# Kyrgyzstan - United States Department of State

- Joint Statement on the United States-Kyrgyz Republic Annual Bilateral Consultations Office of the SpokespersonThe text of the following statement was released by the Governments of the United States of America and the Kyrgyz Republic on the occasion of the 2024&nbsp;United States-Kyrgyz Republic&nbsp;Annual Bilateral Consultations (ABCs).Begin Text:The Deputy Foreign Minister of the Kyrgyz Republic Aibek Moldogaziev and&nbsp;U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs John Mark Pommersheim led successful Annual Bilateral Consultations on April 22, 2024, in Bishkek.&nbsp;Noting the historic&nbsp;C5+1 Summit held on September 22, 2023, in New York, the Kyrgyz Republic and the United States emphasized the C5+1 format’s positive impact on regional cooperation and the U.S.-Kyrgyz’ collective commitment to enhancing the U.S.-Central Asia regional partnership. Both Deputy Foreign Minister&nbsp;Moldogaziev and Deputy Assistant Secretary Pommersheim reaffirmed the importance of the ABCs in advancing shared priorities, including those related to political and security cooperation, economic partnership and support for civil society and rule of law.Political and Security CooperationThe participants discussed security cooperation, including counterterrorism, border protection, global health security, and continued defense cooperation.&nbsp; The United States reiterated its unwavering support for the Kyrgyz Republic’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence throughout the 32 years of U.S.-Kyrgyz bilateral partnership.Economic PartnershipThe United States applauded the Kyrgyz Republic’s commitment to developing the creative economy. The participants discussed future opportunities to work together such as providing opportunities for Kyrgyzstani leaders in this field to network, exchange ideas, and demonstrate the latest trends and technologies. The participants underscored their continued commitment to grow and diversify the Kyrgyz economy, increase U.S. private sector investment, improve regional connectivity and trade, protect public health, advance partnership on critical minerals and the green economy, create economic opportunities for persons with disabilities, and expand agricultural cooperation.Civil Society and Rule of LawThe Kyrgyz Republic and the United States acknowledged&nbsp;media freedom, a strong civil society, respect for human rights &#8211; including the rights of women &#8211; stronger protections against gender-based violence, judicial independence, and combating corruption are integral to achieving our shared goal of a resilient, prosperous, and secure Kyrgyz Republic.&nbsp;&nbsp;The United States and the Kyrgyz Republic discussed the importance of continuing to increase cooperation through educational and English language programming. The participants noted people-to-people ties&nbsp;are an important element&nbsp;of the U.S.-Kyrgyz bilateral relationship.Deputy Foreign Minister&nbsp;Moldogaziev and Deputy Assistant Secretary Pommersheim expressed their commitment to the Kyrgyz &#8211; U.S. partnership and their intention to hold the next Annual Bilateral Consultations in Washington in 2025.End Text.						Tags																					Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs																								Kyrgyzstan																								Office of the Spokesperson
- Kyrgyz Republic HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Kyrgyz Republic				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Kyrgyz Republic																																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																																																																																							Download Report																																																							Translations																																																																 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																																									a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																																											b. Disappearance																																																																											c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																																			Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																																																		d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																																			Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																																																		e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																																			Trial Procedures																																																								Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																																																		f. Transnational Repression																																																																											g. Property Seizures and Restitution																																																																											h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																																																	Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																																									a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																																			Internet Freedom																																																																																																																		b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																																			Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																																								Freedom of Association																																																																																																																		c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																									Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption in Government																															Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																															Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																											Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				There were no significant changes in the human rights situation in the Kyrgyz Republic during the year.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: use of torture by law enforcement and security services; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest; serious problems with the independence of the judiciary; arbitrary interference with privacy; serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media freedom, including violence and threats of violence against journalists, and censorship; serious restrictions on internet freedom; substantial interference with freedom of association including overly restrictive laws on the funding and operation of nongovernmental and civil society organizations; government corruption; extensive gender-based violence; crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting members of minority groups; crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex persons; significant restrictions on workers’ freedom of association; and the existence of the worst forms of child labor.While the government took steps to investigate and prosecute or punish officials known to have committed human rights abuses, official impunity remained a problem.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										There were no reports that the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings.																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										The law prohibited such practices. Nevertheless, physical abuse, including inhuman and degrading treatment, reportedly continued in prisons. Police abuse reportedly remained a problem, notably in pretrial detention and detention facilities under the control of the State Committee for National Security (GKNB).Defense attorneys, journalists, and human rights monitoring organizations, including Golos Svobody, Bir Duino, and international nongovernmental organizations (NGO) Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Transparency International, reported incidents of torture by police and other law enforcement agencies. Through September the Antitorture Coalition (an NGO) reported 95 allegations of torture registered in the National Unified Crime Register. According to the Antitorture Coalition, only four cases of torture went to court, with one resulting in a guilty verdict and a fine. NGOs stated that the government established strong torture-monitoring bodies but that influence from some parts of the government threatened the independence of these bodies.The Antitorture Coalition also accepted complaints of torture and passed them to the Prosecutor General’s Office to facilitate investigations. According to members of the Antitorture Coalition, the cases it submitted against alleged torturers did not lead to convictions.In cases where prosecutors tried police on torture charges, prosecutors, judges, and defendants routinely raised procedural and substantive objections. These objections delayed the cases, often resulting in stale evidence, and ultimately contributed to case dismissal.NGOs reported that courts regularly accepted as evidence confessions allegedly induced through torture. The human rights NGO Bir Duino reported that the police continued to use torture to elicit confessions, and that courts often dismissed allegations of torture, claiming that the defendants were lying to weaken the state’s case. Defense lawyers stated that once prosecutors took a case to trial, a conviction was almost certain.According to Golos Svobody, investigators often took two weeks or longer to review torture claims, at which point the physical evidence of torture was no longer visible. Defense attorneys presented most allegations of torture during trial proceedings, and the courts typically rejected them. In some cases, detainees who filed torture complaints later recanted, reportedly due to intimidation by law enforcement officers.