Tag: azerbaijan

questioning over social media posts critical of government measures raise concern [updated August 3]

Posted on by aiw_admin

The questioning of political activist Ruslan Izzatli, on July 28 over his social media post renewed concerns over government oversight of social media platforms and its non-transparent approach to cherry-picking issues that it deems unfit for public discussion.

Izzatli was not the first person to receive a call from the Prosecutor General’s Office last month inviting him for a meeting. In an interview with one media platform, Izzatli explained that the prosecutor’s office refused to explain the reason for the meeting over the phone and asked that the political activist comes in person. 

During the meeting that took place on July 28, Izzatli was asked questions about a Facebook post in which the political activist shared some of the grievances of war veterans and servicemen since the second Karabakh war. He criticized the state for lack of measures in addressing these issues. “If Aliyev’s team can visit returned territories today it is because of the servicemen and war veterans. But their problems remain unaddressed,” wrote Izzatli in the said post.   

Izzatli was also asked whether he had evidence for the claims made in the post and why the political activist wrote the post in the first place. The political activist also said he received a verbal warning.

Separately, on July 30, the General Prosecutor’s Office said it has warned seven other users over their public posts shared on social media. The Prosecutor’s Office in a statement said the users were warned after the Prosecutor’s Office identified a violation of the Law on Media. Specifically the statement said, 

During monitoring, it was identified that during the publication of news in media, provisions of Article 14.1.11 of the Law on Media were not observed [Facts and events must be presented impartially and objectively, and one-sidedness must not be allowed]. 

In order to prevent cases of violation of socio-political stability, human and citizen rights and freedoms, a number of relevant persons were invited to the Prosecutor General’s Office and the prosecutor took measures. 

As such, Sakhavat Mammadov, Rovshan Mammadov, Zulfugar Alasgarov, Elgun Rahimov, Fuzuli Kahramani, Zeynal Bakhshiyev and Ruslan Izzetli received a warning based on Article 22 of the Law on Prosecutor – to avoid cimilar negative incidents from taking place again.

The General Prosecutor’s Office repeats, in its appeal to media and social network users, that dissemination of unverified information that lacks clarificaition from the state institutions is unacceptable and holds one accountable according to existing legislation. 

According to Alasgar Mammadli, a media law expert, Article 14 of the Law on Media, applies to journalists, newsrooms, and online news sites. But the majority of the men summoned to the Prosecutor’s Office this time were not journalists Alasgarli told Turan News Agency in an interview. The cited Article 14, cannot be used against individuals for expressing their thoughts. This is clearly an attempt to restrict freedom of expression said Mammadli. Journalist Sakhavat Mammadov who was among the group who received a warning agrees. Speaking with Turan News Agency on August 3, Mammadli said, that the warnings and questioning are meant to pressure activists and journalists and are clearly political orders. “Instead of calming people down, these incidents only raise tension and cause opposite effects. It shows there is an attempt to withhold information from the people, which only breeds rumors and disinformation.” 

AIW has analyzed the Law on Media and its implications on media freedom in Azerbaijan here. Among key findings were poorly worded definitions and excessive requirements and restrictions for online media content [see below Article 14 as an example]; challenging parameters of registration of journalists, especially those working for online media outlets and freelance journalists; and lack of oversight and checks and balances to monitor decisions taken within the scope of the new law. 

Article 14 of the Media Law requires that information published and (or) disseminated in the media (including online media) must meet at least 14 requirements. The law also requires that content published by media outlets should meet the requirements of the Law on Protection of Children from Harmful Information and the Law on Information, Informatization and Protection of Information which provides an exhaustive list of requirements criticized for vagueness.

For instance, Article 14.1.6. of the law prohibiting media from using “immoral lexical (swearing) words and expressions, gestures” contradicts the requirements of the European Court of Human Rights standards as “prescribed by law” on the account that it lacks sufficient clarity and precision. The article also does not comply with a standard, “necessary in a democratic society,” “found in Articles 8-11 of the European Convention on Human Rights which provides that the state may impose restrictions of these rights only if such restrictions are ‘necessary in a democratic society’ and proportional to the legitimate aims enumerated in each article.”  The text authorizes the authorities to consider any impugned statement or general criticism as an “immoral lexical (swearing) words of expressions”. With such a broad definition, this requirement has a chilling effect on journalists.

