Plenary session in Nairobi. Flickr photo by Franck K.

It has already been decided that the next IGF will be hosted by Azerbaijan, an oil-rich country in the South Caucasus.

The venue has not been discussed in a multi-stakeholder way (including not only governments and businesses but also civil society). And it is those who were excluded from the decision who have the most concerns about Azerbaijan.

Below are the main pros and cons of holding the IGF in Azerbaijan that civil society participants have discussed offline, on the margins and in the halls of this year's forum:

Pros:

• Tunisia hosted the World Summit on the Information Society (the precursor to the Internet Governance Forum) in 2005. What happened five years later is widely known. The supporters of holding the IGF in Azerbaijan say that the IGF's multi-stakeholder model of discussion can actually trigger democratization processes and better electronic engagement among the netizens and bloggers. Yet, there's no hard evidence to prove that the Internet Governance Forum in 2005 had any direct impact on Tunisian digitalised civil society.
• The geographical and diplomatic advantages. Activists from Iran could come to the IGF and present their view on the development of the Internet.

Cons:

• The main argument by those who are skeptical about the next IGF venue is that Azerbaijan is not a democratic country. According to Freedom House, an American human rights organization, Azerbaijan is a not free country both in terms of press freedom and in terms of democracy, and is only a “partly free” country in terms of Online Freedom. Ilham Aliyev, the president of Azerbaijan, had been called ‘the Predator' of the Internet by Reporters Without Borders, a French human rights NGO (read the list of online media crackdowns). Global Voices has continuously reported the crackdowns on social media exercised by the Azeri government.
• Another issue is the possibility for travel of all parties and all representatives from all over the world. Due to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Armenians can't enter Azerbaijan unless they receive a direct invitation from the Azeri Ministry of Foreign Affairs and can afford bodyguards. There are reports that people who travel to Armenia and later come to Azerbaijan are questioned about the purpose of their visits to Armenia.
• Logistical issues also concerns. The experts doubt Baku's capacity to provide enough affordable hotel accomodation during the Forum.
• Combined, these factors pose a challenge to the continuity of the IGF process.

(Editor's note: This post was corrected on October 3rd to clarify that the World Summit on the Information Society was held in Tunis in 2005, not the IGF.)

Written by Alexey Sidorenko · comments (2)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

In a press release following Wednesday's verdict, Amnesty International said that it considered the young activist to be a prisoner of conscience.

“All the evidence points to the fact that Jabbar Savalan has been convicted on trumped up charges,” said John Dalhuisen, Europe and Central Asia Deputy Programme Director at Amnesty International.

“It’s clear that the real reason he was tried and now convicted was to punish him for - and dissuade others from - calling for anti-government protests inspired by events in the Middle East. Jabbar Savalan is being punished for peacefully exercising his right to freedom of expression.”

Jabbar Savalan was convicted despite a blood test showing he had not used drugs. The conviction was largely based on a confession he was forced to sign and has since retracted. He did not have access to a lawyer during the interrogation.

Jabbar Savalan support site

Although media freedom has long been a concern in Azerbaijan, recent events have highlighted an increasing number of cases concerning online freedom of expression. In March, Bakhtiyar Hajiyev, a Harvard graduate and political activist was also arrested ostensibly for evading military service at the same time as organizing pro-democracy demonstrations in the country via Facebook. Criminal charges have also been launched against another one of the organizers, Strasbourg-based Elnur Majidli.

Critics of the authorities in the oil-rich former Soviet republic maintain that the situation is fast becoming more serious even when compared to the country's previous record of crushing dissent. Another Amnesty International prisoner of conscience, journalist Eynulla Fatullayev, already remains in prison even though the European Court of Human Rights ruled in his favor and demanded his immediate release. Like Savalan, Fatullayev is now imprisoned on drug possession charges.

Speaking at this week's UNESCO World Press Freedom Day event, Adnan Hajizade and Emin Milli noted how such charges continue to be used to silence critical voices. The two video blogging youth activists imprisoned in 2009 and conditionally released in November last year joined a panel of youth leaders over Skype. Ironically, however, the following day the Azerbaijani Minister of Communication Ali Abbasov voiced his concern that Skype posed a threat to national security.