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						Prison conditions were harsh and sometimes life threatening due to food and medicine shortages, overcrowding, substandard health care, lack of heat, and mistreatment.Abusive Physical Conditions: Pretrial and temporary detention facilities were particularly overcrowded, and conditions and mistreatment generally were worse than in prisons. Authorities grouped juveniles in overcrowded temporary detention centers when other facilities were unavailable.NGOs reported that, in some cases, prison gangs controlled prison management and discipline where prison officials lacked capacity and expertise in operating a facility. In some instances, the gangs controlled items that were brought into the prison, such as food and clothing, while some prison officials allegedly ignored such activity. According to NGOs, authorities did not try to dismantle these groups, believing they were too powerful and that removing them could lead to chaos.Inmates reported they did not have access to appropriate medical care in prisons, including medications. Advocates noted that pretrial detention facilities, and notably facilities under control of the GKNB, lacked appropriate medical personnel and standardized medical care regulations.Administration: Prisoners had the right to file complaints with prison officials or with higher authorities. Authorities did not conduct proper investigations of credible allegations of mistreatment. According to Bir Duino, prison staff inconsistently reported and documented complaints. Many observers believed the official number of prisoner complaints of mistreatment represented only a small fraction of the actual cases of mistreatment. Officials running pretrial detention facilities often denied persons held in pretrial detention access to visitors.Independent Monitoring: The government allowed the National Center to prevent Torture (NCPT), an independent and impartial body, to monitor detention facilities. NGO representatives stated that NCPT officials monitored and documented some violations in detention facilities. They stressed, as in previous years, that the government needed to implement a standardized approach to identifying torture cases and provide the NCPT sufficient resources and staff members to conduct its work.Most monitoring groups, including the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), reported receiving unfettered access to prisons and pretrial detention facilities, except for detention centers the GKNB operated. Some NGOs, including Bir Duino and Spravedlivost, had the right to visit prisons independently so that they could provide technical assistance, such as medical and psychological care for inmates.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The law prohibited arbitrary arrest and detention and provided for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest or detention in court. The government did not observe these requirements. Human rights organizations reported that authorities unfairly targeted and arrested ethnic Uzbeks for alleged involvement in banned religious organizations and for alleged “religious extremism activity.” NGOs reported security services monitored the social media accounts of ethnic Uzbeks and frequently arrested individuals whom they alleged were associated with “extremist groups.” Attorneys reported police would often file false charges and then solicit bribes from the accused in exchange for their release.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						According to the criminal procedure code, only courts had the authority to issue search and seizure warrants. Activists frequently reported detention without a warrant or in contravention of regulatory standards. NGOs reported police targeted vulnerable defendants from whom they believed they could secure a bribe. Authorities could legally hold a detainee for 48 hours before filing charges. Experts on torture and abuse reported police and security services often chose not to register criminal cases to avoid the procedural requirements limiting the period of detention; they would then apply harsh interrogation methods and torture to extract confessions or bribes. The law required investigators to notify a detainee’s family of the detention within 12 hours. The general legal restriction on the length of investigations was 60 days. The law, however, provided courts the discretion to order a suspect held in pretrial detention for as long as one year, depending on the severity of the charges. Judges could, at their discretion, extend the period of arrest for more than one year, depending on the severity of the charges. Once a case went to trial, the law permitted courts to prolong detention until the case was closed with no time limitations. The judicial system operated a functioning bail system. The law allowed courts to use alternative measures instead of detention, such as restrictions on foreign travel and house arrest.Persons arrested or charged with a crime had the right to defense counsel at public expense. The accused had the right by law to consult with defense counsel immediately upon arrest or detention, but in some reported cases the first meeting did not occur until the trial. As in past years, human rights groups noted incidents in which authorities denied attorneys access to arrested children, held them without parental notification, and questioned them without parents or attorneys present, despite laws forbidding these practices.The law authorized the use of house arrest for certain categories of suspects. Reports indicated law enforcement officers selectively enforced the law by incarcerating persons suspected of minor crimes while not pursuing those suspected of more serious offenses or those with significant political connections.Arbitrary Arrest: As in previous years, NGOs and monitoring organizations, including Golos Svobody, Bir Duino, and Spravedlivost, recorded complaints of arbitrary arrest. Observers asserted it was impossible to know the number of cases because most of these individuals did not report their experiences. According to NGOs in the southern part of the country, arrests and harassment of individuals allegedly involved in extremist religious groups – predominantly ethnic Uzbeks – continued.Press reported arrests of individuals suspected of involvement in the banned extremist group Hizb ut-Tahrir; such arrests continued a trend that began in 2014. According to Bir Duino, however, corruption within the law enforcement system motivated some arrests.Local and international observers said the GKNB and law enforcement officers engaged in widespread arbitrary arrests, including some alleged to be politically motivated, detainee abuse, and extortion, particularly in the southern part of the country.On June 6, security services arrested Russian antiwar activist Aleksei Rozhkov and deported him to Russia. Rozhkov later reported through his lawyers that a GKNB officer threatened him with torture if he did not cooperate. On June 9, the GKNB detained Lev Skoryakin, a Russian citizen and antiwar activist, and placed him in pretrial detention. On June 11, the GKNB arrested Russian activist Alena Krylova and placed her in pretrial detention. On June 12, a Bishkek District court ruled to extend both Skoryakin and Krylova’s detentions until September 9. Krylova’s lawyers reported to press that Krylova applied for refugee status in the Kyrgyz Republic. Krylova voluntarily returned to Russia in early October. Skoryakin was offered and accepted asylum status in Germany in October. On October 17, however, activists reported that Skoryakin was abducted in Bishkek by unknown individuals and taken to Russia, where he was placed in pretrial detention.In October 2022, police and state security agents detained 27 journalists, activists, and politicians after they criticized a Kyrgyz-Uzbek border agreement. Most were detained for “seeking to organize mass riots,” “inciting ethnic hatred,” or “plotting a coup.” Of the detained, 13 were released under house arrest following hunger strikes in December 2022; 14 remained in pretrial detention as of October 13. The detainees launched another hunger strike in August, claiming that they had not received access to case materials and were denied the opportunity to review the evidence against them.Pretrial Detention: Defendants frequently suffered lengthy pretrial detention, according to civil society groups. Political influence, complex legal procedures, poor access to lawyers, and limited investigative capacity often lengthened defendants’ time in pretrial detention. Judges had discretion to extend detention for over one year, depending on the severity of the charges. Authorities held approximately 1,886 persons in seven pretrial detention facilities.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										The constitution and law provided for an independent judiciary, but judges were subject to influence or corruption, compromising judicial independence and impartiality. The conduct and outcome of trials appeared predetermined in multiple cases. Numerous sources, including NGOs, attorneys, government officials, and private citizens, asserted that some judges paid bribes to attain their positions. Many attorneys asserted that judges ubiquitously accepted bribes. Authorities generally respected court orders.Numerous NGOs described pervasive violations of the right to a fair trial, including coerced confessions, use of torture, denial of access to counsel, and convictions in the absence of sufficiently conclusive evidence or despite exculpatory evidence. International observers reported threats and acts of violence against defendants and defense attorneys inside and outside the courtroom, as well as intimidation of trial judges by victims’ relatives and friends.																