Article 14.1.11 of the law reads, “facts and events must be interpreted impartially and objectively, and one-sidedness must not be allowed.” A duty to impartial and accurate reporting and one-sidedness is likely to result in journalists refraining from exercising their right to freedom of expression without self-censorship. A failure of this requirement subjects the journalist to heavy sanctions. Furthermore, taking into account the existing political atmosphere in the country, such broadly defined restrictions can prevent journalists and other professionals working for online media from staying impartial without any interference.

Article 14.1.14  concerns published content according to which, “publication (dissemination) of information about the crime committed by a person in the absence of a court order that has entered into force should not be allowed.” Such a direct ban in general form could limit the freedom of expression, in particular, where certain cases are widely covered in the media on account of the seriousness of the facts and the individuals. The journalist also can be subject to disproportionate sanctions for publication or dissemination of information, which is already known to people, for instance in case of scandalous news about the corruption of officials. This clause heavily limits the primary duty of ensuring diversity and plurality of voices in the media.

Any imposed restrictions must meet the requirements as prescribed by law pursuant of legitimate aims (allowed by the international human rights law), necessary in a democratic society, such as proportionality, and non-discrimination.

In May, AIW looked into content regulation on the internet carried out by the Prosecutor’s office and how the measures in place, silence free speech often relying on the use of a restrictive law on Information, Informatization, and Protection of Information. This legal overview was prepared following an uptick of cases in which social media users faced punitive measures for their online activism by the Prosecutor’s Office. At the time, the analysis concluded that the Prosecutor General Office has taken on a temporary role of taking measures against activists, journalists, and media within the scope of laws on information and media and with the powers vested in the prosecutor’s office under the existing legislation on administrative offenses and the law of the prosecutor’s office. 

The day Ruslan Izzatli was questioned, Azerbaijan’s Press Council – nominally independent media regulation authority – held a press conference. Speaking at the briefing, the chairman of the Council Aflatun Amashov, expressed his concerns over circulating social media posts damaging the reputation of the Azerbaijani military. As such, the chairman said the council is ready to offer its recommendations on creating a legal framework to regulate social media platforms in Azerbaijan.

Speaking to Meydan TV, media law expert Khalid Aghaliyev said, the council’s proposal to regulate social media platforms is likely linked to the state’s intentions in having social media platforms open representatives in Azerbaijan and then use these representatives to further consolidate control mechanisms over social media platforms.   

two website editors, and three social media users questioned over “disseminating forbidden information on the internet” [updated August 8]

Posted on by aiw_admin

[UPDATE] By August 8, four more citizens were called in for questioning over their social media posts about the military operations in Azerbaijan reported Qaynarinfo.az. Rustam Ismayilbeyli, Farid Huseynov, Elmar Mammadov, Gulay Eyvazova were all invited to the Prosecutor’s Office where all four received a warning. Ismayilbeyli, who is a political activist, wrote on his Facebook, that he was questioned on August 4, specifically over a Facebook post in which he mentions a quote by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. “I was questioned because of the quote by Ataturk, in which he said, ‘so long as the nation’s freedom is not under threat, starting a war is a crime.’ The Prosecutor’s Office concluded that the quote was a threat to national security,” wrote Ismayilbeyli. In a separate case, journalist Sakha

On July 27, according to Turan News Agency reporting, editors of two news sites, Fikret Ibishbeyli (Faramazoglu) and Agil Alishov were questioned by the General Prosecutor’s office. Ibishbeyli is the founder of jamaz.info and Alishov manages the website miq.az. In addition, according to the agency’s reporting, three social media users were also questioned. One of them, a man named Tofig Shakhmuradov, known as a blogger covering military news was sentenced to 30 days in administrative detention for “posting of information prohibited from dissemination on the telecommunication network, as well as failure to prevent the posting of such information” on Facebook.

Ibishbeyli, was most recently fined in January of this year, on the same charges, “disseminating forbidden information on the internet.” The journalist was fined a total amount of AZN500 [USD295] following a court decision. At the time, the Prosecutor General alleged that an article published on the jamaz.info website caused confusion and fear. 

In May, AIW published a legal analysis on who regulates content on the Internet in Azerbaijan. Based on that analysis, AIW specifically looked at how the Prosecutor’s Office was involved in this process and on what grounds. Currently, two laws regulate what constitutes prohibited information on the internet and the liability for violating these requirements. These are the Law on Information, Informatization, and Protection of Information, which defines the requirements and responsibilities for individuals; and the Law on Media, which defines the (almost) similar and additional requirements and responsibilities for journalists and media.

