azerbaijan – Page 2 – Azerbaijan Internet Watch

Opposition Figure Given 25 Days Administrative Detention

Posted on March 10, 2026March 17, 2026 by aiw_admin

Jeyhun Novruzov, head of the Sabail district branch of the Popular Front Party (AXCP), has been sentenced to 25 days of administrative detention.

According to the party, he was found guilty under:

Article 510 (petty hooliganism)
Article 535.1 (failure to obey police orders)

The AXCP states that Novruzov had criticized traffic police on Facebook four days prior, accusing them of unlawfully fining pedestrians. Novruzov was previously sentenced to 10 days in detention in December 2024 under similar charges, which he denied.

Novruzov is not the first activist to receive penalties for online criticism. Recent months have seen continued cases in Azerbaijan where individuals—particularly opposition activists—have been detained after posting criticism of authorities on Facebook. According to recent reporting by independent Meydan TV, numerous individuals who liked and commented on social media posts critical of the authorities have also faced penalties and charges.

Among them is Movsum Mammadov, who was sentenced to 30 days in prison after posting criticism of local authorities on social media; civic activist Konul Ahmadova, who was sentenced to 10 days in administrative detention; and Mushfig Abbasov, who was sentenced to 15 days in administrative detention.

Analysis of anonymized court decisions published on Azerbaijan’s electronic court portal shows that social media activity—particularly Facebook posts—is frequently referenced in administrative cases. Courts typically describe such activity using generalized phrases such as “sharing content on social networks” or “publishing information online,” while avoiding full quotation of the posts themselves. The content is legally framed as violating public order, often characterized as insulting, immoral, or disruptive. Evidence commonly includes screenshots and data extracted from mobile devices. Rather than prosecuting speech directly, courts tend to apply public-order provisions such as petty hooliganism, effectively translating online expression into administrative offenses.

Blogger Manaf Jalilzade Sentenced to 8 Years in Absentia

Posted on March 6, 2026 by aiw_admin

The story was originally published on Meydan TV. This is a translated and edited version.

The Baku Court for Serious Crimes has sentenced Azerbaijani blogger Manaf Jalilzade — who lives abroad — to 8 years in prison. The verdict was delivered in absentia.

Jalilzade, currently residing in Switzerland, was charged with “calls against the state” under two articles of the Criminal Code: incitement to mass disorder and calls against the constitutional order. Prosecutors alleged he shared footage from a 2019 protest near the UN building in Geneva on YouTube, and between 2023 and 2025, published videos inciting violence against the government.

Switzerland’s Federal Ministry of Justice had previously rejected Azerbaijan’s extradition request, citing risks of torture and denial of a fair trial if he were returned. Jalilzade denies all charges, calling them baseless.

Broader Context

His case is part of a wider pattern. On December 26, 2025, a Baku court sentenced another group of diaspora bloggers in absentia: Gurban Mammadov and Tural Sadiqli each received 14 years, while five others received 9-year sentences. Most of the defendants reject the charges as politically motivated.

In recent years, Azerbaijan has opened criminal cases against numerous bloggers and activists living abroad, with charges typically including incitement to mass unrest, calls to armed uprising, terrorism, and fraud.

Azerbaijan Uses Vague ‘Immorality’ Law to Imprison Critics

Posted on February 23, 2026March 23, 2026 by aiw_admin

Azerbaijan is now actively imprisoning civic activists and government critics under new administrative legislation signed into law by President Ilham Aliyev on 26 January 2026. The amendments, approved by parliament on 15 January, classify ‘immoral activity on social media directed against society and national morality’ as petty hooliganism — a shift from criminal to administrative liability that allows authorities to detain individuals immediately, without a criminal conviction.

On 5 February, activist Movsum Mammadov from the Kurdamir district was sentenced to 30 days in administrative detention for Facebook posts documenting poor living conditions in his community and criticising local authorities’ inaction. Friends reported that his critical posts were deleted from his account shortly after his arrest, and he became unreachable.