Trial Procedures						While the law provided for the right to a fair and public trial, the judiciary generally did not enforce this right. Judicial proceedings regularly contradicted the constitutional presumption of innocence, and pretrial investigations focused on the collection of sufficient evidence to prove guilt.Defense attorneys complained that judges routinely returned cases to investigators if the prosecutors did not provide enough evidence to prove guilt, during which time suspects could remain in detention. According to attorneys, judges typically gave defendants at least a suspended sentence instead of finding them not guilty, regardless of how little evidence existed to support a conviction.Courts generally opened trials to the public unless the judge or prosecution claimed the case involved state secrets or privacy concerns of defendants. The government granted a limited number of judges the necessary security clearances to access documents deemed secret, further circumscribing defendants’ access to impartial judicial review in cases purporting to relate to national security.The law provided for unlimited visits between an attorney and a client during trial, but authorities occasionally did not grant permission for such visits. The government provided indigent defendants with attorneys at public expense, and defendants could refuse legal counsel and defend themselves. HRW, domestic NGOs, and local attorneys, however, reported some state-provided criminal defense lawyers were complicit with prosecutors and did not properly defend their clients. Many observers, particularly in the southern part of the country, described these lawyers as “pocket attorneys” who would help secure bribes from their client to pass to police and judges, which would then secure the client’s eventual release. International observers reported that defense attorneys in rural areas provided a lower quality of representation than defense attorneys in the capital. In many cases, individuals accused of extremism-related crimes had trouble trying to find an attorney who was not closely connected to police.The law permitted defendants and their counsel to attend all proceedings, call and question witnesses, present evidence, and access prosecution evidence in advance of trial, but courts frequently did not follow these requirements. Courts typically required witnesses to testify in person. Under certain circumstances courts allowed testimony via audio or video recording. Defendants and counsel, by law, had the right to communicate freely, in private, with no limitation on the frequency. Defendants and prosecutors had the right to appeal a court’s decision. An appellate court could increase a lower court’s sentence against a defendant.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						Human rights and civil society NGOs claimed there were a small number of incarcerated political prisoners. NGOs that monitored prison conditions did not report political prisoners were treated differently from other prisoners. The government permitted access to political prisoners by human rights NGOs and the ICRC.																										f. Transnational Repression										Not applicable.																																				g. Property Seizures and Restitution										Not applicable.																																				h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The law prohibited such actions, but there were reports that the government failed to respect these prohibitions. According to the law, wiretaps, home searches, mail interception, and similar acts, including in cases relating to national security, were permitted only with the approval of the prosecutor and based on a court decision. Such actions were permitted exclusively to combat crime. There were reports that the government failed to respect these restrictions, including reports of police planting evidence during investigations and wiretapping suspects without court orders. Government agencies had legal authority to monitor citizens’ telephone and internet communications.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										The constitution and law provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media, however, the government occasionally limited respected this right. Self-censorship increased, and pressure reportedly existed from editors and political figures to bias reporting. Media organizations reported that online harassment and hate speech directed towards independent media outlets continued to increase.Freedom of Expression: Civil society groups noted government authorities increased the application of provisions of law on the “incitement of interethnic, racial, religious, and interregional hatred,” “public calls for violent seizure of power,” and “attempted mass riots” to restrict speech, which affected the ability of civil society activists to operate. On July 3, human rights activist Ondurush Toktonasyrov was charged with “incitement of interethnic, racial, religious, and interregional hatred” in connection with his social media posts. Toktonasyrov was known for his protests against Russia’s war against Ukraine and against detentions of activists, bloggers, and politicians.On August 24, the GKNB detained activist Olzhobai Shakir under suspicion of “attempting to seize power” after Shakir announced on his Facebook page his plans to hold a rally to protest the transfer of four Issyk-Kul resorts to Uzbekistan under a long-term lease.Violence and Harassment: Journalists reported harassment by police and intimidation and pressure by local and national authorities to avoid reporting on sensitive topics, including ethnic conflicts and nationalism, corruption, border violence with Tajikistan, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and political figures. Media members also reported that nonstate actors, particularly politically connected and wealthy individuals, harassed them for reporting on those individuals’ alleged corruption and other kinds of wrongdoing. Journalists also reported they noticed an increase in online harassment and attempts to hack into their private online accounts.Censorship or Content Restrictions for Members of the Press and Other Media, Including Online Media: Journalists sometimes practiced self-censorship to avoid reprisals for their reporting. Journalists and NGO leaders alleged some news outlets instructed their reporters not to report critically on certain politicians or government officials. The sources also reported some news outlets received requests from government offices to report in a particular way or to ignore specific news stories.The government continued its tight controls over news content on state television. NGO leaders and media sources reported state-owned broadcasters remained under pressure to transmit stories promoting government policies and initiatives and develop narratives critical of NGOs, opposition figures, and civil society activists.On August 14, President Japarov signed the law “On Measures to Prevent Harm to Children&#8217;s Health, Their Physical, Intellectual, Mental, Spiritual and Moral Development in the Kyrgyz Republic, and On Mass Media,” which allowed the government to restrict access to information, including online, that it deemed harmful to children. Media advocates said the law censored and imposed arbitrary restrictions on citizens’ access to information.In August the Bishkek Prosecutor’s Office filed lawsuits in two Bishkek district courts to close media development organization Kloop Media Public Foundation. The lawsuits claim that since Kloop was registered as an NGO, and not a media organization, its media arm “goes beyond the scope of its charter” and was an “unlicensed activity.” Despite the stated reasons for the lawsuits, the court filings instead focused on Kloop’s “sharp criticism of the government” and its alleged negative impact on society.Libel/Slander Laws: While slander and libel were not criminal offenses, civil lawsuits could result in defendants paying compensation for moral harm, which the law did not limit in size. Observers stated courts arbitrarily ruled on the amount of compensation and that failure to pay compensation could serve as a basis for criminal prosecution. The government and oligarchs used these laws to restrict public discussion or retaliate against journalists and political opponents.National Security: The criminal code prohibited actions that “incite racial, ethnic, national, religious, and interregional hatred.” Civil society activists noted that charges of extremism, terrorism, incitement, and defamation were used frequently against independent journalists and the media.On August 9, a Bishkek City Court upheld a previous District Court decision against activist Aizhan Myrsan, who was found guilty and fined 100,000 soms ($1,120) for “inciting ethnic hatred” following a social media video clip criticizing the government.																Internet Freedom						The government generally allowed access to the internet, including social media sites. The Civic Initiative on Internet Policy reported on 472 websites blocked by the government, including 14 blocked during the year.On August 30, the Ministry of Culture banned the social media app TikTok, reportedly in response to complaints that the social media network harmed children’s mental development and health.The Ministry of Culture’s block of the website of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Kyrgyz affiliate Azattyk continued from October 2022 until July. In addition, on January 23, the Ministry of Culture filed suit against Azattyk to revoke its license as a mass media outlet. On April 27, a Bishkek District Court ruled in favor of the Ministry of Culture, revoking the media outlet’s license. On July 12, that court decision was overturned following a settlement agreement between the Ministry of Culture and Azattyk, approved by the Bishkek City Court.On September 11, the Ministry of Culture blocked the Kloop Media Public Foundation&#8217;s website for refusing to remove an article about a detainee’s claims of torture at a GKNB pretrial detention facility.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The government occasionally limited the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association.																