Bailey Daniels

HON3396
2 April 2020

Azerbaijan

I. Introduction

Azerbaijan has long ranked as one of the worst countries in the world with few basic

freedoms for its citizens. Freedom House, an international organization that tracks and ranks

civil liberties, classifies Azerbaijan as a “not free” country, giving them an aggregate score of 11

out of 100 (Freedom House, 2019), one of the lowest scores compared to countries around the

world. In unison, the 2019 World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders places

Azerbaijan at 166 out of 180 countries, ranking them very low on the list of the world’s freest

countries (World Freedom Index, 2019). Living under such a strict government, Azerbaijan

citizens lack free speech and religious rights, and endure skewed and unfair elections.

II. Historical Background

Upon becoming an established country in 1918, Azerbaijan remained free for two short

years before running into political conflict. The country was overtaken by the Soviet Union and

became a union constituent in 1936. For almost 70 years, the country functioned under Soviet

authority and was referred to as Soviet Azerbaijan. In the last 30 years, the country reclaimed its

title as the Republic of Azerbaijan after being granted release from Soviet ties. “Azerbaijan

declared sovereignty on September 23, 1989, and independence on August 30, 1991” (Allworth,

2019). Ultimately, Azerbaijan’s reestablishment brought on a new set of political challenges,

starting with the appointment of their first president, Ayaz Mutalibov. Mutalibov was the last

leader of Soviet Azerbaijan and was declared the first President of Azerbaijan by the Supreme

Council of Azerbaijan SSR. After helping attain their independence as a country, Mutalibov was
officially elected president in a single-candidate election where he continued his role as an

authoritarian leader for only a couple months (Узел, 2020). Between August 1991 and

September 1993, the country fluctuated between a plethora of leaders, having up to four different

presidents before electing Heydar Aliyev for two consecutive terms, making him president from

1993 to 2003. Ever since Mutalibov’s initial appointment, Azerbaijan’s trend of authoritarian

government and suppression of freedom has continued into their current day structure, led by

Ilham Aliyev, son of Heydar Aliyev. In typical, suppressive behavior, Aliyev pushed forward a

referendum removing a president’s two-term limit and in 2018, he was reelected through a

skewed voting process, marking his fourth term as president (Freedom House, 2019).

Today, Azerbaijan’s 10 million residents live in fear of personal attacks, public

humiliation, and imprisonment for the defamation or criticization of the government. Azerbaijan

functions under three governmental branches to divvy up legislative, executive and judicial

powers, but “the separation of powers no longer exists in Azerbaijan, since the executive branch

heavily infiltrates both parliament and the judiciary” (Warsaw, 2016). The authoritarian control

handed to the Azerbaijani president has created a loop of basic rights suppression and the

country’s freedoms are expected to worsen without radical change.

III. Free Speech

According to Azerbaijan’s 1995 Constitution, Article 47 outlines that “everyone has the

freedom of thought and speech” and that “nobody may be forced to identify of refuse his or her

ideas and principles” (Azerbaijan Constitution, 1995). Regardless of this inclusion in their

constitution, it would seem that the government continuously oversteps bounds under their

president’s direction and punishes anything defamatory toward the government.

 In Azerbaijan, it is not rare that activists find themselves serving jail time from

advocating for anything controversial. Elmar Huseynov is just one of the many activists who has

seen the inside of Azerbaijan’s prisons from merely doing his job. As publisher for the

independent magazine, Baku Monitor, Huseynov, like many others, has struggled with his

freedoms within the community. In 2001, “the magazine lost its license and, for six months,

[they] weren't published at all” (Trombly, 2004). In an interview about his arrest, Elmar shared

his efforts to protest saying “the government got upset at me because I was going around

protesting, asking for our license to be renewed. They wanted to put me in prison, but they didn't

have a reason” (Trombly, 2004). Even though the government had no reason to arrest him, his

mere act of protest was enough to put him on their watch list. Huseynov also worked for another

independent newspaper who chose to run an article outlining the mental health of the mayor of

Baku at the time. After the mayor filed for invasion of privacy, Huseynov was arrested under

libel charges, even though as publisher, he was not liable.

One way the Azerbaijan government stifles the voices of their people is through public

humiliation tactics, such as the use of metal cages during court hearings. “The way in which

defendants are portrayed in court can have a huge impact on the equality of arms and influence

judges and juries. It has become a common practice that metal cages are used especially in the

post-soviet region” (Warsaw, 2016). In more than 40 cases, defendants were kept in cages during

their hearing “which prevented them from effective and confidential communication with their

defense lawyers” (Warsaw, 2016) while degrading them in the courtroom. Not only does this

limit active participation in the hearings, but if defendants wish to speak, they rely on permission

from the judge.

