Uzbekistan is once again on the radar of international human rights activists and organisations. Following consultations in Washington and London, a decision has been made to initiate the process of applying the Magnitsky Act against members of the country’s security forces alleged to be involved in torture, fabricated criminal cases and political repression. According to prominent human rights advocate Ms Radha Stirling, her team has already identified specific individuals, and a full sanctions list will be compiled in the near future.
This initiative could set a precedent: to date, no Uzbek official has ever been subjected to personal sanctions for human rights violations, according to Ms Stirling.
“However, the situation in the country increasingly resembles the era of Islam Karimov’s dictatorship, when repression, extrajudicial killings, and the suppression of dissent were the norm. While Western diplomats remain cautious, human rights organisations are determined to accelerate the process. In the coming weeks, official requests for sanctions will be submitted to the US Congress, the State Department, the UK Foreign Office and various EU institutions”, Ms Stirling says.
One of the key cases likely to expedite this process is the trial of former security officer Shukhrat Rasulov, who has been accused of organising an assassination attempt on Komil Allamjonov, the former head of Uzbekistan’s Agency of Information and Mass Communications. The trial is being held behind closed doors, raising significant concerns. Notably, Allamjonov, the primary victim, has not been called to testify, and Rasulov himself claims that his arrest was staged.
According to Ms Stirling, Rasulov was subjected to torture, held in solitary confinement, and pressured to confess to a conspiracy involving high-ranking officials—including the president’s youngest daughter and her husband, Otabek Umarov. If these claims are true, the case takes on a new dimension: it is no longer just a battle between security factions but potentially a political purge within Uzbekistan’s elite.
“The case echoes the old Soviet and Chinese methods, where arrests become a political theatre and legal proceedings are mere instruments of power struggles,” says Ms Stirling. “What happened to Rasulov serves as a stark reminder: in Uzbekistan, even security officials can become victims of the very system they once served. As long as they remain useful to the authorities, they are protected; the moment the power balance shifts, they are discarded.”
According to Ms Stirling, the Allamjonov case is just one of many that could meet the Magnitsky Act criteria. The US and EU consider several key factors when imposing sanctions:
- Human rights violations (e.g., torture, political persecution)
- Lack of judicial transparency (e.g., closed-door trials)
- Corrupt schemes linked to asset redistribution
All of these elements, she concludes, are fully present in Uzbekistan today.
How would sanctions impact Uzbekistan?
“If these sanctions are imposed, they would deal a serious blow to President Shavkat Mirziyoyev’s regime,” says Ms Stirling. “Until now, Western countries have limited themselves to calls for reform, but this time the threat is real. Including Uzbek judges, prosecutors, and security officials on the Magnitsky sanctions list would change the game—those targeted would no longer be able to do business in the West, open bank accounts in Europe, or purchase property in London or Dubai.”
Precedents already exist
The Magnitsky Act has previously been used against:
- Chinese officials responsible for repressing Uyghurs in Xinjiang
- Saudi security officers involved in the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi
- Venezuelan generals who violently suppressed protests
According to Ms Stirling, Uzbekistan could be next in line.
For a country seeking to attract foreign investment, being subjected to Magnitsky sanctions would be a public relations disaster. At a time when the West is scrutinising human rights records more than ever, inclusion on a sanctions list poses a significant reputational risk to the entire government, she argues. “Who would want to invest in a country where businesses can be seized through fabricated criminal cases and torture?”
Radha Stirling and her team have already launched a campaign, and everything now depends on how quickly the West responds. If sanctions come into effect, Uzbekistan could face a new reality in which high-ranking officials are blacklisted and the country is categorised alongside autocratic regimes already subjected to stringent restrictions.
Could Uzbekistan get its own Magnitsky list?
The Magnitsky case initially focused on a single corruption scandal in Russia but eventually led to a global sanctions mechanism. The Allamjonov case could follow a similar trajectory, Ms Stirling suggests: “If the international community is serious about taking firm action, Uzbekistan could see its first-ever Magnitsky sanctions list within months. The real question is: how far is Tashkent willing to go to preserve its old methods? If the government continues to ignore demands for transparency and justice, the consequences will be inevitable.”