Freedom of Peaceful Assembly						The constitution provided for this right, although it limited peaceful assembly in some instances. Organizers and participants were responsible for notifying authorities of planned assemblies, but the constitution prohibited authorities from banning or restricting peaceful assemblies, even in the absence of prior notification. Local authorities, however, had the right to demand an end to a public action and, in the event of noncompliance, were empowered to take measures, including arrests, to end assemblies.On October 12, a Bishkek District Court extended the ban of all public meetings and rallies through December 31. The only location where peaceful assemblies were permitted was in Gorky Park in Bishkek. The original decision to ban public meetings and rallies was made by all four Bishkek District Courts in March 2022 in response to the Russian-Ukraine war.On September 29, the Osh Regional Court ruled to ban public rallies in the Uzgen District until November 7, citing security concerns. On October 4, the Osh Regional Court ruled to ban public rallies was put in place in the Chon-Alai and Nookat districts until November 7 and November 18, respectively, also because of security concerns.						Freedom of Association						Although the law provided for freedom of association, the government increased harassment of NGOs. The law prohibited foreign-funded political parties and NGOs, including their representative offices and branches, from pursuing political goals.As in previous years, NGOs reported harassment from government security agencies, including unannounced visits to NGO offices, publication of personnel details, and threats.The government continued to ban 21 “religiously oriented” groups it considered to be extremist, including al-Qa’ida, the Taliban, the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, the Kurdish People’s Congress, the Organization for the Liberation of Eastern Turkistan, Hizb ut-Tahrir, the Union of Islamic Jihad, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, the Unification (Mun San Men) Church, Takfir Jihadist, Jaysh al-Mahdi, Jund al-Khilafah, Ansarullah At-Takfir Val Hidjra, Akromiya, ISIS, Djabhat An Nusra, Katibat al-Imam al-Buhari, Jannat Oshiqlari, Jamaat al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, and Yakyn Incar. Authorities also continued the ban on all materials or activities connected to A. A. Tihomirov, also known as Said Buryatsky.Numerous human rights activists reported continued arrests and prosecution of persons accused of possessing and distributing Hizb ut-Tahrir literature. Most arrests of alleged Hizb ut-Tahrir members occurred in the southern part of the country and involved ethnic Uzbeks.																										c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  https:www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										The law provided for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights.Foreign Travel: The law prohibited travel abroad by citizens who had access to information classified as state secrets until the information was declassified.Citizenship: The law on combating terrorism and extremism allowed the government to revoke the citizenship of anyone convicted of terrorist and extremist activities. The government did not invoke the law this year.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other humanitarian organizations in providing some protection and assistance to refugees, returning refugees, or asylum seekers, as well as other persons of concern. In June, UNHCR reported there were 1,030 refugees and asylum seekers in the country, including 513 from Afghanistan.Access to Asylum: The law provided for the granting of asylum or refugee status, and the government had a system for providing protection to refugees. The law on refugees included nondiscrimination provisions covering persons to whom UNHCR did not grant refugee status when they left their country of origin and extended the validity of documents until a final decision on status was determined by a court. Despite local law, the government ignored asylum requests from asylum seekers likely to be tortured upon their return to their home country.Employment: The government granted legal permission to work to individuals UNHCR determined were refugees and to whom the government granted official residency status in the country. Not all refugees qualified for residency status, according to the government. Individuals whom UNHCR determined were refugees, but to whom the government had not conferred legal residency, were not permitted to work, access medical services, or receive identity documents. Therefore, they were susceptible to exploitation by employers paying substandard wages, not providing benefits, and not complying with labor regulations. These individuals could not file grievances with authorities.Access to Basic Services: The government deemed individuals whom UNHCR determined ineligible for refugee status, as well as asylum seekers who lacked official status, ineligible to receive state-sponsored social benefits. In June, the refugee law was amended to classify refugees and stateless persons as permanently residing foreigners, enabling them to access basic services. The government provided education access to refugee children but could not provide them with school materials. The UN Refugee Agency provided school kits and one-off cash assistance to facilitate refugee children’s education.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The constitution provided citizens the ability to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage. Authorities and party officials responsible for administering elections engaged in some procedural irregularities during recent elections, as reported by international observers.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections: The 2021 national elections were widely reported to be free and fair, although international observers noted significant procedural problems during the vote count and initial stages of tabulation in the 2021 elections for parliament.Participation of Women and Members of Marginalized or Vulnerable Groups: No laws limited participation of women or members of minority groups in the political process, and they did participate. The election code required the names of male and female parliamentary candidates be intermixed on party lists and that no more than 70 percent of candidates on a party list be of the same gender. The law on elections required that members of parliament who resigned their mandate be replaced by persons of the same gender. Women held fewer than 10 percent of parliamentary seats.The law required women to be represented in all branches of government and to constitute no less than 30 percent of state bodies and local authorities. The law did not specify the level of the positions at which they had to be represented. The 30 percent women’s quota for members of parliament did not include single mandate seats.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						While the law provided criminal penalties for public officials convicted of corruption, the government did not implement the law effectively, and officials frequently engaged in corrupt practices with impunity. According to Transparency International, the government appeared to selectively investigate and prosecute corruption cases.Corruption: There were numerous reports of government corruption during the year. Observers alleged law enforcement authorities routinely accepted bribes from accused persons to avoid investigation or prosecution. Law enforcement officers, particularly in the southern part of the country, frequently employed arbitrary arrest, torture, and the threat of criminal prosecution as a means of extorting cash payments from citizens.For additional information about corruption in the country, please see the Department of State’s Investment Climate Statement for the country, and the Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, which includes information on financial crimes.																											Section 5.													 Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights												    																						Numerous domestic and international human rights organizations generally operated without government restriction, investigating and publishing their findings on human rights cases. Government officials at times were uncooperative and unresponsive to their views.Government actions at times appeared to impede the ability of NGOs to operate freely.The United Nations or Other International Bodies: The government permitted visits by representatives of the United Nations and other organizations in connection with the investigation of abuses or monitoring of human rights problems in the country, including those of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, ICRC, Norwegian Helsinki Committee, and International Organization for Migration. The government provided international bodies largely unfettered access to civil society activists, detention facilities and detainees, and government officials.Government Human Rights Bodies: The Ombudsman’s Institute acted as an independent advocate for human rights on behalf of private citizens and NGOs and had the authority to recommend cases for court review. Observers continued to note the atmosphere of impunity surrounding the security forces and their ability to act independently against citizens, factors that limited the number and type of complaints submitted to the Ombudsman’s Institute.Although the Ombudsman’s Institute existed in part to receive complaints of human rights abuses and pass the complaints to relevant agencies for investigation, both domestic and international observers questioned the office’s efficiency and political independence. On May 3, parliament voted to remove Ombudsperson Atyr Abdrakhamatova following her April 19 report on the human rights situation in the country, which noted systemic setbacks “in all areas, including the protection of human and civil rights and freedoms.”. Parliament appointed a new Ombudsperson, Jamiliya Jamanbaeva, on May 17.																											Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence: The rape of both women and men, including spousal rape, was illegal. The government failed to enforce the law effectively, and many rape survivors did not report their rape or sexual assault to police or NGOs. Penalties for conviction of sexual assault ranged from three to eight years’ imprisonment. Prosecutors rarely brought rape cases to court. Police generally regarded spousal rape as an administrative rather than criminal offense.While the law specifically prohibited domestic violence and spousal abuse, violence against women and girls remained a significant yet underreported problem. Penalties for domestic violence convictions ranged from fines to 15 years’ imprisonment, the latter if abuse resulted in death. Domestic violence experts explained that societal and cultural norms around gender roles and women’s rights remained the primary drivers of domestic violence.Among the domestic violence cases brought to court, prosecutors classified a significant number as administrative offenses or misdemeanors, which carried a lighter sentence.Many women did not report crimes against them due to psychological pressure, economic dependence, cultural traditions, fear of stigma, and apathy among law enforcement officers. NGOs noted some women were reluctant to report cases of violence to police because they did not trust the police or the judicial system to handle the cases appropriately. Civil society and media reported instances of spouses retaliating against women who reported abuse.The government sponsored and provided offices for one shelter for survivors of domestic violence, Ayalzat. International NGOs and organizations contributed funding to other shelters throughout the country. NGOs such as HRW questioned the government’s commitment to address the problem. There were 17 crisis centers in the country, of which eight received limited government funding. Experts noted that the centers were under resourced and understaffed.Other Forms of Gender-based Violence or Harassment: Although prohibited by law, the practice of kidnapping women and girls for forced marriage continued. In 2021, the United Nations estimated that approximately one in five marriages in the country began after a woman was kidnapped. Men married to kidnapped brides were more likely to abuse their wives and limit their pursuit of education and employment. The negative effect of the practice extended to children of kidnapped brides. Observers reported there was a greater frequency of early marriage, polygamy, and bride kidnapping in connection with unregistered religious marriages. This also affected data availability on such marriages. Some victims of bride kidnapping went to local police to obtain protective orders, but authorities often poorly enforced such orders. NGOs continued to report that prosecutors rarely pursued kidnappers for bride kidnapping. The law established penalties for bride kidnapping of seven years in prison and a fine, with up to 10 years in prison for the bride kidnapping of a child.The law prohibited physical sexual assault but not verbal sexual harassment. Police did not actively enforce these laws. Media reported on widespread sexual harassment in the workplace and on public transportation. According to data from UN Women, approximately 25 percent of women experienced sexual harassment at the workplace, with the majority occurring at government institutions.Discrimination: The law provided for the same legal status and rights for women and men, but enforcement of the law was poor, and discrimination against women persisted.Data from NGOs working on women’s issues indicated women were less healthy, more abused, less able to work outside the home, and less able than men to determine independently the disposition of their earnings. NGOs reported women migrants were particularly vulnerable to exploitation and discrimination. Disability advocates reported women with disabilities had limited access to medical and social services, and only a third of disabled women were employed. NGOs reported women in rural areas, especially more conservative areas in the south of the country, faced limited opportunities to work outside of the home or own property.On average, employers paid women substantially lower wages than they paid men. Women made up most pensioners, a group particularly vulnerable to deteriorating economic conditions. By law, women were prohibited from working in more than 400 “dangerous professions,” including in the energy, mining, water, factories, trucking, and agriculture sectors, as well as in certain types of construction. This law was a holdover from the Soviet era, and while it was not clear that it was enforced, it presented a barrier to women’s full and free participation in the economy and affected women’s earning potential. In rural areas traditional attitudes toward women limited them to the roles of wife and mother and curtailed educational opportunities. Nationally, women’s economic participation was 46 percent, compared to 76 percent for men, according to the United Nations Working Group on discrimination against women and girls in April.Reproductive Rights: There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities. The law allowed the use of contraception, and individuals were free to choose this method.Societal attitudes, however, discouraged the use of contraception, especially outside of marriage, and local NGOs and the UN Population Fund reported women were often unable to access reproductive healthcare due to conservative societal attitudes, family pressure, or their inability to pay for services. NGOs reported that women from low income or rural backgrounds often struggled to access and afford contraceptives.The government provided access to some sexual and reproductive health services for survivors of sexual violence, including emergency contraception and postexposure prophylaxis. Reproductive health advocates said that although clinical guidelines mandated the provision of sexual and reproductive health services to sexual violence survivors, many clinics, especially in rural areas, lacked the resources to provide a full range of services. The government provided contraceptives for certain groups of women, including those with disabilities and HIV-positive women.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The constitution provided for the right to equality and nondiscrimination on many grounds, including race, language, and ethnicity. International human rights groups, including the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, noted that although there were antidiscrimination provisions in the Criminal and Labor Code, there were no specific provisions in other key areas such as education and healthcare.Tensions between ethnic Uzbeks – who comprised nearly 15 percent of the population – and ethnic Kyrgyz remained problematic, particularly in Southern Osh Oblast where ethnic Uzbeks made up almost one-half of the population. Discrimination against ethnic Uzbeks in business and government, as well as harassment and arbitrary arrests, was reported. Ethnic Uzbeks reported that large public works and road construction projects in predominantly ethnic Uzbek areas, often undertaken without public consultation, interfered with neighborhoods and destroyed homes. NGO Bir Duino reported that ethnic Uzbeks were overwhelmingly targeted by laws governing extremist materials shared or liked on social media.Uzbeks in the south also complained that discriminatory practices in licensing and registering a business with local authorities made starting a small business difficult. In June the UN reported nearly 28 percent of the country’s population was composed of ethnic minorities – Uzbek, Russian, Dungan, Kazakh, and other smaller groups – but fewer than 5 percent of civil servants came from minority groups.																																				Children										Education: The law provided for compulsory and free education for the first nine years of schooling or until age 14 or 15. Secondary education was free and universal until age 17. The government did not provide free basic education to all students. The system of residence registration restricted access to social services, including education for children who were refugees, migrants, or noncitizens. Families of children in public school often paid burdensome and illegal administrative fees.Child Abuse: The Children’s Code regulated the role of different state institutions in ensuring, providing, and protecting children’s rights. The law prohibited child abuse, including crimes against the “sexual inviolability, spiritual, and moral health of children.” According to NGO and UN reports, child abuse, including beatings, child labor, and commercial sexual exploitation of boys and girls continued to occur. The Child Protection League stated that violence against children left under guardianship of the migrants’ relatives occurred in many cases.