Under the new framework, ‘disrespectful actions’ on social media carry fines ranging from ₼50 ($30) to ₼2,000 ($1,200) depending on the circumstances and whether it is a repeat offence, and administrative arrest of up to 30 days, or up to two months for repeat offences.

Human rights lawyers have condemned the legislation as deliberately vague. Yalchin Imanov told OC Media that the broad language violates the principle of legal certainty — a foundational principle of law requiring that rules be clear, unambiguous, and have predictable consequences. He characterised the law as enabling total state control and driving widespread self-censorship. Fariz Namazli added that, unlike the previous criminal framework — which required a guilty verdict and was thus harder to apply swiftly — administrative liability can be imposed immediately, giving the state a far more powerful and instant tool to silence dissent. He noted that the previous law linked petty hooliganism to a breach of public order; the new law replaces this with the undefined concept of ‘manifest contempt for society’.

Movsum was not the only social media user. Also in February, Zeinab Zeinalli, a 25-year-old content creator known online as ‘Koti’ with approximately 300,000 followers, was remanded in custody for eight days after being charged with publishing obscene statements and openly disrespecting society. The Prosecutor General’s Office confirmed the charges. Pro-government outlet Okhu.az reported that Zeinalli’s prior offence — a ₼600 ($350) fine for promoting illegal gambling on Instagram in November 2025 — was a factor in the court’s decision to detain rather than fine her. She admitted in court to having insulted users who criticised her online, expressed remorse, and pledged to change her behaviour.

However, the crackdown on TikTokers predates the new law. According to OC Media reporting, Azerbaijan’s Interior Ministry had detained or summoned over 60 TikTok users in the first three months of 2024 alone for content deemed contrary to moral values, particularly during live broadcasts. At the time, the ministry’s spokesperson could not specify which articles of the administrative code the TikTokers were charged under, reflecting the legal ambiguity that preceded the January amendments.

Among those recently arrested for online content are also TikTokers Sardar Majnunov (Serdar Inanki) and Rena Jafarova (Renka), who were detained on 17 February for allegedly publishing content with ‘obscene expressions or gestures’. Majnunov was sentenced to 20 days in jail, while Jafarova was fined ₼750 ($440), with the court granting her leniency due to having an underage child. In early February, queer TikToker Salman Mammadov, who used his page Velizarofficial primarily to fundraise for sick people and children, was arrested and sentenced to 30 days of detention for ‘promoting immorality’.

Human rights lawyer Fariz Namazli told OC Media that the legislation remains deeply flawed: there are no precise criteria defining what constitutes offensive, immoral, or morality-violating expression, and courts have consistently failed to justify why specific posts are deemed contrary to national values.

Azerbaijani Journalists and Bloggers Under Threat Across Europe

Posted on February 18, 2026February 25, 2026 by aiw_admin

The story was originally published on Meydan TV. The version below is a translated and streamlined version of the original article.

The reach of Azerbaijan’s crackdown has increasingly extended beyond its borders. Journalists, bloggers, and activists living in exile across Europe have reported being surveilled, followed, and threatened — raising alarms about transnational repression.

On February 18, journalist Emin Huseynov published a video from Geneva, saying he had been followed by unknown individuals, just one day after publicly challenging President Aliyev at the Munich Security Conference.

On February 22, blogger Qabil Mammadov reported in a live YouTube broadcast from Europe that two men had been detained near the home of Alemdar Bunyadov, a member of the Muslim Unity Movement in exile, and that weapons had been found in their vehicle. During the same broadcast, blogger Mehman Huseynov — who had published a series of videos about the President’s daughter-in-law, Alyona Aliyeva — stated that he was being followed by a car.

Mehman Huseynov told Meydan TV that after publishing the videos, he began receiving death threats via social media and various online platforms. He said that members of his family in Baku — his father and brother — had been taken to the State Security Service and shown intimate videos of him, in an apparent attempt to intimidate and silence him. “We had already initiated formal procedures in the country where I live, citing a threat to my life,” he said. He also noted that MP Razi Nurullayev had called for his punishment from the floor of the Azerbaijani parliament in December, in connection with his posts about the police.