The timing of the comments might well have been coincidental, but given the government's track record to date, suspect that more is yet to come and probably with good reason. Marking World Press Freedom Day, Reporters Without Borders named Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev 1 of 38 “Predators of Press Freedom.”

Written by Onnik Krikorian · comments (7)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

“According to CPJ sources and local press reports, plainclothed men detained journalists My Rohwedder Street, Charlie Laprevote, and Charlotta Wijkström at a protest rally in the capital city Baku on Sunday. The men, who did not identify themselves, detained the crew members and took them to the Sabail District police department in Baku, then transferred them to the headquarters of Azerbaijan's Migration Service, the local press reported. The men also confiscated their digital cameras and erased all existing footage from their memory cards, international press reported.”

While the reason for deportation is not very clear, some officials suspect that there might be problems with the crew's visas. Radio Free Europe, however, quotes one of the crew members as saying that they did not hide anything while applying for Azerbaijani visa. They are also reporting that the European Enlargement Commissioner has expressed concern over the deportation and also the hostile environment for journalists in Azerbaijan.

“Meanwhile, a spokesperson for European Enlargement Commissioner Štefan Füele expressed concern about recent developments in Azerbaijan, citing what he called “escalating pressures on journalists, youth, and political activists.”

It is important to note here that Azerbaijan is facing criticism for its attitude towards journalists, democracy and human rights activists. The Associated Press reports that number of activists were arrested for rallying for democracy, earlier this month.

Written by Bhumika Ghimire · comments (1)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

Strasbourg 11.04.11: Inspired by pro-democracy uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa, a recent wave of protests in Azerbaijan has resulted in scores of bloggers, cyber activists, journalists, civil society activists and opposition political party members harassed, arrested and beaten.

In a disturbing new step, the Azerbaijani authorities have launched criminal charges against a cyber activist based outside of Azerbaijan. Strasbourg-based Elnur Majidli, who was involved in organising the protests via his Facebook page, is currently facing charges of inciting hatred.

As the freedom of expression situation in the country continues to deteriorate in the wake of the government clampdown, representatives of the International Partnership Group for Azerbaijan (IPGA) are set to highlight their concerns during the upcoming Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) session in Strasbourg from 11-15 April 2011.

The human rights situation in Azerbaijan has reached a critical level. We are receiving almost daily reports of abuse against cyber activists, journalists and others in connection with exercising their rights to freedom of expression and assembly. This raises the question: how many more need to be arrested or beaten before the Council of Europe takes action to hold this Member State accountable?
The credibility of the Council of Europe depends on such stewardship,

said Dr Agnès Callamard, Executive Director of ARTICLE 19.

Key areas of concern for the IPGA delegation include the recent wave of arrests of bloggers and activists in connection with the protests – some of whom face long prison sentences on the basis of politically motivated charges; increased pressure on non-governmental organisations working on democracy and human rights issues, including the closure of the Human Rights House Azerbaijan;

the recent abduction and beating of two journalists in connection with their criticism of the authorities; and the continued wrongful imprisonment of journalist Eynulla Fatullayev, who remains in jail despite a European Court of Human Rights judgment ordering his release.

This sudden spate of arrests of opposition activists and journalists is alarming. We are deeply concerned by the arrests that took place before the scheduled protests, as this suggests that the authorities are trying to silence people before they even begin to exercise their right to freedom of expression,

said Emin Huseynov, Chairman of the Baku-based Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety.

The IPGA delegation urges the Council of Europe and PACE national delegations to immediately increase their monitoring of Azerbaijan’s compliance with its Council of Europe obligations and hold Azerbaijan accountable. The delegation is comprised of representatives from ARTICLE 19, the Human Rights House Foundation, Index on Censorship, and the Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety.

Media Profile: Eynulla Fatullayev

Eynulla Fatullayev

30 October 2007: Fatullayev is convicted of supporting terrorism, inciting hatred, and tax evasion, and sentenced to 8.5 years’ imprisonment (including his previous defamation conviction). The charges were based on an article he had written criticising the Azerbaijani government’s foreign policy towards the United States, arguing that it left Azerbaijan vulnerable to attack by Iran, and listing specific sites in Azerbaijan which Iran could attack.

