,
[MP's parliamentary assistant]
Craig, can you assure me that the deportation has not taken place?
If the Govt knows for certain that this young man is bound to be tortured, why should British officials insist on sending him back?
hillblogger: That's what we're all incredulous about!
QT
Yes, deportation now set for Wednesday.
Craig