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage: Children ages 16 and 17 could legally marry with the consent of local authorities, but the law prohibited civil marriages before age 16 under all circumstances. Although illegal, the practice of bride kidnapping continued (see section 6, Women). The kidnapping of underage brides remained underreported.In 2021, the UN estimated that 13 percent of girls under 18 were married. The law criminalized religious marriages involving children; however, prosecutors did not file any cases of criminal charges for religious marriages involving children.Sexual Exploitation of Children: The law prohibited the sale of children, defined as younger than age 18, child trafficking, child commercial sexual exploitation and child pornography, as well as other sexual crimes against children. It provided penalties for conviction of up to 15 years in prison if the victim was a child. The law also made it a crime to involve someone in prostitution by violence or the threat of violence, blackmail, destroying or damaging property, or fraud. The government made limited efforts to enforce the law.The criminal code prohibited the distribution of child pornography and the possession of child pornography with the intent to distribute. The law did not specifically define child pornography, and the criminal code did not fully criminalize computer-related use, access to child pornography online, or simple possession of child pornography.According to UNICEF and local observers, children younger than age 18 in Bishkek were involved in commercial sexual exploitation. Although precise figures were not known, police stated that typical cases involved girls from rural areas who relocated to Bishkek for educational opportunities or to flee an abusive family environment. Once in the capital, they were exploited in sex trafficking due to financial need. NGOs and international organizations reported cases where law enforcement officials were complicit in human trafficking by accepting bribes to drop cases, warning suspected traffickers prior to raids, and allowing traffickers to avoid punishment by offering survivors payment to drop cases. There were also reports that police threatened, extorted, and raped child sex trafficking survivors. The government reportedly did not always investigate allegations of government employees complicit in human trafficking offenses. Under the criminal code, it was illegal for persons ages 18 and older to have sexual relations with someone younger than age 16.																																				Antisemitism										The size of the Jewish population was approximately 400. Starting October 7, some Jewish organizations in Bishkek were targeted by social media users. Several social media posts posted pictures of Bishkek’s only Jewish school with its address, calling for the school to be burned down. On October 28, former MP Tursunbai Bakir uulu organized a protest of more than 100 persons in front of the school to call for the school’s closure. The school’s building was vandalized on November 3 and the school employed private security guards to protect students and staff.																																				Trafficking in Persons										See the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics										Criminalization: The country did not criminalize consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults.Violence and Harassment: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) persons faced high levels of homophobia, transphobia, social stigma, and violence, according to Kyrgyz Indigo, an LGBTQI+ NGO; often, violence occurred in home environments. Recent data from Kyrgyz Indigo showed 70 percent of violence experienced by LGBTQI+ persons occurred at home. Additionally, inmates and officials often openly victimized incarcerated gay men.Forced marriages of lesbians and bisexual women to men also occurred. LGBTQI+ NGOs also reported that the gap in data on LGBTQI+ persons who experienced violence was due to fear of secondary discrimination or reprisal. The Labrys Public Foundation noted the continued practice of “corrective rape” of lesbians, a form of “conversion therapy” to “cure” their LGBTQI+ status. LGBTQI+ NGOs reported harassment and continuing surveillance of their workers and offices by security services. LGBTQI+ activists continued to report that LGBTQI+ community members were subjected to police harassment and threats, including threats of violence or arrest if they did not pay bribes. NGO leaders in the southern part of the country reported an even greater threat. Members of the LGBTQI+ community reported that authorities regularly monitored chatrooms and dating sites to punish and extort those who were seeking homosexual sex through online venues.Discrimination: The law prohibited discrimination by state and nonstate actors based on gender; however, there were no laws that prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. LGBTQI+ persons whose sexual orientation or gender identity was publicly known risked physical and verbal abuse, possible loss of employment, and unwanted attention from police and other authorities. In its 2022 report, the Eurasian Coalition on Health, Rights, Gender and Sexual Diversity registered 31 violations of LGBTQI+ rights in the country. The report noted that most violations were perpetrated by employees of medical institutions and representatives of law enforcement agencies against LGBTQI+ individuals living with HIV and homosexual men in search of partners in social networks.Members of the LGBTQI+ community reported discrimination in the workplace when they publicly disclosed their sexual orientation. LGBTQI+ persons faced a high risk of becoming the victims of deception and labor and sexual exploitation. The most vulnerable LGBTQI+ group in terms of employment discrimination was transgender women, who were frequently forced out of employment opportunities.Civil society activists said the law “On Measure to Prevent Harm to Children’s Health, Their Physical, Intellectual, Mental, Spiritual and Moral Development in the Kyrgyz Republic, and On Mass Media,” enacted in August, indirectly targeted the LGBTQI+ community. The law imposed fines for media organizations, publishers, or ordinary citizens who disseminated “information harmful to children,” and also expanded the definition of “harmful information” to include “any information that denies traditional family values, [or] propagates non-traditional sexual relations.”Availability of Legal Gender Recognition: Ministry of Health guidelines established a legal framework for transgender, transsexual, and gender-nonconforming persons to access legal gender identity documents and receive gender-affirming healthcare. The guidelines complied with the global standard allowing individuals to self-identify their gender.Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices: LGBTQI+ advocates reported that some LGBTQI+ individuals were subjected to “conversion therapy” practices, usually conducted by religious figures who attempted to use coercion and abuse to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity, including the practice of exorcising supernatural spirits from the individual by beatings or strangulation.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly: While there were no laws that directly prohibit LGBTQI+ existence or expression, Article 10 of the constitution indirectly censored LGBTQI+ activities and events as they could be considered contrary to the “moral values and the public consciousness of the people of Kyrgyzstan.”																																				Persons with Disabilities										The law prohibited discrimination against persons with physical, sensory, intellectual, and mental disabilities. The law mandated access to buildings for persons with disabilities, required access to public transportation and parking, authorized subsidies to make mass media available to persons with hearing or vision disabilities, and provided free plots of land for the construction of a home. The government generally did not ensure proper implementation of the law, and discrimination persisted. Persons with disabilities often had difficulty finding employment due to negative societal attitudes and high unemployment among the general population. A 2022 Solidarity Center study estimated that only 20 percent of persons with disabilities were employed, most in seasonal or part-time jobs.A lack of government resources made it difficult for persons with disabilities to receive adequate education. Although children with disabilities had the right to an education, the Association of Parents of Children with Disabilities stated schools often denied them entry.Institutionalized Children: According to UNICEF, the government and families institutionalized one-third of children with disabilities. The government did not adequately provide for basic needs, such as food, water, clothing, heating, and health care, and did not adequately address overcrowded conditions.Authorities usually placed children with mental disabilities in psychiatric hospitals rather than integrating them with other children. HRW reported approximately 3,000 children with disabilities were segregated in residential institutions or segregated schools where they faced neglect and discrimination.HRW reported that institutionalized children with disabilities faced segregation, the overuse of psychotropic medications and forced psychiatric hospitalizations, neglect, and lack of access to quality education. In many institutions a single care worker was responsible for 15 to 25 children at a time.																																				Other Societal Violence or Discrimination										While the law criminalized discrimination and stigmatization of persons with HIV or AIDS, according to UNAIDS, persons with HIV continued to encounter high levels of stigma and discrimination. According to LGBTQI+ organizations, HIV-positive persons and those key populations at increased risk for HIV felt fear or experienced verbal abuse, harassment, and threats, with some reporting incidents of physical abuse and assault. Civil society reported that social stigma of positive HIV and AIDS status led to discrimination in hiring, loss of employment, and a lack of access to housing for individuals with such a status or LGBTQI+ individuals.