29 December 2009: Fatullayev is charged with possessing illegal drugs, after prison officials claimed to have found 0.22 grams of heroin in his clothing in a high security jail cell.

22 April 2010: The European Court of Human Rights rules that Fatullayev’s imprisonment constituted a violation of his freedom of expression and right to a fair trial. The European Court orders the Azerbaijani government to immediately release Fatullayev from prison and to pay him a fine for damages and legal expenses.

6 July 2010: Fatullayev is convicted of possessing illegal drugs, and sentenced to 2.5 years’ imprisonment.

4 October 2010: The European Court of Human Rights Grand Chamber rejects the Azerbaijani government’s appeal, making the 22 April judgment final. The Azerbaijani government is now in breach of its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights.

11 November 2010: The Azerbaijani Supreme Court revokes the charges against Fatullayev of defamation, supporting terrorism, and inciting hatred. However, it also resurrects a previous conviction of defamation from September 2006, replacing a conditional sentence with a prison sentence, and retroactively extends the length of the prison sentence Fatullayev served for tax evasion. The Court considers Fatullayev’s conviction for drugs possession a separate matter.

6 December 2010: The Council of Europe Committee of Ministers issues a decision calling on the Azerbaijani authorities to “explore all possible means” of ending Fatullayev’s detention.

28 December 2010: The Azerbaijani Supreme Court upholds Fatullayev’s conviction for drugs possession. The domestic appeals process has now been exhausted.

11 March 2011: The Council of Europe Committee of Ministers issues a second decision in Fatullayev’s case, calling on the Azerbaijani authorities to “remove without further delay all obstacles to the implementation” of the European Court of Human Rights judgment.

Written by Guest Contributor · comments (0)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

In June 2010, for example, the Azadliq newspaper reported that in order to counter online activists, pro-government youth were being encouraged to join Facebook, and most recently there has been what many consider to be a campaign to discredit Facebook in the media. This has also extended to ‘exposing' those with online links to contacts in ‘enemy' nations.

Coming prior to protests, encouraged by popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia, staged on 11th March this year, several activists were also detained, allegedly for their online activities. Now, new allegations have also emerged from Anonymous, the international hacking community, as Forbes reported earlier this week.

Anonymous adviser Barrett Brown claimed on the group’s Radio Payback show earlier today that the software had led to pro-democracy dissidents in Azerbaijan, where Booz Allen has offices, getting arrested. The software creates “armies of fake people” through social media sites like Facebook, he said, which results in identifying dissidents with anonymous profiles, a method also known as astroturfing.

While online culture in the South Caucasus still amounts to pretty much adding anyone who sends a friend request on Facebook whether users know them or not, claims that software developed in the U.S. could automate the process and be used by governments to track and monitor networks is particularly cause for alarm.

Dubbed ‘MetalGear' by Anonymous, the idea of ‘personal management software,' does however take the task of monitoring citizens to a new and more sophisticated level if details provided by The Tech Herald are correct.

The MetalGear story starts with a proposal [archive copy] from the Office of Air Mobility Command, within the U.S. Air Force, in June of 2010.

The proposal asked for 50 user licenses for software that would allow 10 personas per user. In all, this is a virtual army of 500 personas, who can be centrally controlled by a small group of people.

According to the bid put out, personas must be “…replete with background, history, supporting details, and cyber presences that are technically, culturally, and geographically consistent.”

In an interview with RFE/RL in January, Evgeny Morozov said that he believed internal security agencies might actually welcome activists joining sites such as Facebook because it makes the task of monitoring their networks easier. Reports of dissidents being arrested, as well as software such as “MetalGear” being developed, seems to confirm that.

For now, however, Forbes says that the evidence for a link between Booz Allen and Azerbaijan is ‘pretty wobbly,' but nonetheless notes that the company has offices in Baku, the country's capital. A spokesman for Booz Allen also declined to respond to the allegations, saying only that ‘he could not comment on “rumor or speculation” or on contracts […]‘

Nevertheless, whether the allegations are true or not, they do raise more questions about U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's declared intent to fight Internet repression abroad. Critics already argue that Net Freedom should also extend to the development, sale and export of online surveillance and monitoring tools by U.S. companies.

Guardian columnist George Monbiot wrote that, “Software like this has the potential to destroy the internet as a forum for constructive debate.”

