Azerbaijan – Remembering a brave journalist

Last Tuesday was exactly five years since the threats hanging over  the head of Azerbaijan’s popular investigative journalist Elmar Huseynov were finally carried out. The 38-year-old Huseynov, founder and chief editor of the weekly journal Monitor, was shot seven times with a silenced pistol in the stairwell of his apartment in capital Baku.

Enquiries into the death of the famous journalist have been condemned as vague and half-hearted — with neither the hit man nor those behind the killing ever brought to trial. The investigation remains unproductive five years after the tragedy, so few Azerbaijanis believe the case will ever be solved. Huseynov’s colleagues and human rights watchdogs say the death was politically motivated and had been contracted to silence his work. The assassination was a decisive slap in the face to an already curtailed media.

Huseynov was the most prominent and outspoken among the few Azerbaijani journalists who dared to write investigative articles. He revealed embedded corruption, lawlessness and power abuse, often involving high-ranking members of the government and close associates of the president.

Monitor stood out from much of the mainstream Azerbaijan media, which continues to remain under total state control. Husneyov also founded the Bakinskiy Bulvar and Bakinskie Vedomosty newspapers, which were known for critical reporting and hard-hitting commentary. Few journalists in the Caucuses are willing to cover politically sensitive topics but Huseynov produced numerous investigative articles at great personal risk, receiving death threats and heavy fines.

The Azerbaijani authorities constantly harassed Huseynov. He faced scores of politicised lawsuits — that could result in imprisonment and / or hefty libel fines —  dozens of threats and bribes, all aimed at stopping his work. On many occasions, the authorities attempted to close down businesses that printed Monitor and confiscated copies of the journal from newsstands. The government repeatedly charged him with defaming the Azerbaijani population, insulting the honour and dignity of government officials, and spreading libellous information.

But this intimidations and harassments did not discourage Huseynov. In one of his interviews, he likened his way of journalism to “guerrilla fighting”. He never shied away from personal risks. He was courageous and tough on the government’s record on human rights abuses.

The assassination of Elmar Huseynov on 2 March 2005 led to international demands for an honest investigation to bring the killers to justice. Then Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Terry Davis, said, “I am shocked by the brutal murder of Elmar Huseynov, which has all the hallmarks of a contract killing and I condemn it in strongest terms”.

The Azerbaijani authorities were quick to deny that the government was connected to this vicious crime. President Ilham Aliyev called the murder a “black spot” on the country’s international image. He assured the family, colleagues and public at large that justice would be done. The death was designated as “terror act” and the investigation mandate was later transferred from the Office of Prosecutor General to the Ministry of the National Security (MNS). Although two ethnic Azerbaijani citizens of Georgia — Tahir Khubanov and Teymuraz Aliyev — were declared to be the prime suspects, their photos and information on their alleged roles are still classified. Georgia refuses to extradite the two men back to Azerbaijan.

Today, the official investigation remains stalled. With the killers at large and no clear evidence of who actually ordered the death, Elmar’s widow Rushana speculates that someone from the government ordered the assassination of her husband. When she published her suspicions she received death threats. Rushana, with her young son, is now a political migrant in Norway.

Azerbaijan continues to record a downtrend trajectory in international freedom indexes, with Reporters Sans Frontiers ranking Azerbaijan 146th out of 175 countries. The state-orchestrated media crackdown ensured that Azerbaijan lags well behind the other two states in Southern Caucasus – Georgia and Armenia. Amnesty International said the opposition journalists in Azerbaijan are “increasingly living under the threat of politically motivated arrests, physical assault and even death”.

The authorities expanded a crackdown on media in early 2009 by banning Azeri language service of the Radio Liberty, Voice of America and BBC radios in local frequencies. These radio outlets were the only stations offering a range of political views, dissenting voices and alternative information to the Azerbaijan society. At present, Eynulla Fatullayev and Ganimat Zahid, chief editors of country’s two prominent opposition papers are kept behind the bars on politically-motivated charges. The arrest of Emin Milli and Adnan Hajizade, two well-known youth activists and bloggers, has further limited the space for free expression. Their jailing sent a chilling message to those who use social media and are critical of the government. [Mili and Hajizade are on the shortlist for Index’s on Censorship’s Freedom of Expression Awards 2010]

The government’s targeting of critics and its failure to solve the murder of Elmar Huseynov shows how far the country is from being a democracy with a working independent judiciary and real political will. At stake is not only the declining media freedom, but also the lives of Azerbaijan’s determined journalists.

Turkish editor faces jail for insulting president

Baris Yarkadas, editor of online newspaper Gercek Gündem, faces five years in jail for failing to remove a comment posted on his website insulting President Gül. The comment, written by an anonymous reader, accused President Gül of allowing his Armenian counter-part to defy him, and of bringing shame upon Turkey. Yarkadas is also charged with insulting the head of the Turkey’s Institute for Forensic Medicine by reporting allegations brought about by human rights NGOs.

Press Roundup: Turkish newspapers on US genocide vote

How do the Turk’s view Congress’s resolution? Jennifer Amur examines the outrage and anger

A relatively minor victory in the US Congress for Armenians who claim that 1.5 million of their ancestors were killed by the Ottoman Empire in 1915 triggered indignant headlines across Turkish media Friday.

For years, Armenia and the Armenian diaspora have been lobbying Washington to recognise the deaths as genocide, a move they believe will force Turkey into recognising the massacre and, some say, paying reparations with money and land in eastern Anatolia.

The panel vote by the Committee on Foreign Affairs has few if any practical implications, but it caused a backlash from Turkey, which said the result dealt a deathblow to its ongoing normalization process with Armenia.

Turkish newspaper headlines after the vote reflected a predictable outrage; Turkey has long denied that genocide occurred, arguing instead that both Turks and Armenians were killed in civil strife during the last days of the Ottoman Empire.

Daily Hürriyet, one of the country’s largest newspapers, led with news that Turkey recalled its ambassador for consultations immediately after the vote. Before the vote, the Turkish foreign ministry had warned that everything was “on the table,” including recalling the ambassador and cutting back in Afghanistan.

Ambassador Namık Tan’s recall made headlines in several of the country’s dailies, but Milliyet went further, with views from experts who compared the situation to Russia’s recognition of the genocide.

After Russia recognised the genocide in the 1990s, Turkey continued to develop bilateral relations, and ties grew in the following years. The experts in the Milliyet story asked why the ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP, couldn’t respond similarly to the United States, which often cites Turkey, a NATO member, as an important ally in the Middle East. The US maintains an Air Force base in a Turkish city near Iraq, and Turkey has mediated peace talks between Syria and Israel.

Daily Vatan took a different approach, focusing instead on committee Chairman Howard Berman, who was very vocal in his support for the resolution, and his influence on the vote. The story alleged that the chairman ruled to extend the voting time in order to sway the result.

Other newspapers blamed the result on the Obama administration, which just a few minutes before the session advised the panel to take no action on the resolution. Several dailies asserted the administration was too late and too weak in its opposition.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Friday that the vote was not aligned with the administration’s policy of not intervening in the countries’ negotiations. Part of the plan to establish diplomatic ties is the creation of an expert commission to investigate the genocide claims, but this and several other parts of plan have been criticized by those who say impartiality by “experts” endorsed by either country on this issue is next to impossible.

Jennifer Amur is a Web editor at the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review in Istanbul