2 2.3.2 Case study two: Navoishoh Avenue Samarkand is one of Uzbekistan’s most unique and historic cities. Its centre is UNESCO heritage listed. Samarkand is also among the country’s most popular tourist destinations. As an important cultural and historical urban centre, Samarkand has been targeted for medium- and largescale property developments, activity that has been pump-primed by the government’s strategic ambition to rapidly grow international tourism. One such example has taken place on Navoishoh Avenue, beginning in 2017, in circumstances that are notably similar to the Niyozbek Yuli case. And like the latter, these improper actions by city authorities prompted a campaign of resistance by residents. This case formally began on 15 August 2017, when the then hokim of Samarkand, Vokhid Rahimov, issued a decree, no. 1510-K. The decree notes: ‘Limited Liability Company “Samarqand Agro Eksport Servis” applied to the city Hokimiyat with a petition to demolish the existing buildings of 2-storey unattractive residential buildings located at 44, 45, 47 and 49, Navoishoh Avenue, Samarkand, and issue a permission for the construction of multi-storey housing on the basis of modern architectural and design documentation.’96 The decree also acknowledges a proposal, reportedly made by the city’s Department of Architecture and Construction, to relocate, in accordance with legislative procedure, buildings situated in central streets of the city that ‘do not meet the requirements of the current urban planning architecture, sanitation and fire safety, and to build in their place multi-storey residential buildings’.97 The decree then declares that 60 apartments in buildings at numbers 43, 45, 47 and 49 Navoishoh Avenue do not meet ‘the current requirements of urban planning’, although no assessment from relevant authorities or experts was attached to the decree. It orders that the apartments be demolished and replaced by a four-storey residential building. The company Samarqand Agro Eksport Servis is granted permission in the decree to develop the proposed residential building on the allotted land, providing that it gets the necessary permits and approvals, and also providing that it relocates existing residents from its own funds. When the corporate extract for Samarkand Agro Eksport Servis was first checked on 19 May 2020, its area of declared business was the wholesale of fruits and vegetables.98 Its shares were held by ‘Martirosov Artyom Arturovich’. It had a founding capital of approximately. $46,000. The company was incorporated on 17 May 2016. The Samarkand mayoral decree also claims that affected residents had consented to the proposal. This apparent inaccurate statement precipitated protest from homeowners affected by the decree. The reaction of Navoishoh Avenue residents to the order is captured in a subsequent letter of complaint written by retired teacher Svetlana Smolyakova,99 a homeowner in building 49. The letter is addressed to the Prosecutor General’s Office and Ombudsman. It states: ‘In September 2017, I was forced to go to my daughters for treatment in St. Petersburg (Russia). While I was in rehabilitation (I had two spinal surgeries), I found out that the demolition and gradual resettlement of the residents of our 18-apartment building had begun. Some of the tenants signed an agreement with the developer, some of the tenants did not agree. I repeatedly expressed my categorical disagreement in writing. I didn’t sign any documents. I was against the demolition of a solid, completely non-emergency house (the developer had, according to court records, alleged the houses were in an ‘emergency’ condition).’100 99. Letter from Svetlana Smolyakova to the Prosecutor General’s Office and Ombudsman of the Republic of Uzbekistan, 3 March 2020. A False Sense of Legality 35