Global Voices is currently looking into the allegations made by Anonymous and will update readers when more details are known.

Written by Onnik Krikorian · comments (3)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

When Adnan Hajizade and Emin Milli, two video-blogging youth activists in Azerbaijan, were detained on 8 July 2009 on what many believe were trumped-up charges, supporters and friends naturally used Facebook to campaign for their release. However, spreading networks wide in order to disseminate information and updates, there were obviously risks involved. Reports of the security services monitoring Facebook were coming out of neighboring Iran, and there was no reason to think it couldn’t happen in Azerbaijan.

For the two young men’s supporters, however, that didn't matter. What was arguably more important was that Facebook was crucial in the campaign to free them. And, as international awareness of the plight of Hajizade and Milli increased before their release in last November, they were probably right. Despite the inherent risks, spreading information quickly and efficiently is one thing that Facebook and Twitter are good at. However, with the use of such tools once again in the spotlight following this year’s popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia, the debate over persisting personal and security concerns has re-emerged.

In particular, in a recent interview with Radio Free Europe, Evgeny Morozov, author of The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom, started the ball rolling by saying that internal security agencies might actually welcome the use of new- and social-media tools. “The reason why the KGB wants you to join Facebook is because it allows them to learn more about you from afar,” he said. “It allows them to identify certain social graphs and social connections between activists. Many of these relationships are now self-disclosed by activists by joining various groups.”

In Azerbaijan that is certainly proving to be the case. On 5 February, Jabbar Savalan, a 20-year-old activist from the opposition Popular Front, was arrested and charged with narcotics possession, something his supporters and lawyer strongly deny. Instead, they claim, Savalan was detained for comments made on Facebook a day earlier calling for Egypt-style protests in the country. Amnesty International has also denounced the charges, calling them a “pretext to punish Jabbar Savalan for his political activism and to discourage other youth activists from exercising their right to freedom of expression.”

The international human rights organization also noted that Savalan was interrogated without a lawyer and alleges that he was pressured into signing a confession that he later retracted. Amnesty further demands that the authorities “justify Jabbar Salavan’s pretrial detention or release him immediately.”

A few days later, on 9 February, another Popular Front activist, Elchin Hasanov, was summoned by police and instructed to remove messages on his Facebook page calling for protest actions in Savalan's support, and last week Harvard-educated parliamentary candidate Bakhtiyar Hajiyev was arrested. Although the charges against him relate to avoiding military conscription, his supporters say that this was again simply an excuse, given his constitutional right to alternative service instead. Moreover, they allege, before his arrest Hajiyev was questioned about his activities on Facebook.

As well he might have been. Of seven moderators of a recently launched Facebook page calling for Egypt-style protests in Azerbaijan to take place on 11 March, Hajiyev is the only one who lives in the country. Indeed, in an interview with RFE’s Baku bureau days earlier, one of those other moderators said that had he opened the page while living in Azerbaijan he would probably have been arrested. A few days later, another activist, Dayanat Babayev, was detained by police for 10 days for what they say was “disrupting public order” while speaking loudly and inappropriately on a cell phone while walking. At least one witness, however, claims that Babayev was instead forcibly removed from an Internet café.

Yet, despite officials’ apparent concern about its power, Facebook penetration in Azerbaijan remains incredibly low, at just 324,880 users or 3.9 percent of the population. This pales in comparison with even neighboring Georgia, where 516,300 people, or 11 percent of the population, use the site. Nevertheless, the authorities in Baku appear to be taking no chances. In April 2010, for example, Zahid Oruj, a member of parliament’s security and defense committee, spoke out against Facebook by suggesting it could be used by foreign powers to “recruit agents.”

“It is possible that secret agents sit in social networks trying to lure people to cooperate,” he told journalists, suggesting that this perceived threat should be legislated against. “In my opinion, one cannot exclude that intelligence services of various countries can also lead Azerbaijani nationals to secret cooperation through social networks. We must not allow hostile forces to use different Internet services against us. In this matter, the danger comes not only from Armenian nationalists, but also other forces.”