Journalist and former political prisoner Afgan Mukhtarli, who lives in Germany, told Meydan TV that the Azerbaijani authorities have a documented history of conducting operations against critics abroad. He cited the cases of Rauf Mirqadirov, who was abducted; of Bayram Mammadov, who died in mysterious circumstances in Turkey; of Vugar Rza, who died similarly in Belgium; of Huseyn Bakikhanov, who was openly murdered in Tbilisi; and of Vidadi Isgandarli, who was killed in France. Most recently, he noted, Mohammed Mirzali had survived armed and knife attacks in France. “Taking all this into account, the lives of Azerbaijani political emigrants, bloggers, and journalists are under real threat,” Mukhtarli said.

He named those he believes are currently being targeted: Ganimat Zahid, editor-in-chief of Azadliq newspaper; blogger Qabil Mammadov; journalist Emin Huseynov and his brother Mehman Huseynov; and religious figures Alemdar Bunyadov and Orkhan Agayev.

Mukhtarli urged those receiving threats to report them immediately to the law enforcement and intelligence services of their host countries, to avoid traveling alone, to stay in populated areas, to refrain from going out late at night, and to have their phones checked for spyware and location-tracking software. “Pay very serious attention to personal security,” he warned.

Mehman Huseynov confirmed that German criminal police had placed his home and the surrounding area under surveillance. “I have been assigned protection, and I am not leaving the house,” he said. He added that French, German, and Swiss criminal police are now collaborating to counter transnational crimes targeting Azerbaijani exiles. Ganimat Zahid, living in France, is also said to be under serious threat.

Supreme Court’s Privacy Ruling: Protecting Rights or Silencing Critics?

Posted on February 9, 2026February 25, 2026 by aiw_admin

February 9, 2026 – Azerbaijan’s Supreme Court has adopted a sweeping new resolution on the protection of personality rights, prohibiting the dissemination of information about a person’s private and family life — even when that information is accurate — without their consent.

Under the new rules, individuals may now seek civil remedies on the grounds of privacy violation regardless of whether the information in question is true or false. They can demand moral damages, deletion of the content, a retraction, or an injunction against further publication. Previously, civil action was only possible if the information published was demonstrably false.

The ruling has drawn considerable public attention, not least because it came shortly after blogger Mehman Huseynov published a series of videos about Alyona Aliyeva, the daughter-in-law of President Ilham Aliyev. Critics have questioned whether the timing is coincidental.

Jurist Fariz Namazli told Meydan TV that while the ruling addresses a genuine gap in existing law — there was previously no effective civil remedy for the unauthorized disclosure of true private information — it carries a serious risk of being weaponized against journalists and bloggers. He noted that recent social media posts touching on the private and family lives of public officials had increasingly prompted calls for legal accountability against those who published them.

Jamil Hasanli, chairman of the National Council, was more direct. He described the ruling as part of a broader strategy to curtail freedoms in Azerbaijan, arguing that its practical effect would fall almost exclusively on journalists, bloggers, and those who disseminate information about those in power. He pointed out the deep irony: Azerbaijani authorities themselves have for years gathered, used, and publicized the private information of activists and dissidents — including through the placement of covert surveillance devices in people’s homes — and have used that material as a tool of blackmail and intimidation through state-aligned media outlets. “It appears the authorities will use this law to target journalists and bloggers and restrict the freedom of those working in the information space,” Hasanli said.

Azerbaijan’s Constitution already guarantees privacy under Article 32, prohibiting the collection, storage, use or dissemination of personal information without a person’s consent. Critics argue the new ruling does not strengthen those protections in practice — it primarily creates a new legal instrument that can be turned against those who expose wrongdoing by the powerful.

further restrictions discussed on dissemination of forbidden information

Posted on November 24, 2025December 15, 2025 by aiw_admin

On November 24, a joint online meeting of the Milli Majlis Committees on Legal Policy and State Building and on Human Rights was held.

According to the Parliament’s Press and Public Relations Department, the chair of the Committee on Legal Policy and State Building, Ali Huseynli, stated that the agenda included a single item: a draft law on amendments to the Code of Administrative Offenses and to the Law “On Information, Informatization, and Protection of Information.”

