Vien­na / Bishkek

Free­dom for Eura­sia (FFE) wel­comes the deci­sion of the Bishkek City Court to uphold the acquit­tal of 22 activists, politi­cians, and jour­nal­ists in the Kem­pir-Abad case. This rul­ing con­firms what inter­na­tion­al human rights mech­a­nisms and civ­il soci­ety have con­sis­tent­ly stat­ed: the case was polit­i­cal­ly moti­vat­ed, legal­ly unfound­ed, and aimed at sup­press­ing legit­i­mate civic engagement.

The defen­dants — includ­ing Azim­bek Bek­nazarov, Ravshan Jeen­bekov, Rita Karasar­to­va, Klara Sooronkulo­va, and oth­ers — were detained in Octo­ber 2022 after pub­licly oppos­ing the government’s bor­der agree­ment with Uzbek­istan con­cern­ing the Kem­pir-Abad reser­voir. They faced seri­ous charges, includ­ing orga­niz­ing mass unrest and attempt­ing to seize pow­er, despite the absence of cred­i­ble evidence.

Crit­i­cal­ly, in Opin­ion No. 61/2025, adopt­ed at its 104th ses­sion (10–14 Novem­ber 2025), the UN Work­ing Group on Arbi­trary Deten­tion con­clud­ed that the deten­tion of Klara Sooronkulo­va, Rita Karasar­to­va, Gul­nara Dzhurabaye­va, Asya Sasyk­baye­va, and Per­izat Sura­no­va was arbi­trary under inter­na­tion­al law, falling with­in Cat­e­gories I, II, and III. The Work­ing Group found that:

• The women were detained with­out any legal basis, par­tic­u­lar­ly after their acquit­tal in June 2024;
• Their pros­e­cu­tion stemmed direct­ly from the peace­ful exer­cise of their rights to free­dom of expres­sion, assem­bly, and association;
• Their right to a fair tri­al was vio­lat­ed through closed pro­ceed­ings, denial of access to case mate­ri­als, and pro­longed pre-tri­al deten­tion (approx­i­mate­ly 19 months).

The Work­ing Group fur­ther empha­sized that con­tin­ued restric­tions after acquit­tal — includ­ing house arrest — con­sti­tute a “fla­grant vio­la­tion” of inter­na­tion­al law, as any legal basis for deten­tion ceas­es once a court deter­mines that no crime has occurred.

FFE under­scores that these find­ings are not abstract legal con­clu­sions but author­i­ta­tive deter­mi­na­tions under inter­na­tion­al human rights law, includ­ing vio­la­tions of Arti­cles 3, 9, 19, and 20 of the Uni­ver­sal Dec­la­ra­tion of Human Rights and Arti­cles 9, 14, 19, and 21 of the Inter­na­tion­al Covenant on Civ­il and Polit­i­cal Rights, to which Kyr­gyzs­tan is a party.

The case also reveals a deeply trou­bling pat­tern of “revolv­ing door” or retal­ia­to­ry pros­e­cu­tions, high­light­ed by the re-arrest of Rita Karasar­to­va in April 2025 for shar­ing a let­ter on social media — con­duct clear­ly pro­tect­ed under inter­na­tion­al law. The UN experts found that recy­cling sim­i­lar charges fol­low­ing acquit­tal demon­strates the absence of a gen­uine legal basis and reflects ongo­ing judi­cial harassment.

While the appel­late court’s deci­sion to uphold the acquit­tals is an impor­tant step, it does not rem­e­dy the exten­sive harm caused. The defen­dants endured pro­longed deten­tion, rep­u­ta­tion­al dam­age, restric­tions on their lib­er­ty, and years of legal uncer­tain­ty. Nor does it address the struc­tur­al mis­use of crim­i­nal law to silence dissent.

The Kem­pir-Abad case must be under­stood with­in the broad­er dete­ri­o­ra­tion of civic space in Kyr­gyzs­tan. Once regard­ed as the most polit­i­cal­ly plu­ral­is­tic coun­try in Cen­tral Asia, Kyr­gyzs­tan has wit­nessed increas­ing pres­sure on inde­pen­dent media, civ­il soci­ety, and polit­i­cal crit­ics. The use of vague and over­broad crim­i­nal pro­vi­sions — such as those relat­ed to “mass unrest” and “seizure of pow­er” — con­tin­ues to enable the crim­i­nal­iza­tion of peace­ful civic activity.

Free­dom for Eura­sia calls on the author­i­ties of Kyr­gyzs­tan to:

• Ful­ly imple­ment Opin­ion No. 61/2025 of the UN Work­ing Group on Arbi­trary Detention;
• Imme­di­ate­ly lift all remain­ing restric­tions on the acquit­ted individuals;
• Pro­vide effec­tive reme­dies and com­pen­sa­tion for the vio­la­tions suffered;
• Con­duct an inde­pen­dent inves­ti­ga­tion into the arbi­trary deten­tion and pros­e­cu­tion of the defendants;
• Ensure account­abil­i­ty for offi­cials respon­si­ble for polit­i­cal­ly moti­vat­ed prosecutions;
• Reform leg­is­la­tion and prac­tice to pre­vent the mis­use of crim­i­nal law against peace­ful civic actors.

“The UN deci­sion con­firms what civ­il soci­ety has said from the very begin­ning: these pros­e­cu­tions were not about secu­ri­ty or pub­lic order, but about silenc­ing dis­sent and con­trol­ling pub­lic debate,” said Free­dom for Eura­sia. “The acquit­tals are wel­come, but jus­tice requires account­abil­i­ty, repa­ra­tions, and sys­temic reform.”

FFE fur­ther urges inter­na­tion­al part­ners — includ­ing the Euro­pean Union, the Unit­ed Nations, and OSCE insti­tu­tions — to close­ly mon­i­tor Kyrgyzstan’s com­pli­ance with its inter­na­tion­al oblig­a­tions and the imple­men­ta­tion of the Work­ing Group’s recommendations.

With­out mean­ing­ful account­abil­i­ty and reform, the Kem­pir-Abad case risks becom­ing not a cor­rec­tion of injus­tice, but a prece­dent for its repetition.