A media campaign to discredit the use of Facebook followed and continues, especially after events in the Middle East and North Africa. On 1 March, for example, the online news site Qaynar.Info published the names of prominent opposition and alternative voices in Azerbaijan who had Armenian contacts and friends listed on their Facebook pages. Responses to the piece from youth activists in Azerbaijan were critical, viewing the article as a further attempt to highlight the site as an internal security threat and to portray those named as “enemies of the state.”

The following day, Rauf Mardiyev, secretary general of the IRELI Public Union, a youth organization considered by many activists to be pro-governmental and the local equivalent of the Russian Nashi, followed the same line. In a blog post titled, “The real face of 11 March,” Mardiyev highlighted the appearance of six Armenian names among the first 50 of 2,658 members signed up on the Facebook page set up by Hajiyev. Although the group was an open one, the post ended by stating that “no other comments are necessary,” with Mardiyev saying he would instead “leave it up to the conscience of readers.”

With public hostility toward Armenians high in Azerbaijan because of the festering conflict over the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, playing this card has become predictable in recent years. A household survey in 2009 by the Caucasus Resource Research Centers, for example, found that 97 percent of Azerbaijanis were against friendship with Armenians. Even so, Facebook has proved invaluable in cross-border communication in lieu of traditional means in recent years, but others have already raised concerns about how this could be used against them.

“[One activist] said if pictures of Azerbaijanis together with Armenians are found on the Internet, then they will have to go to the KGB and be questioned,” a German journalist recently wrote to this author after she visited Baku late last year.

Meanwhile, the campaign against Facebook and Twitter has even made it into the broadcast media. Last month, for example, ANS TV ran a 12-minute news item on the “dangers” of Facebook and Twitter. Although starting out neutrally enough by describing how social media can spread information worldwide, it then cut to footage of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaking about net freedom before alleging that social-media tools were “dangerous” in Azerbaijan because they damage the morale of young people and could be exploited by “foreign enemies.”

To a lesser extent, following the uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia the same approach has been evident in Armenia. With the opposition staging a rally to mark the third anniversary of the 1 March post-election unrest in Yerevan that left 10 people dead, the Armenian National Congress, led by former President Levon Ter-Petrossian, tried to attract international attention to its cause by declaring that it, too, would stage a “Facebook revolution.” What’s more, the congress’ coordinator, Levon Zurabyan, claimed that most of the 132,000 Facebook users in the country supported the call.

Pro-government and nationalist bloggers, now referred to by the local media as “information security experts,” were quick to cast doubt on such claims by again alleging that social-media-induced revolutions were being promoted by the United States while others noted that in any case Zurabyan didn’t even use the site, so had no basis to make such claims. Besides, there had been very little activity noticeable on Facebook, with just 380 people both inside and outside Armenia signing up for the protest page. But that did not necessarily mean few would attend the rally: estimates of the turnout range between 10,000 and 50,000.

Nevertheless, it’s clear that activists’ use of social media played no role in the success of that rally, especially when compared with their more Internet-savvy counterparts in Azerbaijan. But even there, despite increased online activity, some remain unconvinced.

The protests planned for 11 and 12 March in Azerbaijan, where social media are being used extensively by activists, and another in Armenia on 17 March, where they are not, might help to further illuminate the bane-or-boon argument about these tools. Already senior members of the IRELI Public Union are attempting to support the authorities in Baku by countering information from activists in Azerbaijan on Facebook and Twitter ahead of the planned protests, and on 7 March they launched a new project to establish a network of young bloggers.

Meanwhile, as of the time of writing, Facebook is also inaccessible from Azerbaijani cellular phone operator Bakcell for the coming week for, it says, “technical reasons.” In an update on Twitter, IRELI’s Mardiyev denied this, but the decision was later confirmed by Bakcell’s customer service department. (Addition: Facebook is apparently accessible again via Bakcell)

Onnik Krikorian is the Caucasus editor for Global Voices Online and a freelance journalist and photographer in Yerevan.

Written by Onnik Krikorian · comments (10)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

Hajiyev, 29, a Harvard graduate and a former parliament candidate, is one of the organizers of the March 11 Facebook campaign calling for a day of protest against the government.

[…]

Hajiyev today posted on his Facebook page the following appeal to police on behalf of “a group of Azerbaijani youth:”

“We learned from the developments in the Arab world that when people demand freedom, they achieve it. We call on you to stand on the right side of history, not to resort to force against your own citizens, to build a fair, happy, and free society in Azerbaijan together with ordinary people.”

