parliament in Azerbaijan is discussing law on hate speech

Parliament in Azerbaijan is set to discuss a draft law on hate speech. While independent critics say there is no need for a separate law, given the existing legal framework that does offer context on hate speech, there is suspicion it is another law with an intention to harm independent voices. 

On September 17, Zahid Oruc, member of the parliament and the head of the Human Rights Committee at the National Parliament, suggested parliament adopts a new law on hate speech. Oruc said the main goal of the law would be to prevent hate speech in information space. While promising, the draft law will be released for public discussion before it goes to the parliament during the fall session, the MP also added the draft law, may consider including social media platforms as part of the information space.

Azerbaijan Internet Watch talked to Elesger Memmedli, a media law expert in Azerbaijan about the draft law. Memmedli thinks there is no need for a separate law on hate speech because Azerbaijan already has plenty of laws that can be amended to regulate hate speech. “What is worrying is the intention. At the moment, the draft law is aimed at political speeches and other instances. But the likelihood of this law to be used as a limiting norm is high.”

The tradition of using existing legal framework or laws against opposition or independent voices goes back to the case of the then opposition journalist Eynulla Fatullayev, explained to Azerbaijan Internet Watch, lawyer Khaled Aghaly. At the time of the sentence [in 20o7] Fatullayev was accused of terrorism, defamation, and incitement to racial hatred. Like Memmedli, Agahly agrees there is no need for a new law when Azerbaijan has Article 283 of the Criminal Code – on Excitation of national, racial, social, or religious hate and hostility.

During the height of the pandemic in Azerbaijan, the parliament introduced a series of amendments to existing laws that were then used to prosecute activists explains Elesger Memmedli. “Shortly after [the amendments] scores of activists were rounded up, including members of [opposition] Popular Front. Some were taken straight from their homes and sentenced to lengthy administrative detention,” recalls Memmedli [some of these arrests were captured here]. 

In 2017, when changes were made to the law on religious terrorism, two prominent members of the Popular Front were arrested relying on the existing legislation, even though it was clear, it was a setup, as neither of the activists had any religious affiliation or background explains Memmedli. 

  • In July, a court convicted Faig Amirli, an APFP member and financial director of the now-closed pro-opposition Azadlig newspaper, on bogus charges of inciting religious hatred and tax-evasion. He received a suspended sentence.
  • In January 2017, a Baku court convicted senior APFP member Fuad Gahramanli to 10 years’ imprisonment for inciting religious and ethnic hatred; he posted criticisms of the government on Facebook.

 

So while hate speech may be a legitimate concern the existing examples tell a different story says Memmedli. 

Meanwhile, Zahid Oruc, vowed the drat law, would not limit the freedom of speech. 

facebook page affiliated with opposition hacked, again

On September 10, the Facebook page that belongs to an online news website bastainfo.com was hacked. Bastainfo.com is affiliated with the opposition party Musavat and is known for often running into problems with the authorities. Its editor was handed a five year suspended sentence in February 2019. The website bastainfo.com remains blocked for access in Azerbaijan. 

In January 2020, Azerbaijan Internet Watch reported how several Musavat party social media accounts were targeted. According to preliminary reports five Facebook pages, one Facebook group, and one website were targeted. 

Bastainfo.com page was targeted then as well. The page lost followers. During last week’s attack, bastainfo.com page lost some 5k followers, and content that was shared since 2017. 