 Since 2019, Azerbaijan pardoned over 50 people imprisoned for defamation charges.

“Among those released was Bayram Mammadov, a youth opposition movement activist. But two

weeks later, police arrested him following a media interview in which he said he would continue

his political activism” (Roth, 2020). Mammadov was then sentenced to another 30 days in jail

for spurious disobedience. Activists and government critic numbers keep rising in Azerbaijan

creating more controversy on the free speech and press issues in the country. However, this

behavior is alerting the government’s attention and they are implementing more restrictions to

counteract activists.

IV. Free Press

Speaking freely in Azerbaijan is certainly met with a number of restrictions, but the

freedom of the press is watched with an eagle eye. The government monitors all forms of media

by blocking certain websites, stripping broadcast licenses, and consistently arresting journalists

on defamation, libel, and bogus charges.

A primary example of the government’s judiciary malpractice lies with Khadija

Ismayilova. Khadija was a journalist for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, one of the few radio

stations offered in Azerbaijan. She often tried to speak out about the injustices within the

Azerbaijan court system and in 2014, an Azerbaijani court sentenced her to seven and a half

years in prison under charges of “libel, tax evasion, and illegal business activity” (The

Chroniclers, 2015). As a journalist investigating corruption in the Azerbaijan government, it’s

widely believed her arrest was politically motivated and more of an act to silence her (The

Chroniclers, 2015). After spending about two years imprisoned, “the Supreme Court quashed her

conviction for some of the charges in May 2015 and reduced her sentence to three years’

imprisonment suspended on probation, following which she was conditionally released”

(Amnesty International, 2020). But even during her probation, Ismayilova was faced with tons of

backlash from the community. Within her home, she discovered hidden cameras and

transmission wires to which she requested an investigation. The investigation was ultimately

plagued with delays, lack of witnesses, and lack of contribution from the authorities. However,

the authorities did manage to publish a report that disclosed full names, addresses, and private

information of Ismayilova’s family and friends. After the multiple privacy breaches, she filed a

civil action which was subsequentially rejected. Footage from the hidden cameras was later

released as public humiliation, depicting what would appear to be a sex tape between Khadija

and her boyfriend. Luckily, she continues to hold her head high and serve as a controversial

figure in Azerbaijan, but she is still limited under travel bans since completing her sentence.

Even in recent years, Azerbaijan journalists continue to endure arrests and restrictions on

their civil liberties. In the last couple year, Mehman Huseynov, an anti-corruption blogger, was

released after serving “a two-year prison sentence on groundless libel charges. In December

2018, two months before his term was to end, the authorities brought new, false charges,

claiming Huseynov physically assaulted a guard” (Roth, 2020). A month later, his charges were

dropped due to a public outcry for his release. However, this mistreatment of those who speak

out against the Azerbaijan government does not appear to have an end in sight.

V. Critical Comparison

To compare civil liberties between Azerbaijan and the United States, there are a lot of

different perspectives to consider. Structurally, both countries have free speech and free press

written into their constitutions. But, similarly, both countries have dropped at least ten ranks on

Reporters Without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index since 2013. In reality, the authoritarian
government functions very differently from the United States’ representative democracy; and

each country has very different priorities within their judiciary branches.

For free speech cases, the community outlook in each country is very different. Often

times, Azerbaijan citizens live in fear of speaking out about anything in their community. Even

though there a not a lot of cases where Azerbaijan citizens have been arrested for speaking

freely, most people are pressured to keep quiet about anything controversial in the community,

and therefore choose not to speak up at all. In the United States, people who speak freely are

often met with praise or support by those around them. If the message is controversial, there is a

good chance of societal backlash and negativity, but protests and free speech are admired in the

U.S. and recognized as a right. In United States history, there were some turbulent cases

regarding free speech, where some protesters were met with arrest, punishment, or community

backlash. But, more often than not, people’s choice to speak freely in the United States has been

welcomed and accepted. Azerbaijani have faced scare tactics, consistent arrest, and public

humiliation for speaking out against the government in any capacity. In cases like Snyder v.

Phelps, organizations such as the Westboro Baptist Church have been deemed within their rights

to comment on public affairs, despite having negative messages about fallen soldiers. In

Azerbaijan, simply speaking up about government injustice could place you on a watchlist where

you’ll be arrested as soon as you make a mistake.