Hajiyev was detained earlier this year and charged with evading military service. He and other activists say the criminal case against him is politically motivated.

As one of seven moderators of a recently launched Facebook page calling for Egypt-style protests in Azerbaijan, Hajiyev is apparently the only one based in the oil-rich former Soviet republic. Ironically, one of those other moderators told RFE's Azerbaijan Service only a few days earlier that had he opened the page while living in Azerbaijan he would probably be arrested.

Supporters say Hajiyev's detention appears to confirm that, especially as it follows the arrest last month of another activist, Jabbar Savalan. That young activist had also made calls for Egypt-style pro-democracy protests on his Facebook page.

Written by Onnik Krikorian · comments (19)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

True, as a tool for online peace building, Facebook has proven its worth, but some activists in Azerbaijan have already expressed concern at how connections with contacts and friends in Armenia might be used against them. “[One activist] said if pictures of Azerbaijanis together with Armenians are found on the internet, then they will have to go to the KGB and be questioned,” a German journalist friend recently wrote after a visit to Baku, the capital of the oil-rich former Soviet republic. It's also not the first time that ‘warnings' have been voiced by officials alleging that social network sites allow “hostile forces us to use different Internet services against us.”

Indeed, fears of the Internet among the authorities in Baku have been growing in recent years, with two video blogging youth activists, Adnan Hajizade and Emin Milli, detained in July 2009 and imprisoned until November last year when international pressure led to their early conditional release. Few buy the government line that they were jailed for ‘hooliganism,' of course, instead considering the action against them intended to prevent and frustrate their online activism. Amnesty International, for example, declared the two men to be prisoners of conscience and the government remains on edge about the potential for social media to foment unrest after uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa.

Jabbar Savalan support site

Certainly, even if Facebook penetration remains low at just 3.91 percent (324,800), the authorities are taking no chances. On 5 February, for example, Jabbar Savalan, a 20-year-old activist from the opposition Popular Front, was arrested in Sumgait, a city in Azerbaijan. Charged with narcotics possession, something his supporters and lawyer strongly deny, Savalan is instead believed to have been detained due to comments he made on Facebook calling for Egypt-style protests in the country a day earlier. Amnesty International have also denounced the charges, calling them a “pretext to punish Jabbar Savalan for his political activism and to discourage other youth activists from exercising their right to freedom of expression.”

A few days later, on 9 February, another Popular Front activist, Elchin Hasanov, was also reportedly summoned to police and instructed to remove messages on his Facebook page calling for action in Savalan's support.

In that context, the publication a few days ago of an article identifying prominent activists and journalists in Azerbaijan with Armenian friends and colleagues on Facebook such as LGBT activist Mamikon Hovsepyan and peacebuilder Georgi Vanyan has concerned many. Translated into English, it might read as fairly neutral, but the original Azerbaijani is considered by native Azerbaijani speakers to be quite critical, portraying those named as “enemies of the State.”

It is no secret that a number of social networks, in particular “Facebook”, act as the force behind the processes taking place in the world today. “Facebook”, which has turned into an everyday necessity for millions, knows no borders in certain aspects. To the degree that representatives of two enemy nations and countries become friends on the site, in spite of everything.

Qaynar.info has tried to find famous Azeris with Armenian friends on Facebook. Though many of them make their friends list private, after a brief investigation it has become clear that tens of well-known Azeris are virtual friends with famous Armenian users.

Ironically, both Hovsepyan and Vanyan's reputation as two of arguably only a handful of genuine promoters of peace and tolerance in terms of relations with Azerbaijan isn't mentioned in the article, with the latter also a victim of a recent Facebook smear campaign by nationalists in Armenia.

Regardless, responses to the article from liberal Azerbaijanis on Facebook were ones of alarm, with a prominent journalist calling it “disgusting.” Others considered it as part of an ongoing campaign sanctioned by official circles to discredit the use of Facebook in Azerbaijan, while others simply responded by saying “I'm so ashamed” and “truly pathetic.” Of course, with tensions high between Armenia and Azerbaijan, comments on the article, translated here, were mixed, but some even suggested that Azerbaijani activists and journalists named should be ostracized or ‘punished.'

having read this, i am ashamed for our martyr mothers

why are these people alive? why don’t they go dig their own graves? i used to love that political scientist… i don’t know the rest of them. why do they keep such people at work? let them go work in armenia.

i have no words… they call them legal advocates? if any of them fought with these bastards for Karabakh, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. we used to respect many of these people….