In addition, the presidential decree dated February 22, 2022, instructed the Ministry of Justice to prepare and submit a draft law on measures for violating information and media legislation on the internet to the government within a month. The law is yet to be adopted and concerns over its text and procedural implementation give ground to worry for a new restrictive law to be adopted not to mention its implications to further stifle free speech online.

Until then, an uptick in recent months, of cases in which social media users have faced punitive measures for their online activism indicates that the Prosecutor General Office has taken on a temporary role of taking measures against activists, journalists and media within the scope of laws on information and media. The prosecutor’s office argues that the official warnings issued by the institution are a precautionary measure for violating existing laws. However as it has been pointed out by the local human rights lawyers and experts, while the prosecutor’s office may be relying on existing bills on Information, Informatization, and Protection of Information as well as the Media, their measures can also be defined within the scope of additional articles of the Criminal Code. Therefore, say experts, the legality of these acts is questionable.

It is still not clear what constitutes “prohibited information”

According to the Law on Information, and Media, while there are general parameters of what prohibited information is, the definitions are rather broad and as such open to interpretation. 

In the case of two editors who received a warning on July 27, the prosecutor’s office claims both websites, published articles that cast a shadow on the country’s Armed Forces. Which articles specifically, however, is not clear. In the case of the social media users, there is no information on what posts specifically were the cause for questioning and subsequent detention of one of the users. In AIW’s legal analysis published in May, we reviewed a number of reported examples where social media users and journalists were warned or received administrative detention over publishing content. In neither of them, there was sufficient evidence to claim violations of the law did indeed occur.

In a Facebook post, media law expert, Alasgar Ahmedoglu wrote if Shahmuradov was sentenced on the grounds of spreading information prohibited by law then the information law enforcement found in violation of the law must be clearly shared as well. “If the prosecutor’s office has found a legal basis for restricting an individual’s freedom of information, it must clearly indicate the date on which the person disseminated that information, what the prohibited information in that disseminated information, and by which specific law the dissemination of that information is prohibited […] A person’s constitutional right cannot be so grossly restricted by merely stating in general terms “prohibited by law,” wrote Ahmedoglu. The expert pointed out, that while applying provisions of existing laws as punitive measures, the General Prosecutor’s Office must also take into account Articles 47 (freedom of thought and speech), and 50 (freedom to lawfully seek, obtain, transmit and disseminate information) of the Constitution of Azerbaijan.   

 

a court in Azerbaijan jails the host of a YouTube show [Updated January, 2023]

Posted on by aiw_admin

[Update] According to local media reports, Gafarov suffered a clinical death on December 22, 2022, while receiving treatment in a medical facility of the prison service. However, instead of keeping him at the medical facility, the prison management decided to transfer Gafarov back to prison. 

Abid Gafarov, was sentenced to one year in prison on charges of insult and slander by a court in Baku. Speaking to the media after the verdict, Gafarov’s lawyer, Elchind Sadigov, said the charges leveled against his client were bogus. Gafarov, hosted a YouTube channel Kim.TV [Who is?]. He is also known for his coverage of the “Terter case” – a “notorious case in which dozens of military officers accused of spying for Armenia were tortured.”

Gafarov, is the second person to be targeted in the last two months who have been previously involved in coverage of the Terter Case. On June 10, lawyer and activist Ilham Aslanoglu was sentenced to six months in prison on insult charges 

According to local media reports, Gafarov was arrested based on complaints by a group of war veterans who felt insulted after Gafarov said during one of his shows, that the veterans were acting “obediently” instead of standing up for their rights. 

The sentence was handed despite the group of veterans later withdrawing their complaint against Gafarov reported the news site Jam-News, “Veterans of the war, officially recognized as plaintiffs, wrote a corresponding statement about the withdrawal of the claim. Despite this, Judge Tarlan Akperov, who was in charge of this case, decided to refer the case to the Yasamal District Court.”

On July 16, a group of rights defenders issued a statement condemning Gafarov’s arrest. 

in Azerbaijan rape survivor continues to face harassment online by the perpetrator

Posted on by aiw_admin

Asgar Agazade was arrested last year following an accusation by a rape survivor. His victim, is an activist, Sanay Yagmur. Agazade has denied the accusation from the start however, seven months into the ongoing investigation and the trial, he is now facing a possible seven-year prison term. In addition, new evidence based on Agazade’s own statement now reveals that the perpetrator continued harassing and threatening Yagmur online.

The new evidence emerged during the hearing on June 22, in which, Agazade confessed hacking Yaghmur’s email address and obtaining private information about her travel itinerary which his family then used to target the activist on social media platforms and leaking the false information to local media with the goal of humiliating and further threatening the activist. The perpetrator’s family, alleged Yaghmur was lying about her studies abroad [Yaghmur left for her master’s degree last fall.] 