In cases regarding freedom of the press, the answer remains the same. Azerbaijan is

under much more restriction and censorship than the United States. Journalists in Azerbaijan are

constantly imprisoned, whereas in the U.S., aside from a few historical mishaps, journalists and

citizens alike are free to publish whatever their hearts desire. There are certain instances though

where the United States government overruled basic freedoms from journalists, such as Schenck
v. United States. In 1925, Charles Schenck mailed around 15,000 pamphlets urging men to

dodge the draft. He was charged under violating the Espionage Act and causing a clear and

present danger to the union, despite simply exercising his first amendment right. Nowadays in

the U.S., similar restrictions are seen in social media use and blog posts. Not only does

Azerbaijan function under blocked websites and limited internet access, but there are very few

independent broadcasters who are not owned by the government. Furthermore, if the independent

stations publish something too farfetched, they risk losing their program license and possible jail

time. In the United States, the media belongs to the people and is made to be an outlet of free

expression where punishment is limited to those who are too vulgar in a public capacity.

In Near v. Minnesota, another Supreme Court case from the U.S., a 1930’s newspaper

published accusations, implicating certain local officials with gangsters. “Minnesota officials

sought a permanent injunction against The Saturday Press on the grounds that it violated the

Public Nuisance Law because it was malicious, scandalous, and defamatory” (Oyez, 2020). The

resulting verdict was in favor of Jay Near, stating that the article constituted a prior restraint and

was therefore invalid under the First Amendment. “The Court established as a constitutional

principle the doctrine that, with some narrow exceptions, the government could not censor or

otherwise prohibit a publication in advance, even though the communication might be

punishable after publication in a criminal or other proceeding” (Oyez, 2020). As stated, prior,

Azerbaijan citizens do not experience the same protections in defamatory cases. Defamation

cases are arguably the biggest free speech and press issue in Azerbaijan, and anything remotely

threatening to the government is likely to see punishment of sorts.

VI. Conclusion

Azerbaijan has endured a long history of authoritarian rule. Even after gaining

independence in 1991, the citizens of Azerbaijan still remain captive to the iron fist of the

government. Azerbaijan still has a long way to go to achieve freedom, but every day that a

journalist, activist, or political oppositionist breaks the mold is one step in the right direction.

Citizens continue to be arrested, publicly humiliated, monitored, and falsely accused of crimes to

be kept in the government’s control. Even though their constitution outlines free speech, free

press, and expression, the executive branch continues puppeteering authorities to punish people

for speaking up for their civil liberties. With Azerbaijan currently ranking 166 out of 180 on the

World Press Freedom Index, the country is not free and needs heavy media attention in order to

see radical change. In comparison, though the United States is significantly freer than

Azerbaijan, there are miles of progress ahead for the world to see true freedom.
 Works Cited

House, Freedom. “Azerbaijan.” Azerbaijan | Freedom House, 18 Apr. 2019,

freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2019/azerbaijan.

Morozova, Irina. “Contemporary Azerbaijani Historiography on the Problem of ‘Southern

Azerbaijan’ after World War II.” Iran & the Caucasus, vol. 9, no. 1, 2005, pp. 85–120. JSTOR,
www.jstor.org/stable/4030908. Accessed 27 Feb. 2020.

Allworth, Edward, et al. “Azerbaijan.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.,

8 Oct. 2019. Accessed 27 February 2020.

Узел, Кавказский. “Mutalibov, Ayaz Niyazovich.” Caucasian Knot, 26 Feb. 2020,

www.eng.kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/368/.

http://www.pitt.edu/~weidman/2004-educ-reforms-countries.pdf

Warsaw, Zgoda. “The Functioning of the Judicial System in Azerbaijan and Its Impact on the
Right to a Fair Trial of Human Rights Defenders.” Edited by Helsinki Foundation for
Human Rights, Hfhr.com, 2016,
www.hfhr.pl/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Azerbaijan_judciary.pdf.

“Azerbaijan's Constitution of 1995 with Amendments through 2016.” Edited by Constitute

Project , Constitute Project, 2020,
www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Azerbaijan_2016.pdf?lang=en.

“THE CHRONICLERS.” Foreign Policy, no. 215, 2015, pp. 77–83.,

www.jstor.org/stable/24577719. Accessed 29 Mar. 2020.

Amnesty International. “European Court Rules Azerbaijan Imprisoned Khadija Ismayilova to

Silence and Punish Her.” Amnesty International, 2020,
www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/02/european-court-rules-azerbaijan-imprisoned-
khadija-ismayilova-to-silence-and-punish-her/.

Trombly, Maria. “Jail Time for Journalists.” Quill, vol. 92, no. 6, Aug. 2004, pp. 40–41.
EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?
direct=true&db=asn&AN=14413041&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

Roth, Kenneth. “World Report 2020: Rights Trends in Azerbaijan.” Human Rights Watch, 14
Jan. 2020, www.hrw.org/world-report/2020/country-chapters/azerbaijan.

"Near v. Minnesota ex rel. Olson." Oyez, www.oyez.org/cases/1900-1940/283us697. Accessed

22 Apr. 2020.