It was noted that the main purpose of the draft law is to protect public morality, in particular to shield adolescents and young people from harmful and unethical information disseminated on social networks, as well as to improve existing legislation by clarifying accountability mechanisms in the online environment.

At the end of the meeting, the draft law was recommended for consideration at the Milli Majlis plenary session in its first reading.

According to the draft, it would be prohibited to post information in publicly accessible information resources that involves actions demonstrating blatant disrespect toward society, the use of obscene expressions, or the display of parts of the human body in a manner contrary to moral norms and national and spiritual values.

It was reported that corresponding amendments would also be made to the Code of Administrative Offenses, imposing relevant penalties.

Independent experts believe that adopting this draft would further tighten the law in question. In their view, in many cases, the cited provisions could be used to curtail freedom of expression artificially.

Previously, a number of amendments were made in Azerbaijan to the Law “On Information, Informatization, and Protection of Information.” Amendments adopted in 2017 granted executive authorities the power to block electronic resources without a court decision. In the same year, the websites of Radio Azadliq (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s Azerbaijani service), Meydan TV, and the Azadliq newspaper were blocked by court order. This was justified by claims that certain materials published on these sites posed a “threat to interests protected by the law of the state and society.” However, during court proceedings, representatives of the outlets stated that the allegations were unfounded.

In subsequent years, this practice continued.

on a mission to spread propaganda

Posted on July 30, 2025 by aiw_admin

The blocking of 3,932 YouTube channels linked to Azerbaijan-backed influence operations by Google’s Threat Analysis Group (TAG) in the first two quarters of 2025 indicates a persistent and significant effort to spread propaganda. These channels were specifically noted for “sharing content in Azerbaijani, supportive of Azerbaijan, and critical of Armenia and critics of the Azerbaijani government.”

This sustained activity points to:

Systematic Information Warfare: The large number of channels suggests a well-organized and extensive campaign, likely state-sponsored or state-aligned, aimed at shaping public opinion both domestically and internationally.
Targeted Narratives: The content’s focus on supporting Azerbaijan while criticizing Armenia and domestic critics indicates a clear agenda to control narratives related to geopolitical conflicts and internal dissent. This aligns with the broader context of the Azerbaijani government’s tightening control over information, as evidenced by recent legislative changes impacting NGOs and media.
Use of Digital Platforms for Influence: YouTube, as a widely accessible platform, is being leveraged to disseminate these narratives, highlighting the importance of social media in modern propaganda efforts.
Google TAG’s Role in Countering Disinformation: Google TAG’s consistent identification and blocking of these channels underscore the ongoing battle between state-backed influence operations and platform efforts to maintain integrity and prevent the spread of harmful or manipulative content. The continuous blocking action suggests an arms race where propagandists attempt to create new channels as old ones are shut down.

In the context of the legislative changes, which aim to restrict independent media and NGOs, the aggressive online propaganda campaigns further demonstrate the Azerbaijani government’s comprehensive approach to controlling information and stifling dissenting voices. The blocking of these channels by Google TAG effectively highlights the digital front of this broader struggle for information control.

Here is a breakdown:

Q1 2025: 1,562 (January) + 787 (February) + 542 (March) = 2,891 channels
Q2 2025: 356 (April) + 457 (May) + 228 (June) = 1,041 channels
Total Azerbaijan-linked channels blocked in Q1 and Q2 2025: 3,932 channels.

Last year, Google TAG identified and took down over 14,000 YouTube channels serving a similar purpose.

government consolidates control over media

Posted on July 30, 2025 by aiw_admin

On July 14, the parliament of Azerbaijan adopted amendments to the already restrictive Law on Media, tightening state control over information and extending censorship capabilities to digital platforms. One of the most significant changes is the expansion of the term “Media Entity” to include the local offices and representative branches of foreign media organizations. These entities are now required to register both with the State Tax Service and with a newly empowered Media Register. Any operation conducted without both forms of registration is explicitly classified as illegal. The registration process is not merely bureaucratic—it forms the legal basis for the state to shut down foreign media operations at will.