Lawyer Zibeyde Sadigova, who represents Yagmur, said unlawfully obtaining personal information, and spreading it, is a criminal act in itself. However, no further steps have been taken to investigate this criminal act. 

Some, including Yagmur’s family, suspect that the perpetrator was not acting alone in hacking into Yagmur’s email and obtaining private flight information and that the State Security Services was on the case as well. 

In a separate blackmail attempt, the perpetrator’s family alleged in an interview with a website Axar.az that Yagmur lived in Istanbul and was married to a woman. The claim was later retracted by the perpetrator’s sister in an interview aired on the YouTube show “Let’s talk straight.” 

one man threatens to behead LGBTQI+ community members in a TikTok video

Posted on by aiw_admin

A man named Roman Mammadov, 39, in a video he shared on TikTok, threatened to behead men who behaved like women. The video that was circulated on social media, alarmed LGBTQ+ activists in Azerbaijan who demanded the Ministry of Interior take action. Eventually, Mammadov was detained. According to the officials, the investigation is ongoing.

According to reporting by Azerbaijan service for Voice of America, the video was filmed at one of the Baku subway stations. In the video, the man appeared to be holding a tool, resembling an ax wrapped in a bag.

Such threats are not surprising in a country where there is no legislation protecting the rights of the LGBTQ+ community and an environment of impunity said activists in interviews with Voice of America. The most recent example is that of Avaz Hafizli, journalist and LGBTQ+ rights activist who was personally targeted by Azerbaijani blogger Sevinj Huseynova. Huseynova openly made homophobic incitements targeting other members of LGBTQ+ community in the past but no measures were taken against the blogger despite criticism by local activists. Hafizli, was brutally murdered as a result of this targeting by a family member in February 2022.

In a Facebook comment, feminist activist Gulnara Mehdiyeva wrote she was personally told by the State Security Services that they don’t take interest in threats leveled against LGBTQ+ because there is nothing in the national legislation about them. “Maybe, the Ministry of the Interior is also going to say, that the man with an ax did not threaten anyone, because LGBTQ+ people are not considered humans.”

Speaking to Voice of America, lawyer Samad Rahimli said, “the criminal legislation of the Republic of Azerbaijan does not contain references to hatred as a separate provision in an aggravating circumstance of murder or an aggravating circumstance of harming health. Therefore, committing a crime motivated by hatred cannot be described as an aggravating circumstance in Azerbaijan.”

Javid Nabiyev, an LGBTQ+ activist from Azerbaijan, shared the video of the man making the threat on Facebook and demanded authorities take action tagging both the Ministry of the Interior and the Ombudsman office. “I came across this video on Instagram. Although it was shared today, it is unclear when it was taken. But it is certain that right now, a man with an ax in his hand, walking around the city, and threatening to behead anyone he spots who have their eyebrows done and behaves like a woman [in the video, the man swears to God he would do that]. I am out of words. To the attention of the Ministry of the Interior, you have to find this person immediately before another hate crime takes place. You were powerless to take measures against blogger Sevinj who shared the same mindset. I hope this time you won’t say, “we can’t do anything because the law doesn’t mention LGBTQ+ people.”

Voice of America reports that the man was detained and that criminal proceedings have been initiated.

According to ILGA Europe, an international non-governmental organization advocating for LGBTQ+ rights and freedoms, Azerbaijan occupies the last place among 49 countries on the organization’s Rainbow Index. The community is not only targeted by homophobic narratives of the likes of Huseynova and Mammadov but also the state itself. In recent years, the authorities too have consistently targeted LGBTQ+ community with arrests, torture, and blackmail.

political activist and blogger detained

Posted on by aiw_admin

On June 23, Elchin Ibrahimli, a member of an opposition party was detained according to local news reports. He was sentenced to 30 days in administrative detention the following day, said members of the party. According  to reports, the activist allegedly resisted police and as a result was sentenced on charges of resisting the police according to the Code of Administrative Offenses, Article 535. 

In a statement issued by the Ministry of the Interior, the blogger is said to have failed to show up in person at the police station despite numerous invitations. 

