On February 23, a preliminary hearing took place in a lawsuit against three independent weekly newspapers and a lawyer that were accused of libel for publishing the content of a press conference. Two judges of the Supreme Court of Tajikistan and one judge of the Municipal Court of Dushanbe sued three media outlets of Tajikistan, the “Asia Plus”, “Farazh” and “Ozodagon” newspapers. The judges demanded to defend their honor and dignity and to recoup moral damage at a total amount of 5,5 million somoni (approximately US$1,2 million). Furthermore, the judges demanded that the newspapers’ activities should be stopped while the court’s decision is pending.

The case refers to the so-called “legal case of the Isfaranians”. In June 2009, the Supreme Court judge Nur Nurov sentenced 31 residents of Isfara, a town in the north of Tajikistan, to 11- 25 years of imprisonment. They were accused of banditry, illegal possession of firearms, money laundering, tax evasion, theft, etc, even though the public prosecutor had demanded milder sentences to the accused.

The trial caused public indignation. The accused, the lawyers, and even the public prosecutor considered the sentence to be unjust and too harsh. Furthermore, during the press conference, the attorney general of Tajikistan, Bobojon Bobojonov, claimed that the sentence passed by the Supreme Court was “illegal and unjust”. However, the judges who participated in the trial did not respond to the indignation.

During the appeal trial that was held in January 2010, the lawyer Solekhjon Juraev made a sensational statement by accusing the Supreme Court and the Anti-Corruption Agency of Tajikistan of having falsified evidence, acting outside the legal framework and of taking an arbitrary decision. After the trial, Juraev made an open statement to the President, Parliament, Ombudsman, international organizations and media. During the press conference, the lawyer presented his arguments to journalists and supported them with a CD containing a private conversation between Juraev and the Supreme Court judge Nurov, where the judge tells the lawyer the reasons for passing the ‘unjust’ sentence.

All media outlets that took part in the press conference published the story together with the opinion of public prosecutor Rustam Olimov, who also made a public announcement saying that the sentence “contradicts the principles of legality, equal treatment by the law, humanism, and social justice”. As a result, the three media outlets “Asia Plus”, “Farazh” and “Ozodagon” were sued by the judges for publishing articles that conveyed the content of the press conference. The judges brought a libel action against the newspapers, accusing them of “publishing libelous articles”.

The hearing was held in the Municipal Court of Dushanbe and attracted the attention of civil society, media and international community. Some experts and international organizations claim that this case is nothing short of an attack on the freedom of speech in Tajikistan.

Several international organizations made statements where they raised their concerns about the case. The U.S. Committee to Protect Journalists made a statement calling the judges to withdraw the libel action against the popular independent newspapers in Tajikistan. According to the Committee, such an action could result in the bankruptcy of independent media outlets. Local journalists also expressed their concerns. Thus, the Journalist Union of Tajikistan claims that “the punitive measures against the freedom of expression contradict democratic principles and negatively affect the image of Tajikistan, particularly in light of the upcoming Parliamentary Elections”.

Finally, the U.S. Embassy in Tajikistan made a public statement also expressing its concerns over legal actions against independent newspapers. According to the embassy, this legal action may force the newspapers to cease their publications, which will be “a serious strike at media freedom in Tajikistan”. The Embassy requested the government of Tajikistan “to guarantee that the judicial system will not be used as a tool to persecute independent media outlets in Tajikistan”.

In sum, the independent media outlets are blamed for fulfilling their mission – providing information to the public. Some media experts have already termed the case political, incited by the authorities in order to frighten independent media before the Parliamentary elections in Tajikistan. However, representatives of the three prosecuted newspapers believe that this is not a political case and that the Government of Tajikistan has nothing to do with it. The journalists believe that the case is just a banal attempt by the judges to save face and to hide serious problems in Tajikistan’s judicial system from the public.