- Location of case in SG report
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- Country Geolocation
- Country Geolocation (linked Countries)
- Europe and Central Asia
- Type of record
- Named individual
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- Was the victim a minor?
- Individual's/organization's activity
independent journalist and human rights activist; openly monitor work based upon forced labor.
- Type of rights defended
- Economic/social rights
- Was the victim a civil servant, member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- Reported trigger of reprisal
also signed the complaint to the International Finance Corporation’s Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO) regarding World Bank investments.
- Engagement with UN body
- World Bank
- Dates of engagement
- Type of attempted engagement
- Submission of information to UN
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- 12 September 2017; 6 October 2017; 15 October 2017; November 2017
- Location of mentioned reprisals
- Yaipan; Buka; Pastdargam
- Reprisal information
On 12 September 2017, police in Yaipan, a district of the Fergana region, detained Ms. Urlaeva at the police station where they confiscated her notebook, three mobile phones, camera, and a recording device. When Ms. Eshonkulova came to the station to demand Ms. Urlaeva’s release, she was also detained. Both were released several hours later. Police in Buka detained Ms. Urlaeva again on 6 October 2017. On 15 October 2017, police in Pastdargam district, in the Samarkand region, detained Ms. Urlaeva and Ms. Eshonkulova for six hours. They were taken to the police station where they were interrogated and had their belongings confiscated, including notebooks, mobile phones, and camera flash card. In November 2017, is also alleged that police raided Ms. Eshonkulova’s home and confiscated several of her belongings in a nearly 11-hour search for her computer and cell phone.
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Property damage/raid/search/confiscation
- Detention/Imprisonment: Release within a day
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?