CAT/C/47/D/444/2010 The complaint 3.1 The complainants refer to the concluding observations by the Human Rights Committee for Uzbekistan, in which it expressed concerns about the limitations and restrictions on freedom of religion and belief and about the use of criminal law to penalize the apparently peaceful exercise of religious freedom, including for members of nonregistered religious groups and the persistent reports of charges and imprisonment of such individuals,4 as well as to the report by the Human Rights Watch stating that Uzbek authorities have targeted and imprisoned Muslims and other religious believers who practise their faith outside official institutions or who belong to unregistered religious organizations. This campaign has resulted in the arrest, torture, and incarceration of thousands of peaceful people branded as “extremists”. 5 3.2 They also refer to General Assembly resolution 60/174 on the situation of human rights in Uzbekistan, and that some persons who sought asylum abroad and were returned to Uzbekistan have been kept in detention in unknown places and possibly subjected to treatment in breach of the Convention. 6 The complainants claim that individuals returned to Uzbekistan pursuant to extradition requests are reported to be held in incommunicado detention and therefore submitted to a risk of torture or ill-treatment as well as subjected to unfair trial.7 3.3 The complainants further submit that Uzbekistan’s record on torture and illtreatment has been well documented8 and that in 2010, the Human Rights Committee noted with concern the continued reported occurrence of torture and ill-treatment9 and in 2007, this Committee expressed concern about numerous, ongoing and consistent allegations concerning routine use of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment committed by law enforcement and investigative officials or with their instigation or consent.10 ACAT-France, counsel for the complainants, has been closely following-up dozens of cases of torture victims and notes that the torture practice remains systematic in Uzbekistan and that Muslims practising their faith outside official State controls are significantly targeted for acts of torture and forms of mistreatment in custody. 3.4 The complainants also refer to several decisions by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), including, inter alia11, Ismailov and others v. Russia,12 in which it barred the extradition from the Russian Federation to Uzbekistan of 12 Uzbek refugees who were accused of being members of an illegal Islamist group on the ground that it would be a violation of article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. ECHR noted that it 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4 CCPR/CO/83/UZB, para. 22 and CCPR/C/UZB/CO/3, para. 19. Human Rights Watch’s report, Creating Enemies of the State- Religious Persecution in Uzbekistan (2004), available online at: http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2004/03/29/creating-enemies-state-0). General Assembly resolution 60/174 on the situation of human rights in Uzbekistan, 14 March 2006. The complainants cite the example of four asylum seekers arrested at the same time as themselves, for three of which their whereabouts remain unknown after their extradition to Uzbekistan in September, October and November 2010. See for example: Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan “Ezgulik”, Analytic report on the situation with human rights in the Republic of Uzbekistan for the year 2009, March 2010, Section 4; Amnesty International, Uzbekistan – A briefing on current human rights concerns, May 2010; Human Rights Watch’s report, Nowhere to turn – Torture and ill-treatment in Uzbekistan, 2007. CCPR/C/UZB/CO/3, para. 11. CAT/C/UZB/CO/3, para. 6 (a). See ECHR, Muminov v. Russia, Application No. 42502/06 2008; Garayev v. Azerbaijan, Application No. 53688/08, 10 June 2010; Isakov v. Russia, Application No. 14049/08, 8 July 2010; Sultanov v. Russia, Application No. 15303/09, 4 November 2010. ECHR, Ismailov and others v. Russia, Application No. 30352/03, 6 November 2008.