The Rozikova sisters became key organisers in a campaign of civil and legal resistance to the compulsory acquisition of homes, and the associated demolitions and forced evictions. Dilorom spent five months in detention and was later sentenced to two years of restriction of freedom. Following protests organised by affected homeowners, a letter from the Samarkand Prosecutor’s Office to the new hokim of Samarkand, Furkat Rakhimov, states that the decree issued by his predecessor violated residents’ private property rights, which are enshrined in the constitution and national legislation; it requires consent from private property owners.105 The letter explains: ‘However, although the mayor’s decision indicated that the consent letters of the residents of the houses were received, in reality, 25 of the 60 apartment owners had not given the consent letters, and their legal rights to private property were violated.’ The Prosecutor General therefore requested that ‘this decision should be annulled on the grounds that it was issued contrary to the requirements of the current law’. The initial decision of the Samarkand city mayor (1510-K) was in fact cancelled by decree no.1755-K, issued by the new Samarkand mayor Furkat Rakhimov on 14 October 2017.106 The decree notes consent from property owners was not obtained, as required in law. It confirms that consideration of the original proposal will only take place after full consent of citizens residing in homes situated in buildings 43, 45, 47 and 49 Navoishoh Avenue has been obtained in the prescribed manner. Image: Dilorom Rozikova Source: Hook Report Following the 14 October 2017 mayoral decision, the developer filed a legal suit against homeowners with the Samarkand City Civil Court, requesting that the court invalidate mayoral decision no. 1755-K.107 The developer alleged that the compensation requested by residents opposed to moving was unreasonable and disproportionate. It was also alleged that the protest of the Prosecutor’s Office was incorrect and unreasonable. The developer claimed the apartment blocks were in an emergency state. The Civil Court appears to have accepted the case wrongfully, as the acts of government have to be challenged in Administrative Courts. Subsequently, the municipality had to be a defendant. This is a clear violation of the procedural law by the principal civil law judge. Not all residents opposing the eviction were able to appear before the Civil Court, including residents from building 49. Residents from blocks 45 and 47 who gave evidence at the trial did complain about lack of consultation and inadequate compensation. Others noted that they did not want to move, contesting the developer’s allegation that the blocks were in an emergency state. Presiding Judge Norov delivered a decision that partially invalidated the municipality decree no. 1755-K. The judgement states that buildings 45 and 47 could not be demolished as consent had not been given by residents. However, the judge was content that residents had given consent with regard to buildings 43 and 49. Image: Bayramali Norov, former principal judge of Samarkand city and later Samarkand region Source: Zarnews.uz 105. 38 A False Sense of Legality Letter from Provincial Prosecutor F.M. Zufarov to mayor of Samarkand, F.J. Rakhimov, 7 October 2017.