THE RIGHTS AND LEGAL ISSUES OF “NON-TRADITIONAL” MUSLIMS IN KAZAKHSTAN

THE RIGHTS AND LEGAL ISSUES OF “NON-TRADITIONAL” MUSLIMS IN KAZAKHSTAN

Kamila Salimzhan

Graduate student, KAZGUU University,

Kazakhstan, Astana

ABSTRACT

The goal of the article is to analyze the treatment of the religious outcasts in Kazakhstan, particularly adherents of non-traditional Islam, who returned from warfare zones in Syria with their families. The author tries to identify the difference between their legal rights and the reality of their treatment by the state and society.

Keywords: religious freedom, legal system of Kazakhstan, radical extremism, human rights.

Over the course of the last few years the government of Republic of Kazakhstan has successfully undertaken several rounds of repatriation of its citizens from warfare zones in Syria and Iraq, under the special operation “Zhusan”. 595 Kazakhstanis returned to the country as a result of the operations, most of them being women and children [1]. While 27 of the returnees were placed arrested for convictions of terrorism, others were placed in “adaptation centers” and went through psychological and theological consultations. However, many countries, including Western democracies consider repatriation as dangerous – they see women and children as a potential threat for society because of their propensity to radical views and experience of living with radicalized members of family. Kazakhstan is one of the unique cases when such great number of citizens was returned by the government from conflict zones in Syria and Iraq.

There is a concern regarding the issue of human rights of the returned citizens, as the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism Fionnuala Ní Aoláin has reported [2]. While Kazakhstan has ratified several conventions on human rights (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Convention on the Rights of Child) and Security Councils Resolutions on prevention of and fight with terrorism, the actual situation reflects that the level of freedom in the country is lower than it should be according to the international standards. Numerous human rights violations have taken place throughout the years of Kazakhstan’s independence, including unlawful arrests, restrictions of rights of expression and political freedom, and many others. Such cases of violation of rights are dangerous in that they can set a negative trend of mistreatment of people by the authorities and function as justifying precedent for further practice. While UN Special Rapporteur has marked the country’s substantial efforts in bringing home the citizens from conflict zones, she has also expressed her concerns in relation to preservation of legal rights of the returnees and conducting a fair trial over the detained citizens. The existing literature on the topic suggests that Kazakhstan faces serious challenges in providing religious freedom and protecting human rights, but the success of the repatriation is publicly acknowledged.

There is a positive view on successful implementation of the operations, suggesting that the benefits of the returning home its citizens outweigh the costs. The rescued children can receive the official citizenship of Kazakhstan and hope to start a new life there, after they undergo the adaptation period in special centers. In the rehabilitation center in Aktau women together with their children undergo the process of adaptation. The occupants of the center receive medical and psychological help, while the adults also have meetings with state security services to check their affiliation with radical extremism. As soon as the state confirms that there is no threat to society from their views, the occupants return to their homes. The whole process can last from a month to almost a year, to ensure the stable psychological condition of the women and children after living in war zones.  However, there exists a concern in public regarding the potential threat of those who returned from the Islamic State, as there have been several terrorist attacks in the country conducted by the religious extremists. On the other hand, there is another viewpoint to the situation, according to which these citizens would have posed much more danger, have they stayed in Syria, as they would have been used by the Islamic State as resources for further actions. Still, there is a hope to return the women and children to normal life, by providing them support from the government in terms of education and work opportunities.

Other Central Asian countries joined Kazakhstan in action of rescuing their citizens, which is a positive trend. Cook and Vale state that Kazakhstan “has taken a proactive approach”, in regard to returning hundreds of their citizens from Syria and Iraq [3, p. 31]. Yet, there is also a threat involved in the repatriation process, since children separated from their parents may undergo a severe psychological trauma, especially when parents are convicted of terrorist actions and detained in prison. In such situations it is necessary to conduct a careful examination of every case, to prevent the possible radicalization of the minors.