On the other hand, there were other Azerbaijanis who considered the piece to be inexcusable and ‘below the belt.'

shame on you for writing such articles.

it’s really shameful. laughable. you just show how low and backwards you are with such articles.

may god protect us from “patriots” like you. just try to do what Adnan Hajizada has done for this country, then maybe you can discuss the armenians on his friends list. you are not doing anything for your country with this “patriotism”.

so apparently the country has no problems other than this? or you don’t have the courage to talk about the real problems?

The damage, of course, might already have been done even if there has been no other action taken to date. Nevertheless, the apparent intention to discredit them in the eyes of the public remains and was also used against opposition candidates ahead of parliamentary elections held in Azerbaijan last November. Now, on a blog by an activist from the pro-government Ireli Public Union, such tactics continue. In a post entitled “The real face of 11 March” the appearance of 6 Armenian names among 1,745 members ahead of actions planned are highlighted — literally.

And, although the group is an open one, and while several Azerbaijani names had also ‘liked' the Facebook page for the Armenian opposition's own protest held on 1 March, the post ends by stating that no other comments are necessary, with the blogger preferring to instead “leave it up to the reader's conscience.”

Onnik Krikorian is the Caucasus regional editor for Global Voices Online. An earlier shorter version of this post appeared on the Peace & Collaborative Development Network.

Written by Onnik Krikorian · comments (11)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

After reporting the incident to the police, the two activists were instead detained for 48 hours and later placed in pre-trial detention. By the time of their final court hearing on 11 November 2009, Hajizada and Milli had been held in prison for over four months. Local human rights activists expressed concern about the conduct of the trial which eventually ended with a sentence of 2 years in prison for Hajizade and 2.5 years for Emin Milli.

The Presidency of the European Union, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), Human Rights Watch and Reporters Without Borders condemned the verdict. Amnesty International went further, however, by adopting both men as prisoners of conscience.

Despite earlier efforts to have the two men released on parole, in addition to appeals from U.S. President Barack Obama and U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, few of their supporters believed that either would be released before completing their sentences. However, in a surprise development, an appeal court ordered Hajizade's conditional release yesterday while Milli was freed earlier today.

Some international observers believe that their release is an attempt by the Azerbaijani government to deflect international criticism of parliamentary elections held earlier this month. However, on the same day that Hajizade was set free, Baxtiyar Haciyev, an activist and unsuccessful candidate for the controversial vote, was detained for so far unspecified reasons on the border with neighboring Georgia.

Whatever the reason for their release, however, both Hajizade and Milli maintain their innocence, alleging that the initial attack was planned in order to prevent them from continuing with their activities. Both men had staged a mock press conference just weeks before being arrested criticizing planned amendments to the law on NGOs and news that donkeys had been imported into the country for tens of thousands of dollars.

With Hajizade dressed for the clip in a donkey outfit, the two activists soon became known as the ‘donkey bloggers' after their arrest. Using YouTube extensively to disseminate their video materials, when asked by RFE's Azerbaijan service if he will continue to blog, Hajizade's answer was simple. “Yes, yes,” he said as he left the courtroom, despite the conditional nature of both men's release. “Video blogging.“

A summarized chronology of events surrounding the imprisonment of Adnan Hajizade and Emin Milli as well as the campaign for their release can be found in Global Voices' Caucasus 2009 Blog Review.

Emin Milli (left) reunited with Adnan Hajizade (right) after their release this week. Photo via @leylanajafli.

Written by Onnik Krikorian · comments (16)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper

BLOG POST: Extracted from the new report titled Free Expression under Attack: Azerbaijan’s Deteriorating Media Environment.

The report is the result of joint freedom of expression mission undertaken from 7 to 9 September, 2010. The mission representatives met with journalists and bloggers, collected testimonies from survivors of violent attacks, and family members of imprisoned journalists and bloggers, including Hikmet Hajizade, the father of imprisoned blogger Adnan Hajizade. The mission representatives also held meetings with civil society activists and government representatives.

