Political conflictologu

Ospanova A.N., Ph.D

Anel Abdrakhmanova

Postgraduate student 2 course,

Regional Studies Departament,

International Relations Faculty,

L.N.Gumilyov Eurasian National University

Astana

Case study Non–international armed conflict in Kyrgyzstan, 2010

The Report of the International Law Association in August 2008 concluded that all armed conflicts have as a minimum two necessary characteristics: (1) the presence of organized groups that are (2) engaged in intense armed fighting [1].

This form of conflict occurs very often in our society and raises many questions of lawyers. The case study is limited to the applicability of customary and international humanitarian law and analyses non-international armed conflict in Kyrgyzstan took place in April – June, 2010.

Prerequisites

Kyrgyzstan – is a small country situated in Central Asia and borders with Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and China. The republic is independent and sovereign since USSR collapse. Politically, Kyrgyzstan has become an unstable since first tulip putsch in 2005, which led to overthrow of power and President Askar Akayev had to run away from the country. Then there were a series of interethnic conflicts: in 2005 between the Kyrgyzs and the Dungans, in 2009 - the Kyrgyzs and the Russians from the one side and the Kurds from the another, in 2010 – the Kyrgyzs and the Turks, and armed conflict in Osh city which will be analyzed [2].

The revolution with antigovernment set began on 7th of April 2010. Among official causes are: low living standards, fight for the power between South and North clans, increased signs of authoritarian regime. As regards the economy of Kyrgyzstan, it was always vulnerable and many thousands of people were poor. The unequal distribution of wealth among the people prompted some radicals to wage a rebellion against the government [3].

NIAC, characteristics

The event could be easily called as a non-international armed conflict according to the ICTY and the Tadic Appeal Decision (para. 70), the armed violence occurred between governmental authorities and organized armed groups, in particular The United People Movement (UPM) and thousands of their adherents against the President’s law-enforcement bodies before the overthrow; after the putsch – between non-state actors – self-proclaimed Kyrgyz interim government with adherents of ethnic Uzbek people against ethnic Kyrgyz. UPM – is a political association, the alliance of Kyrgyzstan opponents, which leading body is the National council and the Political bureau. Its purpose – “prescheduled resignation of clannish and anti-constitutional power headed by Kurmanbek Bakiyev”. Additional characteristics of non-international armed conflict: à) presence of hostile organized actions between fighting powers of the single state - Kyrgyzstan; b) actual participation in armed conflict of contending sides’ armed forces, including police bodies; c) weapon employment (the total number of used arm fires – 282 units, the total number of captured munitions – 43 0456); d) collective nature of “performance”; e) organized insurgents and the presence of body, which is responsible for their actions – UPM, Kyrgyz interim government; f) not long duration and intensity of armed actions [4].

 Applicability of IHL

The article attempts to study the applicability of International Humanitarian Law instruments in Kyrgyzstan. Jus ad bellum – referring to sovereignty principle, a state has a right to solve all internal conflict at its own judgement, including resort to armed force, or that is to say responsibility to protect. Thus, the head of State Security Service – Zhanybek Bakiyev, brother of the President, ordered to open a fire for effect on armed people on 7th of April [6].

When the government forces were fighting against rebels, during the ethnic conflicts occurred aftermath, then, there were a lot of cases where human rights of common citizens were completely ignored. Both the government forces and rebels were accused of violating national human rights law and were found to be unconscious of International Humanitarian Laws [7].

The state is a party to the UN key treaties, Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols . So, the government armed forces must be made aware of their legal obligations during the war. There were frequent incidents of International humanitarian law breach, applicable in situations of armed conflicts [8].

Article 3 of Geneva Convention guarantees persons, who do not directly participate in armed actions minimum humanitarian rights. It is forbidden to kill, perform violence attitude, torture, and humiliation (by reasons of race, religion, and ethnicity) towards that group of people. But the government and power turnover was followed by violation in relation to civil society and even to medicine staff [9].

The situation stressed ethnic intolerance in mass media, where authors of the articles provoked the tension, insisting on oppressed situation of Kyrgyz people, saying that Kyrgyzs should live better than others, also maintaining that the Uzbeks fight for autonomy and for official statute of Uzbek language [10].

The situation was followed by interethnic scuffles among youth of Kyrgyz and Uzbek nations. State law-enforcement bodies tried to stop the mass riots using arms, but it was the case of failed state, which lost the control over the territory. Questions of justification and proportionality in the case of weapon employment are still open in Kyrgyzstan. Lack of official information from the state side had generated rumors, according to which the shots were made depending on ethnic signs. Chain reaction was highly stressed by interethnic character, accompanied by arsons, assaults, injures and murders. According to customary tradition the Uzbeks do inter their relatives on the day of death, in this connection during 10-13 June, there was mass buries in the South region of Kyrgyzstan. Notwithstanding the fact that IV Geneva Convention protects internment, it is absolutely necessary measure and is subject to legal review, Public officers (medicine and police) did not participate in buries because of fearing of their self-security. That is why the witness point absence took place aftermath, complicating compensation issues and paper on death filling process. The interim government declared riot emergency and adopted the decree on weapon employment on effect on 12 June 2010 [11].

