II Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)
| Published date | 01 March 2010 |
| Date | 01 March 2010 |
| Author | Arie Bloed |
| DOI | 10.1177/016934411002800105 |
| Subject Matter | Part B: Human Rights News |
Netherlands Q uarterly of Human R ights, Vol. 28/1 (2010) 85
II oRgAnIsAtIon FoR seCURItY AnD
CooPeRAtIon In eURoPe (osCe)
A B*
1. KAZAKHSTAN AT THE HELM OF THE OSCE IN 2010
AMIDST CONCERNS ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS
For the rst time i n the history of the OSCE a former Soviet republic has t aken the
lead in the OSCE with Kazak hstan becoming Chairman-in-Oce of the organisation
in 2010 amidst concerns whether the country is up to t he task, particularly in the
area of the human dimension. e countr y takes on this task , while its best-known
human rights defender, Evgeny Zhovt is, has been put in prison for four years for h is
involvement in a trag ic and fatal trac ac cident at the end of July 2009. Aer he was
sentenced in rs t instance on 4 Septemb er by an Almaty court i n a controversial
procedure, the verdic t was upheld in appeal on 20 October, brush ing aside all
complaints about serious procedural aws. is led to a wave of criticism both wit hin
civil soc iety in Kaza khstan and in the international commun ity, both calling on the
authorities to review the ca se.
On 21 October, the Direc tor of OSCE’s Oce for Democrat ic Institutions and
Human Rig hts (ODIHR), Janez L enarcic, expressed his dismay about the conduct of
the appea ls hearing a nd demanded a fa ir trial for Zhovtis. ‘We a re dismayed by t he
appeal court’s reported failu re to appropriately address the apparent violations of due
process that occurred during the initial trial’, Lenarcic said. Following the rst-instance
verdict, ODIHR already conveyed its concerns to the Kaza kh authorities about reports
of numerous procedural irregu larities. e same concern was expressed by all member
States of the European Union (EU) at a meeting of the OSCE Permanent Council
(PC) in Vienna. is seems not to have had any impact on the Kaz akh authorities.
Observers of t he appeals hearing again reported interference with the defendant’s
right to a fa ir trial, including the rejection of the defence’s technica l expertise on t he
essential matter of whether Zhovtis could have avoided the acc ident. ‘e conduct
of the appeals hearing regrettably con rmed our concerns about the fa irness of t he
proceedings in this ca se’, Lena rcic said. He reiterated that while Zhovtis should not
* Director of the Asia-Paci c Law Enforcement Instit ute, Bangkok, ai land.
To continue reading
Request your trial