Hacking and compromising Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube accounts (because these are popular platforms used by journalists and activists) is common in Azerbaijan and isn’t new. The online harassment of prominent accounts began several years ago at first, mostly on the level of government-sponsored trolls. Over the years, as the ruling government developed an interest in spyware technology, the types of attacks became more sophisticated while state-sponsored trolling and reliance on automated bots even though still used, became secondary. In each of these cases, finding the perpetrators have not been possible. And in cases when it was clear the attacker was an automated bot/state-sponsored troll the platform took no action. We finally know why. A former Facebook employee, Sophie Zhang, wrote a memo after getting fired from her job at the company revealing how the company dealt with fake accounts and bots. Among the countries, she has worked on and analyzed was Azerbaijan. “Ms. Zhang discovered that the ruling political party in Azerbaijan was also using false accounts to harass opposition figures. She flagged the activity over a year ago, she said, but Facebook’s investigation remains open and officials have not yet taken action over the accounts.” 

government in Azerbaijan threatens activists with interpol, again [update September 14]

On September 8, seven Azerbaijani dissidents who now live in various cities across Europe were targeted by the government of Azerbaijan. In addition to being formally charged with a crime in their absence and arrest warrants issued, the authorities have vowed to ask Interpol for their extradition.

The story goes back to last year when an Azerbaijani blogger, Elvin Isayev was extradited to Azerbaijan from Ukraine. Isayev lived in Russia since 1998 and was known for his critical views of the government. He acquired Russian citizenship in 2001. 19 years later, a court in St. Petersburg ruled to strip him of Russian citizenship and expel him. The following month Isayev moved to Ukraine, after an interim measure of the European Court of Human Rights called “Rule 39” suspended his deportation. Three months later he went missing only to appear in Azerbaijan where the Azerbaijan State Migration Service claimed Isayev was deported, a statement that was later refuted by Ukraine’s State Migration Service which said it never ordered Isayev’s deportation.

Few days after his “arrival” in Azerbaijan, Isayev was charged with calling for mass riots and public incitement against the ruling government. Now, the Prosecutor General office is seeking the deportation of seven men accusing them of the same crimes.

Ordukhan Babirov, Gurban Mammadov, Orkhan Agayev, Rafel Piriyev, Ali Hasanaliyev, Tural Sadigli, and Suleyman Suleymanli have been now charged in their absence. Many of these men are known for their online media activism, managing popular opposition YouTube channels, and for organizing street protests across European capitals in support of political prisoners in Azerbaijan, highlighting human rights violations and other advocacy engagements. One of the targeted men, popular activist, Ordukhan Babirov (known as Ordukhan Temirkhan Babirov) wrote in a Facebook post “[…] how many more times are they are going to give my name to Interpol”.

In an interview with OC-Media Tural Sadigli, activist and editor of Azad Soz [Free Speech] online news platform, said he faced a criminal case in 2019. “I was slighly surprised. They can’t reach us, they cannot stop our activities, so they use such forms of pressure,” Sadigli told OC Media.  

This is not the first time, the government in Azerbaijan is resorting to Interpol. But according to Interpol, “[it] cannot compel the law enforcement authorities in any country to arrest someone who is the subject of a Red Notice. Each member country decides what legal value it gives to a Red Notice and the authority of their law enforcement officers to make arrests.

The persecution against activists at home and abroad is on-going. For years, the ruling Baku tried silencing dissident voices both inside the country through threats, intimidation, and arrests and abroad through public shaming campaigns, and targeting of remaining family members. 

A week ago, a court in Baku sentenced veteran dissident Tofig Yagublu to four years and three months in jail on bogus charges. A campaign calling for his freedom #FreeTofigYagublu and #TofiqYaqubluyaAzadliq was launched and many of the targeted activists mentioned in this story have been rallying behind the campaign. Similarly, a youth activist who is among the organizers of the September 9 rally in support of Yagublu, was also targeted online and blackmailed. 

police “visits” writer’s home during his live stream

Writer Keramet Boyukchol was briefly taken to the police for questioning after an alleged complaint to the police made by his neighbors. Police claimed neighbors complained he was making too much noise. 

Boyukchol is known for his criticism of the authorities on social media and in the numerous interviews, he has done with the media. 

The day he was taken in for questioning, Boyukchol was live on Facebook, raising yet again, the issue of economic difficulties faced by the general public in the country. He was still streaming live when the doorbell rang and he got up to open the door. Seeing the police the writer asked what was the purpose of their visit, to which one of the officers responded, saying his neighbors complained he was making too much noise. 