According to Azadliq Radio, Azerbaijan Service for Radio Liberty, Ibrahimli was arrested from his home. Speaking to the radio, Faig Jafarzade, the party regional head, said Ibrahimli is an active social media user and that his arrest is rooted in his political activism.  

activist and lawyer Ilham Aslanoglu arrested

Posted on by aiw_admin

On June 10, lawyer and activist Ilham Aslanoglu was sentenced to six months in prison on insult charges according to reporting by Turan News Agency. Aslanoglu is known for his public investigation of the Terter case – a “notorious case in which dozens of military officers accused of spying for Armenia were tortured.”

Aslanoglu’s lawyer speaking to Turan News Agency said the court found his client guilty based on a complaint filed on April 22 by Egyana Alekperova, who felt she was insulted while watching Aslanoglu’s video on YouTube channel AzerFreedom TV  about the Terter Case.

According to the Caucasian Knot website, this is Aslanoglu’s second sentence in one year on similar charges. The lawyer was sentenced to five months in January 2022 on charges of slander. Aslanoglu was released in March following the ruling by the court of appeal.

Aslanoglu’s lawyer told Caucasian Knot there were no alleged insults in the video. Aslanoglu was a guest on the show and therefore, was not responsible for comments made by other participants of the show, explained the lawyer.

Azerbaijan blocks RIA Novosti – Russian language state news website – citing violation of the national law [Updated June 13]

Posted on by aiw_admin

The Ministry of Digital Development and Transport blocked access to the Russian state-owned RIA-Novosti news site on June 3, according to reports by Azerbaijani media. In a statement issued the following day, June 4, the Ministry said the decision to block the Russian news website was a result of the news site running a story that was of defamatory nature against Azerbaijan.

According to Turan News Agency reporting, the Ministry statement said, “RIA Novosti violated Azerbaijani law On Information, Information, and Protection of Information.” Specifically, the statement was referring to an interview published by RIA Novosti with Artak Beglaryan, the Minister of State of the disputed territory of Karabakh. In response, Azerbaijan Foreign Ministry accused Russia of “spreading slanderous information against the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and promoting separatism” and violating “the 1997 Agreement on Friendship, Security, and Strategic Partnership between Azerbaijan and Russia, as well as the 2022 Declaration on Allied Cooperation, which requires both countries ‘to refrain from any activity directed against the principles of the UN Charter and each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,’ as well as ‘counter the threats of separatism’.”

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, both Russia and Azerbaijan have blocked or discussed blocking each other’s news sites. At the time of writing this post, at least six Azerbaijan news sites are currently blocked by the Russian internet regulator– Roskomnadzor. 

According to Article 13.3.3 of the law on Information, Informatization, and Protection of Information, in cases of existence of a real threat to the lawful interests of the state and society or in urgent cases when there is a risk to the life or health of people, the access to internet information resource is temporarily restricted directly by the Ministry of Transport, Communications and High Technologies [former name of the Ministry of Digital Development and Transport]. This restriction is applied without a court order. 

Who regulates content online in Azerbaijan? Legal analysis

exiled blogger says his life is in danger [updated June 3, 2022]

Posted on by aiw_admin

Tural Sadigli is an Azerbaijani blogger and political activist living in exile. He is the managing editor of a YouTube channel, Azad Soz – Free Word. According to Sadigli, his life is in danger as per Facebook posts, Sadigli shared on May 29 and 31 respectively.

Attention. There is a four-man squad sent to kill me in Germany. Somehow the squad acquired my home address in Germany and have been watching the house for the last week. They have been caught on security cameras. They were sent during Ilham Aliyev’s visit to Brussels. They must have thought that I will travel to Brussels from London and visit my apartment in Germany on the way. And catch me then. [German] Police already know their identities and two of them were checked by the police. Investigations continue. It is possible that they have already left [Germany].

I assure you that my life is in danger. They are really on to me this time. The order has come from the Presidential Apparatus. This is why, my parents, who both live in Baku will be staging a protest outside of the Presidential Apparatus at 14.00pm. I ask political parties, rights defenders, activists, journalists and everyone else, to come to their support.

In an interview with Meydan TV, the political activist said, it was his work exposing the extent of government corruption and specifically that of the ruling family that is the reason behind the targeting. “There is yet a journalist, or blogger, who has visited the home of the president abroad, knocked on its door and showed the audience in Azerbaijan the properties bought on their money.” The blogger also told Meydan TV that he was warned numerous times not to talk about Mehriban Aliyeva [the wife, and first Vice President] and her team. “They even tried to buy my silence, promising a monthly salary, as long as I did not touch the president and his family,” Sadigli told Meydan TV. 

This is not the first time Sadigli is threatened. Two years ago Sadigli was charged in absentia and authorities vowed to ask Interpol for his extradition. He was among a number of other activists targeted at the time. 