Hikmet Hajizade, the father of imprisoned blogger Adnan Hajizade

The deteriorating freedom of expression situation in the country is the result of a number of worrisome trends, including the continuing practice of imprisoning journalists and bloggers in connection with expressing critical opinions; the enduring cycle of violence against journalists and impunity for those who commit these acts; and the continued existence of criminal defamation provisions in domestic law. These trends are particularly concerning in the context of the upcoming parliamentary elections, set to take place on 7 November 2010.

The mission representatives found that deep pessimism within the media community is somewhat counter-balanced by the energy and enthusiasm prevailing among bloggers and others writing for online media. When the traditional media are under the control of the government or face pressure from the authorities, online media has been filling the void and has been able to ensure interesting coverage of current events.

New media versus traditional media

The place of bloggers and citizen journalists in Azerbaijan is not clear. The head of the Presidential Administration’s Social and Political Department, Ali Hasanov, publically stated that “bloggers are not journalists,” as a way to dismiss international criticism calling for the release of the two jailed bloggers.

Some bloggers with whom the mission met complained about not being recognized as journalists and then not being able to enjoy the rights and social benefits given to journalists. However, a requirement that bloggers register with the Ministry of Justice would present a danger of creating one category of bloggers recognized by the authorities, and another category of “illegal bloggers,” who would become more vulnerable to repression.

Bloggers have indeed encountered problems in trying to access official information since they are not considered to be journalists. But many independent and opposition journalists also face this issue.

A dynamic blogosphere

There was variation among the figures provided to the mission by its interlocutors. According to official figures, one third of the population (2.5 million persons) has access to the Internet. The blogosphere has dramatically expanded during the past three years. Ten thousand bloggers are reported to be active, although it seems that closer to several hundred are influential in the Azerbaijani blogosphere.

A bloggers’ forum, Bloqosfer 2010, was held after the mission was completed, from 10 to 12 September 2010. It was seen as the crowning of the development of the Azerbaijani blogosphere over the past three years, or as a new beginning. According to Elnur Kelbizadeh, it was attended by about 50 bloggers and served as an opportunity for bloggers, new media specialists and other Internet experts, as well as representatives from the industry and civil society to identify as a community and strengthen their links. Representatives of the authorities attended the event. Some bloggers complained that the case of the two imprisoned bloggers was not raised during the forum, but others explained that the social aspect of blogging was stressed over political issues.

Some dialogue has been taking place online between bloggers from Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia. According to one blogger who spoke at an international conference held in Budapest from 20 to 22 September 2010, if something negative happened to bloggers in Azerbaijan, neighboring countries such as Armenia and Georgia could follow suit

Vibrant online media

There was encouraging evidence of a vibrant and growing online media, including Internet television stations such as Obyektiv TV, ANTV, and Kanal 13. Those using digital media to report, campaign and inform displayed an optimism which bodes well for the future. Young people have taken the potential of Web 2.0 by storm. Some of the most popular websites, such as Tac.az, have started to address issues relevant to Azerbaijan’s youth. Havaodsutorpag.com, open.az, contact.az, and irfs.az also have an interesting audience. Facebook has now about 170,000 users in the country, most of whom are 18 to 30 years old. Twitter is less popular, even though the “Green Revolution” in Iran contributed to making it more known in Azerbaijan, according to bloggers who met with the mission.

With the November 2010 parliamentary elections coming up, some Facebook groups and pages have popped up, created by political figures such as political analyst and potential candidate Ilgar Mammadov or Erkin Gedirli, a lawyer whose group has now more than 400 members. Given the lack of media pluralism and problems with access to the media by members of the political opposition, online and social media could provide a new avenue for the government's critics to express themselves.

The nine organisations that participated in the joint mission are members of the International Partnership Group for Azerbaijan, and actively work towards the promotion and protection of human rights. The participating organisations included: ARTICLE 19; Freedom House; Index on Censorship; International Federation of Journalists; Media Diversity Institute; Open Society Foundations; Press Now; Reporters Without Borders; and World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers.

Written by Guest Contributor · comments (0)
Share: facebook · twitter · reddit · StumbleUpon · delicious · Instapaper