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The law provided for the right of workers to form and join trade unions, except domestics and migrants. The government effectively enforced these rights. The law provided for the right of unions to organize and bargain collectively and conduct their activities without interference. Workers could strike, but the requirement to receive formal approval made striking difficult and complicated. The law on government service prohibited government employees and medical professionals from striking, but the prohibition did not apply to teachers. The law did not prohibit retaliation against striking workers. Penalties were commensurate with those for other laws involving denials of civil rights, such as discrimination. Penalties were sometimes applied against violators.Many unions reportedly operated as quasi-official institutions that took state interests into consideration rather than representing workers’ interests exclusively. The Federation of Trade Unions of Kyrgyzstan (FTU) remained the only umbrella trade union in the country. Most unions were affiliated with the FTU, although the government did not require such affiliation. Labor rights advocates reported the existence of several smaller unaffiliated unions.Workers exercised their right to form and join unions, and unions exercised the right to organize and bargain collectively. Union leaders generally cooperated with the government. There were limited reports of government interference with union activities. International observers judged that unions represented the interests of their members poorly.According to labor activists, workers in mines (primarily gold and coal) owned and operated by Chinese firms were not provided the same rights of freedom of association or collective bargaining. Strikes by workers at these mines, often demanding higher wages or safer working conditions, were organized ad hoc and without official representation or mechanisms for negotiating with mine owners. Local authorities were less inclined to interfere with the operations at these mines, including enforcement of worker’s rights.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										See The Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment										See the Department of Labor’s Findings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor at  https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/resources/reports/child-labor/findings/ .																																				d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																														e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws: The law provided for a national minimum wage for all sectors of the economy, which was less than the official government’s 2021 poverty line. The law on minimum wage stated it should rise gradually to meet the cost of living. The government did not effectively enforce laws related to minimum wage and overtime. There was limited employer liability for late payment of wages, allowances, or other social benefits. Penalties were not commensurate with those for similar crimes, such as fraud. The standard workweek was 40 hours, usually with a five-day week. For state-owned industries, there was a mandated 24-hour rest period in a seven-day workweek. According to the labor code, overtime work could not exceed four hours per day or 20 hours per week. The labor code also stated workers engaged in overtime work had to receive compensatory leave or premium pay of between 150 and 200 percent of the hourly wage. Compliance with these requirements differed among employers. For example, large companies and organizations with strong labor unions often abided by these provisions. Employers of small or informal firms where employees had no union representation often did not enforce these legal provisions.Occupational Safety and Health: Occupational safety and health (OSH) standards were appropriate for the main industries in the country, but the government generally did not enforce them; the mining industry, construction, transport, and energy sectors were considered the most hazardous. The law did not clarify that occupational safety and health experts, rather than workers, were responsible for identifying unsafe situations. Factory operators often employed workers in poor safety and health conditions. Penalties for violations of the law, which ranged from community service to fines, were commensurate with those for crimes like negligence. Penalties were rarely applied against violators. The law provided workers the right to remove themselves from a hazardous workplace without jeopardizing their employment.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement: The Ministry of Labor, Social Security and Migration was responsible for protecting workers and carrying out inspections for all types of labor problems. Enforcement of wage requirements was somewhat effective; employers often chose to negotiate directly with employees rather than face potential fines. Occupational safety enforcement remained weak, and penalties were rarely applied against violators. The government announced In November a new moratorium on labor inspections following the expiration of a prior three-year moratorium on all state inspections. Although the ministry conducted 186 inspections during the first half of the year, the ILO noted the ministry lacked funding and personnel to carry out robust inspections.The National Statistics Committee defined informal economic activity as household units that produce goods and services primarily to provide jobs and income to their members. In 2022, an estimated 30 percent of the population worked in the formal economy, while the rest worked in the informal economy, which the International Monetary Fund estimated to be equivalent to more than 40 percent of GDP. The government did not enforce labor laws nor provide for occupational health and safety standards for workers in the informal economy.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Côte d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Gambia											The Netherlands											Timor-Leste											Togo											The Bahamas											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																							a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																						b. Disappearance																																																						c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																				Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																				d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																				Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																				e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																				Trial Procedures																																												Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																				f. Transnational Repression																																																						g. Property Seizures and Restitution																																																						h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																			Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																							a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																				Internet Freedom																																																																																				b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																				Freedom of Peaceful Assembly																																												Freedom of Association																																																																																				c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																							Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption in Government																Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																						Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs																								Kyrgyzstan
- Protection of Non-Governmental Organizations in the Kyrgyz Republic  HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;Protection of Non-Governmental Organizations in the Kyrgyz Republic 				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										Protection of Non-Governmental Organizations in the Kyrgyz Republic 																																		Press Statement																														April 2, 2024																																							We are deeply concerned by the Kyrgyz Republic’s enactment of the so-called “Foreign Representatives” bill into law, which puts at risk the work of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that are essential to a more democratic and inclusive Kyrgyz Republic. This is the latest in a series of Kyrgyz government actions that have undermined democratic governance and civil society. NGOs play a critical role in linking government and the community to improve the welfare of all Kyrgyzstanis. The “Foreign Representatives” law will place undue burdens on NGOs and has the potential to limit or end the operation of organizations that are delivering critical assistance to the Kyrgyz people – including U.S. assistance that is implemented by local and international NGOs. Restricting the work of these organizations and allowing for unbridled government interference in their operations could prevent the provision of U.S. assistance that improves health care and education, strengthens the rule of law, improves delivery of public services, and expands economic opportunity for Kyrgyzstanis. This work is integral to achieving our shared goal of a prosperous and successful Kyrgyz Republic.  It is in our shared interest to support effective democratic governance and civil society, and by so doing, contribute to strengthening peace and security. We will continue to engage with the Kyrgyz government on protecting civil society and defending fundamental freedoms. 						Tags																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs																																Civil Society																															Kyrgyzstan																																Non-governmental Organization																															Office of the Spokesperson
