Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Azerbaijan (Ratification: 2000)

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that several provisions of the Criminal Code, which provide for sanctions of correctional work or imprisonment (involving compulsory labour), are worded in terms broad enough to lend themselves to application as a means of punishment for the expression of views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. These provisions include:

• – section 147 regarding defamation, defined as “dissemination, in a public statement … or through the mass media, or a publicly displayed Internet information resource of false information discrediting the honour and dignity of a person”;
• – sections 169.1 and 233, read together with sections 7 and 8 of the Act on freedom of assembly, regarding “organization or participation in a prohibited public assembly” and “organization of group actions violating public order”; and
• – section 283.1 regarding “inflaming the national, racial or religious enmity”.

The Committee further noted the indication by an important number of United Nations and European institutions and bodies of a growing tendency to apply various provisions of the Criminal Code as a basis for the prosecution of journalists, bloggers, human rights defenders and other persons who expressed critical opinions. In particular, the following provisions of the Criminal Code were often used for that purpose: insult (section 148); embezzlement (section 179.3.2); illegal business (section 192); tax evasion (section 213); hooliganism (section 221); state treason (section 274); and abuse of office (section 308). The Committee also observed the introduction in the Criminal Code of section 148(1) on the offence of posting slander or insult on an Internet information resource by using fake user names, profiles or accounts, punishable by imprisonment for up to one year, and the extension of section 323(1) (smearing or humiliating the honour and dignity of the President in public statements, publicly shown products or the mass media) to online activities through the use of fake user names, profiles or accounts, punishable by up to three years’ imprisonment. In addition, according to the UN Human Rights Committee, the maximum term of imprisonment under the Code of Administrative Offences for misdemeanours, with which human rights defenders were often charged (for example, hooliganism, resisting police and traffic violations), had been increased from 15 to 90 days.

The Committee notes with regret the absence of information on this point in the Government’s report. The Committee observes from the report of the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe following her visit to Azerbaijan in July 2019 that no progress has been made with regard to protecting freedom of expression in Azerbaijan and that journalists and social media activists, who expressed dissent or criticism of the authorities, are continuously detained or imprisoned on a variety of charges, such as disobeying the police, hooliganism, extortion, tax evasion, incitement to ethnic and religious hatred or treason, as well as drug possession or illegal possession of weapons. The Committee also notes that, in its Opinion No. 12/2018, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concluded that deprivation of liberty of the journalist, who had been accused of drug crimes under section 234.4.3 of the Criminal Code and sentenced to nine years in prison, was as a result of his exercise of the right to freedom of expression (A/HRC/WGAD/2018/12, paragraph 59). The Committee further observes that the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has continued to hear a number of cases from Azerbaijan concerning the detentions and convictions of opposition political activists, particularly in the following cases: Hasanov and Majidli v. Azerbaijan, applications Nos 9626/14 and 9717/14, judgement of 7 October 2021; Azizov and Novruzlu v. Azerbaijan, applications Nos 65583/13 and 70106/13, judgement of 18 February 2021; Khadija Ismayilova v. Azerbaijan, application No. 30778/15, judgment of 27 February 2020, among others.

The Committee once again deplores the continued use of the provisions of the Criminal Code to prosecute and convict persons who express their political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, leading to penalties of correctional work or imprisonment, both involving compulsory labour. The Committee therefore once again strongly urges the Government to take immediate and effective measures to ensure that, both in law and practice, no one who, in a peaceful manner, expresses political views or opposes the established political, social or economic system can be sentenced to sanctions under which compulsory labour is imposed. The Committee once again requests the Government to review the abovementioned sections of the Criminal Code by clearly restricting the scope of these provisions to situations connected with the use of violence or incitement to violence, or by repealing sanctions involving compulsory labour.

In light of the situation described above, the Committee is bound to observe that there has been no progress with regard to protecting freedom of expression in Azerbaijan and that journalists, social media activists and opposition political activists who express dissent or criticism of the authorities are convicted and imprisoned under various provisions of the Criminal Code. The Committee once again deplores the continued use of the provisions of the Criminal Code to prosecute and convict persons who express their political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, leading to penalties of correctional work or imprisonment, both involving compulsory labour. The Committee considers that this case meets the criteria set out in paragraph 95 of its General Report to be asked to come before the Conference.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 110th Session and to reply in full to the present comments in 2022.]