According to International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, threshold for military intervention on human protection claims large scale loss of life, which is really took place. During the period of armed conflict in Kyrgyzstan, the number of killed was about 490 people. The government did not perform enough control over armed forces. Civil people claimed several times that it was difficult to distinguish the personality and belonging persons to curtain group, also armed forces exceeded the use of power. General humanitarian principles and rules did not have been kept nor by government armed forces neither by anti-governmental [12].

Customary law

The Constitution of Kyrgyz Republic adopted by referendum on 21 October 2007 was in force during the June events. According to which the State should serve to all country, not only to part of it, all Kyrgyz people are equal and could not be discriminated by its race, religion or nationality, every person has inevitable right to live, no one can lose this right. Unfortunately, during the June conflict such important constitutional clauses had not demonstrated its effectiveness in terms of human rights protection during interethnic conflict [13].

Following customary laws, namely “Law of Municipal and Administrative Government” – the question of human rights, keeping order; “Crime Code” – murder, raising national enmity, “Law on Prosecutor” - control over constitutional execution, “Law about Media” – checking the material authenticity, are also in the list of ineffective and violated documents. According to the materials of Society Fund “Kylym Shamy”, journalists made a lot in terms of interethnic destabilization factors in the region, namely: disinformation, seducing and offensive messages took place [14].

The data stressed in the State bodies role during the period of armed conflict in Kyrgyzstan report, such as overkill, extermination, violence towards civil society, sexual abuse, in several cases no medical aid provided, humiliation by ethnic sign, especially towards ethnic Uzbeks illustrate the fact that applicable general principles during the NIAC, such as principle of distinction, proportionality and pain relief were totally disregarded [15].

Conclusions

 Summing up we should emphasize the fact that there was no timely reaction from the Government directed to stop inter ethnic hatred. The government could not provide life security for its citizens, and transparent actions of its law-enforcement bodies during the arm forces. The IHL principles and customary laws were violated by anti-government groups as well. And when there is a situation where both government forces and armed rebels have violated various legal provisions, then, an independent and impartial tribunal to try the crimes committed during the conflicts is essential. The situation in Kyrgyzstan is still unstable, there is an invisible conflict which can occur in any minute [16].

Used literature:

1 Journal of Conflict & Security Law C _ Oxford University Press 2009; doi:10.1093/jcsl/krp007, March 27, 2009, Defining Armed Conflict,Mary Ellen O’Connell.

2 Atyrkul Alisheva, Director of Regional studies institute, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan; “Kyrgyzstan: destruction and creation”.

3. http://www.rosbalt.ru/main/2010/04/07/726477.html Expert: Riots in Kyrgyzstan - is the response on authoritarian regime.

4. http://www.icty.org/x/cases/tadic/acdec/en/51002.htm 70.

5. State bodies role during the period of armed conflict in Kyrgyzstan, Report was written with the participation of Human rights protection centre “Kylym Shamy”; HDIM.NGO/0101/12/RUS 26 September 2012. Page 13

6.     http: // lenta.ru/news/ 2010/04/11/civil/

7.     State bodies role during the period of armed conflict in Kyrgyzstan, Report was written with the participation of Human rights protection centre “Kylym Shamy”; HDIM.NGO/0101/12/RUS 26 September 2012.

8.     http://www.icrc.org/rus/resources/documents/news-release/2012/kyrgyzstan-news-2012-09-18.htm

9.     Armed people with captured weapon on 7 April 2012, at collision with state security service and special “Alfa” subdivision agents next to the Forum agency building, directed to Central square. State bodies role during the period of armed conflict in Kyrgyzstan, Report; HDIM.NGO/0101/12/RUS 26 September 2012

10.  Article “Êûðãûç÷à òàêòûê áåø ìîíóò åðòå” 4 March 2010, p.13

11.  Decree #68 dated 12.06.10 “About permission to weapon employment”

12.   State bodies role during the period of armed conflict in Kyrgyzstan, Report; HDIM.NGO/0101/12/RUS 26 September 2012

13. 16.06.2010 Armed rota of 12 soldiers, equipped with auto rifles, launchers, and sharpshooters periodically fired on civil housing estates from Suleiman mountain.

14.  Article 2, Constitution of Kyrgyz Republic, 2007 16 Article 13, Constitution of Kyrgyz Republic, 2007

15.  State bodies role during the period of armed conflict in Kyrgyzstan, Report; HDIM.NGO/0101/12/RUS 26 September 2012

16. Human rights protection center “Kylym Shamy”, Kyrgyzstan.