In addition to registration requirements, the amended law introduces naming restrictions for media outlets. The names of media entities and their editorial offices must not be identical or similar to those of other outlets, must not mislead users, and must not contain expressions deemed contrary to public order, morality, or ethics. These vague criteria offer the authorities broad discretion to deny registration or shut down operations on subjective grounds.

Perhaps most troubling is the provision banning the publication and dissemination of “false information.” The law does not define what constitutes “false,” giving the authorities the power to interpret and enforce this standard arbitrarily. In Azerbaijan’s legal environment, where courts often side with the state and media freedom is already tightly constrained, this creates enormous risks for journalists, especially those engaged in critical reporting. Content that challenges official narratives can now be punished not because it is untrue, but because it is unwelcome.

Moreover, the law places significant and arguably unattainable demands on news agencies. In order to qualify for legal operation, agencies must have formal agreements with at least twenty other media outlets and employ journalists accredited in a minimum of five foreign countries. These requirements appear less intended to encourage professionalism than to impose exclusionary thresholds that many independent or critical outlets simply cannot meet.

The Media Development Agency, an entity under close government control, has been granted expansive new powers under the amended legal framework. It now has the authority to take measures against content it deems prohibited, including on online platforms. This effectively formalizes internet censorship. The agency can also request the State Tax Service to dissolve foreign media offices that fail to comply with registration requirements or that are found to be operating without an applicable international agreement. Most notably, this process can now be conducted without following the standard legal procedures for dissolving entities laid out in Articles 59 through 61 of the Civil Code. A similar change has been made to the Law on State Registration and State Register of Legal Entities, which now explicitly states that failure to appear in the Media Register—or removal from it—is a valid ground for dissolution.

Key changes include:

Expansion of “Media Entity” definition: Now explicitly includes branches and representative offices of foreign media organizations operating in Azerbaijan.
Registration requirements: Such entities must first register with the State Tax Service (STS) and then apply for inclusion in the Media Register. Operating without both registrations is explicitly prohibited.
Illegal operation penalties:
- Media activity without Media Register inclusion is now defined as illegal.
- Administrative penalties are introduced for the publication or dissemination of print media by entities not listed in the Register.
Naming regulations: Media outlet names must not:
- Resemble or imitate existing media names;
- Contain expressions that contradict public order, morality, or ethics;
- Mislead users.
Prohibition on “false information”: The law prohibits the publication and dissemination of false information, but provides no clear definition of what constitutes “falsehood.” This vagueness opens the door to arbitrary enforcement and censorship.

“Critical reporting could be punished not because it’s false — but because it’s inconvenient,” noted one media analyst.

Operational burdens on news agencies:
- Must maintain agreements with at least 20 media entities;
- Employ journalists accredited in at least five foreign countries;
- Meet minimum content production thresholds.

Critics argue these criteria are unrealistic for most independent or local outlets, and function as gatekeeping tools to limit access to legal operation.

Unprecedented Powers for the Media Development Agency

The Media Development Agency, an entity under close government control, now wields broad new powers:

Can take measures against materials it deems “prohibited”, including online publications;
Has authority to request that the State Tax Service dissolve foreign media branches and representative offices, without following the dissolution procedures outlined in Articles 59–61 of the Civil Code;
Can enforce removal from the State Register of Legal Entities for non-compliant foreign media entities.

Additionally, amendments to the Law on State Registration and State Register of Legal Entities make removal from the Media Register or operation outside of international agreements grounds for forced dissolution.

What These Changes Mean

Media freedom under siege: Foreign and local media are subject to restrictive registration, vague censorship provisions, and harsh penalties. Independent journalism, particularly if critical of the government, faces heightened risk.
Government agencies have unchecked power: The Media Development Agency now acts as a censorship body with legal tools to dismantle non-compliant entities — without judicial oversight.
Azerbaijan drifts further from international norms: These laws contravene constitutional protections and international obligations under the ECHR and undermine any remaining democratic space.

Older posts

Newer posts