LAND HOME JUSTICE

On 28 July 2017, the Cabinet of Ministers issued a Decree [1] «On measures to improve the architectural appearance and improvement of the central part of Tashkent, as well as creation of appropriate conditions for the population and visitors to the capital», which paved the way for the development of $1.3bln mega-urban - “Tashkent City”. It occupied 80 hectares (3.1 square miles) along the main streets, Navoi and Islam Karimov Avenues (former Uzbekistanskaya), which link Olmazor and Furkat Streets [2.1]. The Article 4 of “Regulations on the Procedure for Compensation of Damages to Citizens and Legal Entities due to Seizure of Land for State or Public Needs” (2006), which stated that the hokimiyat (municipality) must notify property owners in writing no less than six months before demolition begins. In fact, the process of demolition in the mahallas and relocation of residents began earlier, as the Decree on Tashkent City [1] required that residential and non-residential buildings be acquired within a month. The district administration visited the mahallas and informed residents of Olmazor (Apple Orchard) and O’qchi (Fletcher) that they had 10 days to vacate their homes.” [15] In 2008, it was estimated that 10,000 people lived in the O’qchi-Olmazor mahalla area. Some residents [16-17], however, resisted the eviction by remaining in the area despite the dust and being cut off from electricity and gas. This is supported by the evidence in the form of testimonies of the residents at the time when the demolition works had starred in the area. The evidence comprises of multiple stories of the Olmazor mahalla residents some of whom resisted the demolition and expressed discontent on the compensation/replacement they had been offered. Some names have been altered to protect the confidentiality of the residents and ensure personal security.

Individual testimonies: Muhabbat Umarova. A resident of Olmazor, in her 70s, lived alone at the time of the interview and she expressed discontent with regards to demolition. She was unaware of the events planned for the Tashkent City and claimed that she was not informed in any form about the eviction. Umarova stated she wanted to remain in the area and have a replacement nearby [in Qoratosh street]. Dilbar Isaeva. A resident of Olmazor, stated she had visitors from “Akfa” who came to offer her replacements. Isaeva was referring to the people from the hokimiyat who visited her (local people sometimes identify hokimyat as “Akfamen” or “Akfa” due to the business ownership of “Akfa-Artel” group by the Mayor of Tashkent) known as to offer a replacement for her house, which was not equal in value and size as she declared. Isaeva claimed that although the hokimiyat had initially promised that they would provide an equal compensation, they did not fulfil on the promise prompting her to choose one of the replacement flats rapidly.
Davron Halikov. A resident of Olmazor, was refused compensation in lieu of his family home which was demolished for Tashkent City. Lives in a leased flat with his wife and four children. Halikov was refused a replacement dwelling on a simple technicality; he was not living in the house the moment of demolition together with the rest of the larger family. Due to the great size of the family in one house, he had opted to rent another place in the city. He filed a case at the city court, but has since dropped it as he does not believe either the government or the judicial system has anything to offer him: “This country does not exist for me as homeland anymore. It is just a place for living for the moment until I find a place somewhere abroad. The only thing I am worried about now is my apartment rent payment, which is due on Monday. I am worried about my children’s fate. I want to help them to stand on their feet… I am waiting for magic to happen. I know that I cannot expect anything from the government.” [25]

Nilufar Aripova. A resident of Olmazor. According to the story by The Guardian (2017) , a resident of Olmazor, 52 years old Nilufar Aripova expressed discontent about the demolition and moving out of her mahalla: “I don’t want to leave this mahalla, but if I have to I want to be given another house big enough to keep us all together,” she stated. Aripova lived with her husband, three children and grandchildren.

Group testimonies: The Tojiboev family. The family comprises of four households living under one roof in a large house with an extensive backyard and garden area, testified that they, in general, did not oppose the demolition but wanted a fair replacement. The daughter of the Tojiboev’s stated that the places they were offered as a replacement were not equal to the family house as it is big enough to accommodate four families including herself: “If the city flourishes, it is better for us, but only if they provide us with decent houses as soon as possible. So far, what they offer as a replacement does not meet our needs. The conditions are no better.” [15] Three Olmazor residents. A group of three neighbours: Rifat Saburov, Ahmad Asimov, Evgenii Gorbunov were one of the last people, who remained in the Olmazor mahalla despite the inconveniences of being cut off from electricity and gas and the dust from the demolition. They did not want to move from their houses and were not content with the condition of the offered replacements in the form of apartments. They claimed that they appealed to the hokimiyat but did not receive any response:

“We were not given any written notice about demolition of the area. The BTI (Bureau on Technical Inventory) just came to inform us verbally. The news just killed us. The whole mahalla, neighbors, are dispersed around the city. We will not be able to see each other anymore. Of course, we would like to have houses in this area if only they could build them. However, as we see, there is no opportunity. We were offered some places, but we did not like the places we have seen. There is construction going on in those areas too, there will be the same mess...We would like to be heard by the khokimiyat. We are living in this dust, cut off from electricity and gas. We have written zayavlenie (an appeal), but no reaction…” [15]

During the swift preparation of the territory for ‘Tashkent City’, in neighbouring O’qchi mahalla, 521 houses owned by 2165 families were demolished. According to a legal expert at the directorate of ‘Tashkent City’, out of 2165, only 1138 families lived in the area before demolition started. This means that the other 1027 families have not received compensation in any form for not residing in the de facto area. [25]