Watchdog: Central Asian Governments Use Extremism Laws to Suppress Religious Freedom

Legislation in the five republics of Central Asia routinely enforces extremism laws that have little or nothing to do with legitimate security threats but are aimed at punishing individuals engaged in peaceful religious activities, according to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF).

In a report issued on December 31, 2024, the USCIRF, an independent, bipartisan federal government entity established by Congress to monitor, analyze and report on religious freedom overseas, accused the governments of Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan of restricting practices ranging from online religious expression and the sharing of religious materials to religious teaching and the manifestation of religious beliefs through clothing.

Titled “The Abuse of Extremism Laws in Central Asia,” the seven-page report points out that such punitive legislation has been influenced by decades of Soviet rule over the region in the past.

“Enforcement measures include harassment, fines, forced renunciations of faith, detainment, imprisonment, and, at times, torture and extrajudicial killings,” according to the report.

“While all states have an obligation to protect individuals from extremism-motivated violence and incitement to violence, they also are required to uphold other human rights enshrined under international law,” says the report, adding: “Despite this, each Central Asian state enforces extremism laws in ways that fail to uphold the human right to freedom of religion or belief (FoRB).”   

Notably, the report highlights that extremism laws in Central Asia diverge from the specific justifications permitted for restricting expressions of freedom of religion or belief as outlined in Article 18.3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which all five states are signatories. 

The report emphasizes that under the ICCPR, governments may only impose restrictions on FoRB manifestations if such limitations are “prescribed by law and necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.”

In line with the ICCPR, the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which includes each Central Asian state, released policy guidance on FoRB and security. The recommendations, issued in 2019, advise that any law limiting FoRB should, among other things, “avoid vaguely defined terms” and specifically address criminal conduct rather than “thoughts or beliefs.” Additionally, the guidelines call for addressing specific unlawful activities instead of “targeting a religion or belief.”

In contrast, Central Asian governments frequently invoke extremism legislation to criminalize personal beliefs or restrict peaceful religious activities that they deem undesirable, even when these do not meet the ICCPR’s criteria for permissible limitations on FoRB. 

The USCIRF report analyzes extremism laws in each Central Asian country, discussing commonalities and differences in how officials across the region misuse these laws to suppress and penalize peaceful religious practices.

The report starts by highlighting the use of “broad and vague extremism laws” across Central Asia, pointing out that under international standards, nations are obliged to practice the principle of “legal certainty.” The concept is outlined in the OSCE’s Guidelines on Democratic Lawmaking for Better Laws, issued in January 2024. The document requires that legislation clearly describe what comprises a violation of the law.

“Each of the extremism laws in Central Asia, however, define ‘extremism’ using vague and broad terms, such as disturbing constitutional order or inciting hatred,” says the USCIRF report, emphasizing: “By employing these terms, the state makes it nearly impossible for the general population to understand what conduct would represent a violation of the law.

This disregard for the principle of legal certainty, the report adds, gives authorities “flexibility to label virtually any activity as ‘extremist,’ including activity that does not include the use or incitement of violence.” 

In Tajikistan, for example, “extremist” activities need not be violent or incite violence. Rather, says the report, they are broadly characterized as actions that, among other activities, provoke “religious hatred” and promote the “superiority of citizens based on their religion.”

Further, according to the report, every government in Central Asia maintains a list of banned “extremist” organizations, each of which includes “some religious groups with no known history of violence and sometimes includes religious ideologies that may not constitute formal groups.”

The governments routinely misuse those lists to “indiscriminately prosecute alleged members’ peaceful religious activities that deviate from the state’s preferred religious practices, especially targeting Muslims,” according to the report.

The report acknowledges that Central Asian governments face genuine security threats, including terrorist attacks by Islamic extremist organizations. However, the report points out that despite the fact that such violence has decreased in recent years, the region’s governments continue to refer to past security incidents as a “justification to further restrict freedoms, including religious freedom, at home.”

“While all states have both a responsibility and a right to respond to real security threats, states must at the same time maintain respect for human rights enshrined in international law,” the USCIRF report emphasizes.

“However, all five Central Asian states restrict the fundamental human right to freedom of religion,” the report concludes, “under the guise of combating ‘extremism.’”

Image credits: Eid-Ul-Fitr prayers at the Arbaca Rukun mosque via RawPixel. CC0.