Podoprigora et al. claim about serious issues of violation of citizens’ rights in Kazakhstan [4, p. 117]. The authors state that despite the initiatives of the government to present Kazakhstan as a democratic state, in reality the law does not protect people from illegal restrictions on expression, assembly, religious practices and other fundamental rights. Moreover, as the republic tries to appear as a secular state, the issues of religious freedom are rarely raised by the government, and there is a lack of discussion of such important questions in Kazakhstan. Podoprigora et al. also consider that although the country holds the Congress of Leaders of the World and Traditional Religions every 3 years, its effectiveness in discussing relevant issues is questionable.

From the standpoint of international agreements, in 2005 the country has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which contains issues of religious freedom. However, according to the reports of the independent agencies on freedom of rights, the official position of Kazakhstan does not reflect the actual level of freedom. The situation has also changed after the adoption of the ‘Law On Religious Activity and Religious Associations’, which put more restrictions on the believers in the country. The state’s fear of radicalization of the citizens has pushed it to adopt such harsh methods of security on the religious activity, which violate the fundamental rights of people. It would be fair to suggest that changes can only be possible when the substantial political reforms will take place in Kazakhstan.

Kazakhstan, as was previously noted, has ratified numerous international documents on the prevention and fight with terrorism. The UN Security Council Resolutions 2178 and 2396 bind the states which signed them to follow the measures stated in these documents, in order to eliminate the threats posed by terrorism domestically and internationally. While Resolution 2178 offers measures for prevention of terrorist acts mostly through travel and transport security issues, it also provides recommendations for the member states on developing programs of prevention of terrorism by involving different interest groups, such as NGOs [5].  The Report of Special Rapporteur notes the “Shans” center in Kaskelen, one of the special centers for supporting children and family, where several repatriated minors were placed. Public Fund “Informational-propagandist rehabilitation center “Akniet” is also involved in the process of working with children and women, designing the curriculum of the rehab program [6]. “Pravo” Public Foundation is one of the primary organizers of the implementation of program, in tight cooperation with the Ministry of Education of Kazakhstan [7]. Also, the Resolution emphasizes the importance of non-violent actions in response to the threats of terrorism, including the significant role of education in the conflict prevention.

The Security Council Resolution 2396 also stresses the vulnerability of children to radical extremism, thereby suggesting that the states should provide the required support and consultation to them and acknowledge their rights and freedoms according to the respective international law [8]. Besides, it raises the issues of rightful treatment of the convicted persons, proposing that the states must comply with the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, in order to avoid the incidents of re-radicalization and to abide the international law on the rights of human.

The problem of stigmatization of the religious communities in Kazakhstan also stands sharp, and the government should be more cautious in implementing its laws on persecution on the religious basis, so as not to turn the fight with extremism into fight with religion. An analysis of the foreign experience has concluded that the effective measures of preventing radicalization include the active involvement of the local NGOs, public and youth organizations and communities. At the same time, the issue of inadequate control over the funding of NGOs is another point at question, as some researchers note that it has contributed to the rise of extremist activities. Contrary to the views of the UN Special Rapporteur Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, Rakhimbekov and Sydykova believe that the government should exercise more control over the activities of the NGOs in this regard [9, p. 95].

The UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism Fionnuala Ní Aoláin has reported on the situation with human rights and freedom in Kazakhstan after her visit to the country. She assessed the work of the government in protecting the citizens’ rights as promising, but facing numerous challenges in achieving its goals. Although the Special Rapporteur has described the results of Zhusan operation as “positive implementation of its international obligations under Security Council resolution 2178”, she also expressed her criticism on the subject of religious freedom, rights of the detained citizens, civil rights of the people and many other issues. Particularly, she noted that the vague and ambiguous interpretation of the terms “extremism”, “religious hatred or enmity”, “inciting social or class hatred” contributes to the unlawful actions of the government in relation to civil activists, believers and members of the unregistered religious practices. As for the issue of the families of foreign terrorist fighters, the Special Rapporteur noted that certain actions of the government in relation to the residents of the adaptation centers pose concern, as the rescued citizens are often placed under strict control of the security services. Also, she mentioned that the government of Kazakhstan should provide more transparency in the issues regarding the detainment of the citizens returned from conflict zones. Particularly, the Special Rapporteur was concerned by the overly emphasized religious normalization as part of the adaptation program in the centers. She suggested that the government should provide the freedom of religious beliefs as one of the fundamental rights of the citizens, and be more transparent in its actions towards them.  However, overall the implementation of the special operation was addressed by her as “humanitarian and supportive in nature”.

