Businessmen in Kyrgyzstan have welcomed a new law making it legal for them to use weapons to defend their property. However, there are a number of grey areas in the law which NBCentralAsia commentators say need to be defined more clearly – including what actually constitutes property, and what the police and courts should do when a violent incident takes place. On November 14, the Kyrgyz parliament passed a bill amending current criminal and civil legislation to allow individuals to defend their property to the extent that is reasonable, and to use firearms as long as they have a gun license. Businessmen welcomed the changes as a rational move. Omurbek Abdrakhmanov, president of the Azat corporation and a former head of Kyrgyzstan’s Union of Entrepreneurs, told NBCentralAsia, “Property owners have a right to defend themselves and their assets. As an owner myself, I see no negative aspects to this, only positive ones. \"When you can’t defend yourself even in the courts, this kind of radical measure is the only solution.” Abdrakhmanov does not predict that members of the public will start arming themselves en masse, and Kubatbek Baibolov, a member of parliament who is also a businessman, agrees with him. “This law will not result in a mass acquisition of weapons. Any businessman or owner who had a chance bought weapons in the wake of the March 24 looting,” said Baibolov, referring to the night of rioting and attacks on shops that followed the March revolution of 2005. “People realised they had no other realistic option if they were to protect their property.” He added, “Illegal takeovers and outright seizures of property have become more and more frequent, and this threatens the very foundations of the state.” Toktogul Kakchekeev, chief spokesman for Kyrgyzstan’s prosecution service, warns that the courts and the law-enforcement agencies still need to set specific limits to the definition of self-defence. He believes that law could be subject to diverse interpretations where it talks about how courts and investigating agencies should deal with such matters, how property is defined, and accountability for using weapons. (IWPR)