In addition to physical threats, Azad Soz, the YouTube vlog managed by Sadigli has also been targeted. In February of this year, AzNet Watch assisted AzadSoz to restore access to several videos that were taken off from YouTube in the absence of any explanation, and likely as a result of fake “complaints.” All of the videos were about SOCAR – the state oil company, its former president Rovnaq Abdullayev and his cousin Anar Alizada. The videos explain how Azad Soz discovered in their investigations that Anar Alizade owned a fake Turkish passport by another name. At the time of takedowns, Sadigli, told AzNet Watch that the only notification that he received from YouTube was an email telling him he was subject to NetzDG Appeals and that in all likelihood, it was the state oil company and Anar Alizada behind these requests.

Similar removals took place on the channel’s Facebook page. In both cases, the videos were restored following the intervention of a third party on behalf of AzadSoz. 

But the targeting did not stop there. According to Sadigli, the Facebook page was targeted again in April. “They [government sponsored trolls and actors] are studying old pictures, trying to identify violence that could be then reported by hundreds of fake accounts to Facebook as community guideline violations,” wrote the blogger on his Facebook on April 5.

Last month, in May, Azad Soz’s TikTok account was targeted as well. The account was shut down by the platform according to Sadigli. “You can shut them down, but we will open new ones. You won’t succeed at silencing Azad Soz [Free Word],” wrote Sadigli on Facebook. Previously AzadSoz was the target of inauthentic accounts on Facebook. The Guardian published this story explaining how Azad Soz’s Facebook account was flooded with over 1.5k comments over a post about two men sentenced to eight months. The Guardian investigation analyzed the top 300 comments and discovers that 294 out of 300 comments were inauthentic Facebook pages.

In 2018, Tural Sadigli, was among exiled political activists involved in a political campaign, called “Know Your Dictator.“

activist exposing fake accounts on social media arrested, facing up to 12 years behind bars [with updates]

Posted on by aiw_admin

Razi Alishov was detained on May 28 in the city of Ganja. Two days later, the political activist and member of the opposition Popular Front party, was charged with Article 234.2 of the Criminal Code [Illegal purchase or storage with a view of selling, manufacturing, processing, transportation, transfer or selling of narcotics or psychotropic substances] and sentenced to two months in pretrial detention. 

The opposition Popular Front party considers the detention and the grounds for Alishov’s arrest, political. According to the party, Alishov often exposed fake social media accounts deployed by the state, targeting the party, reported Turan News Agency on May 30. The activist also often identified stolen or hijacked social media accounts of opposition activists.  

While the Ministry of the Interior has confirmed the arrest of the political activist, it has denied that the motives behind the arrest are political. Noting the party member’s arrest, the leader of the Popular Front, Ali Karimli said the arrest was part of the rotating door policy referring to a number of recently released political prisoners and the need to “fill out the emptied spots in prisons.” 

On May 27, President Ilham Aliyev signed a presidential pardon decree. Among 168 prisoners released were also several political prisoners, reported Meydan TV.

On June 2, the appeal court in the city of Ganja reviewed Alishov’s complaint appeal where the activist was informed that the original charge of drug possession was aggravated to Articles 234.4.1 and 234.4.3 of the Criminal Code [Manufacturing, purchase, storage, transfer, transportation or selling the drug by a group of persons or organized group with a view of illegal manufacturing and processing of narcotics or psychotropic substances].

Relevant articles of the penal code: 

Article 234. Illegal manufacturing, purchase, storage, transportation, transfer, or selling of narcotics, psychotropic substances;

234.1. Illegal purchase or storage without a purpose of selling of narcotics or psychotropic substances in a quantity (amount) exceeding necessary for personal consumption – is punished by imprisonment for a term up to three years.

234.2. Illegal purchase or storage with a view of selling, manufacturing, processing, transportation, transfer, or selling of narcotics or psychotropic substances – is punished by imprisonment for a term from three up to seven years with confiscation of property or without it.

234.3. Manufacturing, purchase, storage, transfer, transportation, or selling drugs with a view to illegal manufacturing and processing of narcotics or psychotropic substances – is punished by imprisonment for a term up to three years with confiscation of property or without it.

234.4. The acts provided by articles 234.2 and 234.3 of the present Code, committed:

234.4.1. on preliminary arrangement by group of persons or organized group;

234.4.2. repeatedly;

234.4.3. in large amount – is punished by imprisonment for the term from five up to twelve years with confiscation of property.