As such, the government of Kazakhstan should focus on protecting the returnees’ rights as its obligation under International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the Convention on the Rights of Child. Specifically, the infringement by the state authorities on the absolute right of belief of the citizens is the violation of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, therefore it is necessary to guarantee strict adherence to the recommendations of UN Special Rapporteur in the process of rehabilitation of the returnees. No pressure on changing the religious beliefs of the returned citizens should be implemented in work with them, all attempts of forced secularization should be stopped.

On the other hand, the threat of radicalization of the returned women and children still persists, as there is no strong evidence in support of successful rehabilitation programs of radicalized individuals, guaranteeing their safe socialization. Cases of the former adherents of radical views regaining their old beliefs and organizing terrorist attacks and participating in other unlawful activities involving terrorist groups also show that there is a potential danger in returning such individuals to the society. In case of insufficient control of the government on the process of religious consultations there is a risk of women and children returning to their previous views. In light of this argument the government should control stricter for the adherence of the returned citizens to traditional religious beliefs.

However, Kazakhstan should not succumb into the practice of interfering with personal rights and freedoms of the citizens even at such risk. The methods of control should be in accordance with the country’s obligations under international conventions. Kazakhstan can adopt the experience of other countries in dealing with prevention of radicalization and adhere to the recommendations of human rights organizations and local institutions. The protection of the rights of the citizens is the first and foremost duty of the state, and the acts of prevention of any threats to society must be undertaken with respect to the rights of the citizens under question.

References:

1. Musaev Aybulat. “Kazakhstan Completes Rescue Operation, Brings Back At Least 595 Citizens From War Zones”, Caspian News. 2020. https://caspiannews.com/news-detail/kazakhstan-completes-rescue-operation-brings-back-at-least-595-citizens-from-war-zones-2020-2-7-0/
2. Report Of The Special Rapporteur On The Promotion And Protection Of Human Rights And Fundamental Freedoms While Countering Terrorism, A/HRC/43/46/Add.1 (22 January 2020), available from http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/HRC/43/10/ADD.1&Lang=E
3. Cook, Joana and Gina Vale. “From Daesh to ‘Diaspora’ II: The Challenges Posed by Women and Minors After the Fall of the Caliphate.” CTC Sentinel (2019): 30-46. https://ctc.usma.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/CTC-SENTINEL-062019.pdf
4. Podoprigora, Roman, Nurlan Apakhayev, Aizhan Zhatkanbayeva, Dina Baimakhanova, Elina P. Kim and Kaliya R. Sartayeva. “Religious Freedom and Human Rights in Kazakhstan.” Statute Law Review 40, no. 2 (2019): 113–127. doi:10.1093/slr/hmx024
5. UN Security Council Resolution 2178, S/RES/2178 (24 September 2014), available from https://www.un.org/sc/ctc/news/keyword/2178/
6. Kramer, Andrew E. “Kazakhstan Welcomes Women Back From the Islamic State, Warily”, The New York Times. 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/10/world/europe/kazakhstan-women-islamic-state-deradicalization.html
7. Zhapisheva, Assem. “Life After IS: What Awaits Kazakhstanis upon Return Home”, Central Asian Bureau for Analytical Reporting. 2019. https://cabar.asia/en/life-after-is-what-awaits-kazakhstanis-upon-return-home/
8. UN Security Council Resolution 2396, S/RES/2396 (21 December 2017), available from https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/sres23962017
9. Rakhimbekov M.M and L.Ch. Sydykova. “Foreign Experience In Prevention Of Religious Extremism And Terrorism And Its Applicationin The Republic Of Kazakhstan.” Journal of Karagandy State University 3, no. 91, (2018): 91-97. URL: http://rep.ksu.kz//handle/data/6288