At some point, one of the officers entered the flat, without Boyukcol’s permission and in the absence of an arrest warrant and stopped Boyukchol from filming the scene. 

According to Boyukchol’s father, in an interview with Azadliq Radio, his son was taken to the police and released the next day without any charges. 

Boyukchol was also targeted online. In June, his Facebook account was compromised. All of his posts (over the last ten years) were deleted. 

activist accused of intentionally spreading coronavirus [updated February 17, March 5]

[Update] On March 5, the Court in Baku sentenced Ibrahim to one year and three months. 

[Update] On February 17, during his hearing, Nijat Ibrahim, once again refuted the claims that he was intentionally spreading the coronavirus when he was arrested in July 2020. “When police arrested me, I was wearing a mask and gloves. Without giving an explanation, they twisted my arms and handcuffed me. After bringing me to the police station, they tested me for Covid 19 and told me I tested positive. If this was really the case, then why did they not isolate my family?” said Ibrahim during the hearing. According to Azadliq Radio, the prosecutor was expected to hand in the final sentence on February 24. Ibrahim is facing up to three years in prison if found guilty.

On July 20, activist Nijat Ibrahim, posted on his Facebook, that he was going to protest outside the Presidential Apparatus in the capital Baku. The main message of his one-man protest was calling on the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev to resign. The activist also said he demands that the government demolish all of the monuments of Haydar Aliyev. 

However, shortly after leaving his home, Ibrahim was detained by the police and charged with Article 139.1.1 of the Criminal Code (Violation of anti-epidemic, sanitary-hygienic, or quarantine regimes) specifically with spreading the virus. On July 21, Ibrahim’s wife, received a phone call informing her, her husband tested positive despite him never taking the testOn July 22, Nasimi district court found Ibrahim guilty and sentenced the activist to three months in pre-trial detention.

On July 28, Ibrahim’s lawyer filed a motion requesting the Center for Dangerous Infections at the Ministry of Health to provide information about the date Ibrahim was tested, and the results were made available to him. The court dismissed the motion.

According to the legislation, Ibrahim is facing 2500-5000AZN [1500-3000USD] fine, jail up to three years, or up to three years of restricted freedoms. 

Scores of political activists have been accused of a similar crime over recent weeks. 

hacking alert: activists and journalists targeted online [ongoing, last update September 10]

Several activists and journalists had their Facebook accounts compromised in recent weeks in Azerbaijan. 

At the end of June, a veteran human rights lawyer, Intigam Aliyev, reported a break-in attempt into his Facebook profile. A few days later, an opposition group D18 reported their Facebook page was compromised. On July 2, journalist Aysel Umudova and activist Rustam Ismayilbeyli received messages from the Facebook platform informing them their passwords were reset. This happened despite the fact, that both users had 2FA enabled on their accounts. On July 6, journalist Fatima Movlamli’s Facebook profile was compromised. Yet again, despite 2FA and secure email service, the account was taken over by unknown users. Finally, on July 14, multiple social media users reported receiving password reset messages even though no such requests were made by the users.  

Targeting social media profiles, and pages, are common in Azerbaijan. In recent years, hacking of prominent accounts has led to mass content removal, loss of followers, and subscribers. On YouTube, account owners of popular channels report their videos are taken down by the platform due to copyright violation reports, have received strikes and in some cases, their accounts were deactivated by the platform. And yet, further investigations, indicate, that these copyright violations are indeed submitted by fake accounts and that the actual cause of the strike is nothing but a fluke.

This type of deliberate targeting limits the work of targeted account owners, whether they are human rights defenders, journalists, media platforms, or political activists. Responding to these digital attacks takes time, it also requires having the right contacts at platforms directly or vis-a-vis third parties. In addition, once the account is compromised the account owner, no longer has access to their platform for outreach, unable to share their work/updates, and face the reality of losing their audience.  

