%{search_type} search results

• Introduction
• Rescripts (texts in Chaghatay)
• Reports (texts in Chaghatay)
• Notifications (texts in Chaghatay)
• Qāżīs' reports

This book aims to shed light on the juridical field of the Khanate of Khiva at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century. The 'Khanate of Khiva' is the term employed in Western historiography to denote the political formation that was put in place by the Qonghrats. The latter was a dynasty of Uzbek origin that ruled roughly between the last quarter of the 18th century and 1920. It ruled over the region known as Khorezm (Ar. Khwarazm), one of the biggest oases of Central Asia, traversed by the Amu Darya and nestled within the territory of what is today Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan. The main objective of this work is to show that prior to Sovietization the dispensation of justice in Khorezm depended mostly on a group of officials who represented the dynasty in power, but who lacked any specialised legal training. It is important to reflect on this particular aspect of the legal system developed by the Muslim principality that we refer to as 'the Khanate of Khiva, ' for conventional wisdom says that the practice of law in pre-modern Muslim societies was usually the business of the 'ulama', i.e., the scholars of Islam.
(source: Nielsen Book Data)

• Map of Uzbekistan
• Summary
• Recommendations
• Methodology
• I. Background
• "Systematic Torture" and the Call for Habeas Corpus
• Documenting Torture in a Closed Country
• Fading International Pressure
• European Union: Sanctions and Human Rights Criteria
• Germany: Anti-Sanctions, Pro-Termez
• "Positive Steps" and "Dialogue"
• United States: Restrictions on Aid for a "Country of Particular Concern"
• Afghanistan and the End of Congressional Sanctions
• II. The Failure of Habeas Corpus
• Habeas Corpus Amendments
• A Core International Human Right
• Uzbekistan's Narrow Legal Standard
• No Alternatives to Detention
• Pre-Trial Detention: The Rule, Not the Exception
• Most Detention Petitions Approved
• Length of Detention
• Using Administrative Charges to Avoid Habeas Corpus Review
• Violation of Right to an Impartial Tribunal
• Closed Hearings
• Participation of Defense Lawyers
• How One Lawyer's Efforts to Represent Her Client Were Blocked
• Habeas without Corpus
• Right to Appeal
• III. The Persistence of Torture
• Physical and Psychological Torture in Pre-Trial Custody
• Beatings
• Torture of "Abdumannob A."
• Asphyxiation
• Electric Shock
• Rape and Other Sexual Violence
• Rape of Rayhon, Khosiyat, and Nargiza Soatova
• Access to Counsel and the Right to Counsel of One's Choice
• "Permission" to Visit a Client
• Incommunicado Detention
• "Miranda" Rights
• Courts' Failure to Investigate Torture
• Empty Habeas Hearings
• Trial
• Torture of Obitkhoja O.
• IV. Dismantling Uzbekistan's Independent Legal Profession
• International and Uzbek Law on the Independence of Lawyers
• From Bar Association to "Quasi-Ministry" of Lawyers
• From Bar Association to "Quasi-Ministry" of Lawyers
• Prohibition on Other Lawyers' Associations
• Blacklisted Lawyers
• The Disbarment of Ruhiddin Komilov
• Disbarment of Rustam Tyuleganov
• Disciplinary Proceedings
• A Chilling Effect
• Acknowledgements
• Appendix: Human Rights Watch Letter to National Human Rights Center of Uzbekistan.

"Uzbekistan has become synonymous in recent years with an abysmal rights record and a torture epidemic that plagues its police stations and prisons. United Nations bodies determined in 2003 that torture was "systematic" and "widespread" in Uzbekistan's criminal justice system--a crisis that only deepened after the Uzbek government killed hundreds of protesters in the eastern city of Andijan in May 2005. In 2008, the Uzbek government introduced the right of habeas corpus, or the judicial review of detention, followed by other procedural reforms, to its system of pre-trial detention. Such measures should have heralded a more positive era for Uzbekistan. They did not. Despite improvements on paper, and the government's claims that it is committed to fighting torture, depressingly little has changed since habeas corpus was adopted. There is no evidence the Uzbek government is committed to implementing the laws it has passed or to ending torture in practice. Indeed, in several respects, the situation has deteriorated. The government has dismantled the independent legal profession, disbarring lawyers who dare to take on torture cases. Persecution of human rights activists has increased, credible reports of arbitrary detention and torture, including suspicious deaths in custody, have continued, and the government will not allow domestic and international NGOs to operate in the country. Uzbekistan's increasing strategic importance as a key supply route for NATO troops in Afghanistan has led the United States, European Union, and key actors to soften their criticism of its authoritarian government in recent years, allowing an already bleak situation to worsen. "No One Left to Witness": Torture, the Failure of Habeas Corpus, and the Silencing of Lawyers in Uzbekistan documents the cost of the West's increasingly complacent approach toward Uzbekistan and urges a fundamental shift in US and EU policy, making clear that concrete policy consequences, including targeted punitive measures, will follow absent concrete action to address serious human rights abuses."--P. [4] of cover.