While there is some evidence pointing the attacks originate from the government-affiliated institutions, it’s been virtually impossible to prevent them from happening and keep the online community safe.

On September 10, Nigar Hezi, a political activist, said there was an attempt to compromise her Facebook account.  

former minister detained after posts on social media [updated]

On July 13, Azerbaijan arrested, former Minister of Defense, Rahim Gaziyev on the grounds of incitement against the state and provocation online.

“[…]former Defense Minister Rahim Gaziyev purposefully spread inappropriate news about the events on social media and reasonable suspicions have been found that these acts aimed at weakening its defense capabilities of the Republic of Azerbaijan, provoking people to riots and openly calling for the seizure of state power,” wrote state news agency APA

The 77-year-old retired minister was sentenced to four months in pre-trial detention on July 14.

***

Gaziyev served as the Minister of Defense between 1992-1993. He was then arrested in 1993 and allegedly escaped prison in 1994. In 1995 he was sentenced to death in absentia. He was re-arrested in 1996. Gaziyev was pardoned in 2005.

On September 4, the indictment was changed and Gaziyev was released under house arrest.

the tale of blocked websites [updated June 14, 2024]

[Update] On June 13, 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled, “that Azerbaijan violated an article of the Human Rights Convention that enshrines freedom of speech by shutting down several news outlets between 2017 and 2018.”

The complete text of the ruling is available here

***

In July of last year, in their response to the Government of Azerbaijan, four of the websites that were blocked for access in Azerbaijan in 2017, reiterated their claim that the ban violates their right to freedom of expression. According to EHRAC, this response came following the Government’s [of Azerbaijan] submissions to the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”). 

EHRAC (European Human Rights Advocacy Center) represents four of the websites – Meydan TV, Azadliq Info, Azerbaycan Saadi, and Turan TV and has been working in tandem with local legal partners on the case. 

At the time of blocking these websites in 2017, the Government of Azerbaijan argued “a number of articles published by the four critical news websites included calls aimed at “forcible change of the constitutional order”, “organization of mass riots”, and other illegal activities.” 

In reality, all four websites are considered independent and/or platforms affiliated with opposition parties or their critical position against broader government practices and policies adopted by the ruling government of Azerbaijan. As a result, the decision to block them was based on the legal claims that lacked evidence. This was further reflected in the review process when the decision to block these platforms was implemented. According to EHRAC, “no effective and independent review took place in the first instance decision to block access to the websites in 2017, and in subsequent appeals. The courts simply accepted the authorities’ allegations at face value and made no attempt to adequately consider or explain why the content was unlawful.”

The intentions behind the blocking decision were further reflected in subsequent actions taken by the Government of Azerbaijan against the online platforms. Such that, at the time of the first decision to block these websites for access in 2017, the Azerbaijani Government claimed these websites continued disseminating their content through VPN services or social media platforms and therefore the action taken against them did not cause significant changes to the published content. However, in February 2020, the Ministry of Transportation, Communications and High Technologies “requested the domestic courts to impose a ban on the applicants’ ability to share their content through VPN services and social media platforms.” 

While access to the said websites remains blocked in Azerbaijan further developments signal a consistent pattern of censorship and impunity.

in Azerbaijan a COVID tracing app draws much suspicion over privacy issues [updated]

In July, authorities in Azerbaijan released it’s very own COVID tracing tracker application. Launched by Tebib (Azerbaijan Administration of Regional Medical Division) the app was quick to draw attention, especially over its privacy issues. 

e-Tebib is just one of the deluge of apps that have been unveiled in recent months by various governments, promising to detect COVID-19 exposure and not only. According to this detailed MIT review, some of these apps are “lightweight and temporary, while others are pervasive and invasive” like the Chinese version which attains access to user’s identity, location, online payment history “so that police can watch for those who break quarantine rules”. 

In Azerbaijan, the police were already on the watch, with a mandatory SMS mechanism that required citizens to receive permission slips via SMS before going outside.  So why ask citizens to install an app, that technically does nothing new or does it?

Features and concerns

According to the app’s description, “E-Tebib is designed to inform users in real-time about the number of patients (both sick and recovered) in Azerbaijan.” Currently, the official data is available here and the numbers are updated once a day – based on the numbers reported by the Operational Headquarters set up under the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Azerbaijan (the unit was established on February 27). It is unlikely the app will be providing real-time indicators when the main body in charge only shares the information once a day. 

In addition, article 4.4 in the user agreement of the app, explicitly states that any information, obtained through the app, may not be precise, correct, or trusted. 

And yet, the app also claims to reduce the number of infected patients by informing users of potential COVID infected patients around them via Bluetooth technology. 

Although the app claims it does not collect any personal data aside from user’s phone number the article 5.3 of the license agreement states, the center [the Ministry of Communication, Transportation and High Technologies who owns the app’s license] collects users’ names, last names, phone numbers, social media accounts, emails, national ID numbers, and location. Article 5.4 mentions the center sharing of this information with third parties. These third parties may analyze collected information including users’ browsing history [The center does claim that it does not allow third-parties, to use the obtained information for other purposes]. Article 5.5.1 states the center may share users’ information with government bodies and/or representatives’ legal requests; court orders; or under any other legal condition. Article 5.6 states that users’ information may be shared with third parties in other countries for security purposes. Article 5.10 states that all user-related data is kept for a month. But it fails to explain whether the same expiry date applies to “third parties” that may have accessed users’ information.

The application is developed by A2Z Advisors LLC and the app’s privacy policy is linked to the company’s website. The landing page, however, does not provide any information on the app’s privacy policy. When reached out for a comment, AIW was recommended to send an email which at the time of writing this post remains unanswered. Similarly, in the App Store for IOs when clicking on “App Support” tab, the page once again leads to A2Z company website but does not actually provide any information related to the App. Instead, the privacy policy is accessible via this link that a user can access only after downloading and launching the app. 

According to the app’s version history at App Store, the application was released a month ago. The latest “update” was done 2 days ago [July 7].

The app’s further transparency criticism comes from the fact that it is not an open-source code and its license belongs to the Ministry of Communication, Transportation, and High Technologies. 

The biggest concern – the location of the data storage; the duration of the data storage; and who has access to this data.    

In Azerbaijan however, other concerns have also been voiced – that the application is only available for native speakers and that ex-pats living in the country are unable to use the application. It is also not catered to people with disabilities. 

FaktYoxla, a fact-checking platform in Azerbaijan concluded after a detailed legal analysis over the license agreement that e-Tebib is not designed in accordance with national legislation on data privacy.

On July 10, following widespread privacy concerns and questions over the app’s transparency, changes were made to its terms of the agreement. Originally users’ information was transferred to third parties, which were not explicitly defined in the agreement. At the time, independent experts and lawyers said this was against Article 32 of Azerbaijan’s state constitution and in violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.  Azerbaijan’s constitution, namely, Article 8, stipulates that no one has a right to collect personal information without individual’s permission. The convention, on the other hand, refers to respect to privacy. 

The new license agreement now says that only under necessary circumstances, and within the normative legal framework personal information may be transferred to third parties. The revised agreement, still, fails to explicitly mention the precise list of institutions considered under third parties.

Although this last point was later addressed by Fuad Niftaliyev – the head of the app development project. Niftaliyev explained that the third parties referred to in the agreement are: Ministry of Health, Tebib, and the Operational Headquarters [set up under the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Azerbaijan]. According to Niftaliyev, the collected information is stored on the servers operated by the Ministry of Communication and Information. The last point is itself problematic, as the transparency of government institutions in Azerbaijan is problematic especially as surveillance technology is widely used by the ministries alike. 

For potential users of the app, this remains problematic, especially when there is no option “B” if one disagrees with terms of service.