- B5+1 Forum HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;B5+1 Forum				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										B5+1 Forum																																		Media Note																														March 15, 2024																																							The Governments of the United States, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan joined private sector representatives in the inaugural B5+1 Forum in Almaty, Kazakhstan, from March 13-15, 2024.Announced by President Biden during the inaugural C5+1 Summit in September 2023 and highlighted in the corresponding New York Declaration, the B5+1 is the private-sector-led counterpart to the C5+1 &#8211; the diplomatic platform among the five Central Asian governments plus the United States.&nbsp; With the “B” standing for business, the B5+1 platform facilitates public-private sector dialogue to foster enhanced U.S.-Central Asia economic partnership. &nbsp;The U.S. delegation was led by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Central Asian Affairs John Mark Pommersheim and National Security Council Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Russia and Central Asia Nicholas Berliner.During the B5+1 Forum, participants engaged in a series of discussions regarding&nbsp;economic opportunities for Central Asian and U.S. businesses. They offered priority recommendations for improving the business operating environment in Central Asia and advancing regional economic integration, competitive markets, and foreign investment to the region.&nbsp; With support from the U.S. Department of State, the Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE) will continue to lead B5+1 activities in pursuit of sustainable and inclusive economic growth in Central Asia.						Tags																					Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs																																Business																																																					Economic Prosperity and Trade Policy																															Kazakhstan																								Kyrgyzstan																								Office of the Spokesperson																								Tajikistan																								Turkmenistan
- DRL FY23 Strengthening Civil Society Resiliency in the Kyrgyz Republic Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborUnited States Department of StateBureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL)Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO):  DRL Strengthening Civil Society Resiliency in the Kyrgyz Republic This is the announcement of funding opportunity number SFOP0010247Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:  19.345Type of Solicitation:  Open CompetitionApplication Deadline:  11:59 PM EST on Monday, May 6, 2024Total Funding Floor:  $750,000Total Funding Ceiling:  $750,000Anticipated Number of Awards:  1Type of Award: GrantPeriod of Performance:  24 monthsAnticipated Time to Award, Pending Availability of Funds:  5-7 monthsA. Project DescriptionThe U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) announces an open competition for organizations interested in submitting applications in response to the following solicitation.  DRL anticipates funding one proposal from this solicitation, pending availability of funding.The Kyrgyz Republic has long had a reputation of having the most vibrant, active civil society and independent media in Central Asia.  In recent years however, concerning trends have put that reputation at risk.  Harassment of activists, independent media and CSOs has intensified, with peaceful rallies limited to specific places, with authorities extending restrictions every few months.Kyrgyz CSOs now face systematic attacks including arbitrary criminal and administrative prosecutions, deportations, and anonymous offline and online threats. They routinely endure unannounced tax inspections and smear campaigns on social media. Additionally, draft anti-democratic legislation currently for consideration in the Kyrgyz parliament threatens to seriously undermine freedom of association and further restrict CSO operating space.In this challenging environment, DRL aims to maintain civil space and build civil society resiliency. This project’s primary objective is ensuring Kyrgyz CSOs have the tools, training, resources, and support to remain safely and effectively engaged in their work amid increasing repressions.Elements of useful programming could include digital and physical security trainings, financial audits, flexible small-grants, legal support, advocacy strategy development, cyber bullying response tactics, or building solidarity networks domestically and internationally. The focus should be holistic, addressing security, legal, financial, operational, and psychosocial needs given the multilayered pressures civil society faces.Program outcomes could include one or more of the following but are not limited to:Civil society and community actors operate and coordinate safely to navigate the new/emerging legal operating environment in Kyrgyz Republic.Kyrgyz civil society organizations have the tools, resources, and support to safely and more effectively remain engaged in their work amid increasing restrictions and repressions that challenge the civic space.Kyrgyz civil society engages in advocacy on human rights issues.All programs should aim to have impact that leads to reforms and have the potential for sustainability beyond DRL resources.  DRL’s preference is to avoid duplicating past efforts by supporting new and creative approaches.  This does not exclude from consideration projects that improve upon or expand existing successful projects in a new and complementary way.DRL is committed to advancing equity and support for underserved and underrepresented communities.  In accordance with the Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Underserved Communities, programs should implement strategies for integration and inclusion of individuals/organizations/beneficiaries that can bring perspectives based on their religion, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, sex characteristics, national origin, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, pregnancy, political affiliation, or veteran’s status.  Programs should be demand-driven and locally led to the extent possible.DRL requires all programs to be non-discriminatory and expects implementers to include strategies for nondiscrimination of individuals/organizations/beneficiaries based on race, color, religion, sex, gender identity, gender expression, sex characteristics, sexual orientation, pregnancy, national origin, disability, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, political affiliation, or veteran’s status.Competitive proposals may also include a summary budget and budget narrative for 12 additional months following the proposed period of performance, indicated above.  This information should indicate what objective(s) and/or activities could be accomplished with additional time and/or funds beyond the proposed period of performance.Where appropriate, competitive proposals may include:Opportunities for beneficiaries to apply their new knowledge and skills in practical efforts;Solicitation of feedback and suggestions from beneficiaries when developing activities in order to strengthen the sustainability of programs and participant ownership of project outcomes;Input from participants on sustainability plans and systematic review of the plans throughout the life of the project, with adjustments made as necessary;Joint identification and definition of key concepts with relevant stakeholders and stakeholder input into project activities;Systematic follow-up with beneficiaries at specific intervals after the completion of activities to track how beneficiaries are retaining new knowledge as well as applying their new skills.Activities that are not typically allowed include, but are not limited to:The provision of humanitarian assistance;English language instruction;Development of high-tech computer or communications software and/or hardware;Purely academic exchanges or fellowships;External exchanges or fellowships lasting longer than six months;Off-shore activities that are not clearly linked to in-country initiatives and impact or are not necessary per security concerns;Theoretical explorations of human rights or democracy issues, including projects aimed primarily at research and evaluation that do not incorporate training or capacity-building for local civil society;Micro-loans or similar small business development initiatives;Initiatives directed towards a diaspora community rather than current residents of targeted countries.This notice is subject to availability of funding.B. Federal Award InformationPrimary organizations can submit one application in response to the NOFO.The U.S. government may:  (a) reject any or all applications, (b) accept other than the lowest cost application, (c) accept more than one application, and (d) waive irregularities in applications received.The U.S. government may make award(s) on the basis of initial applications received, without discussions or negotiations.  Therefore, each initial application should contain the applicant&#8217;s best terms from a cost and technical standpoint.  The U.S. government reserves the right (though it is under no obligation to do so), however, to enter into discussions with one or more applicants in order to obtain clarifications, additional detail, or to suggest refinements in the project description, budget, or other aspects of an application.DRL anticipates awarding either a grant or cooperative agreement depending on the needs and risk factors of the program.  The final determination on award mechanism will be made by the Grants Officer.  The distinction between grants and cooperative agreements revolves around the existence of “substantial involvement.”  Cooperative agreements require greater Federal government participation in the project.  If a cooperative agreement is awarded, DRL will undertake reasonable and programmatically necessary substantial involvement.  Examples of substantial involvement can include, but are not limited to:Active participation or collaboration with the recipient in the implementation of the award;Review and approval of one stage of work before another can begin;Review and approval of substantive provisions of proposed sub-awards or contracts beyond existing Federal policy;Approval of the recipient’s plan of work prior to the award.The authority for this funding opportunity is found in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (FAA).C. Eligibility InformationFor application information, please see the proposal submission instructions (PSI), updated December 2023 on our website.C.1 Eligible ApplicantsDRL welcomes applications from U.S.-based and foreign-based non-profit organizations/nongovernmental organizations (NGO) and public international organizations; private, public, or state institutions of higher education; and for-profit organizations or businesses.  DRL’s preference is to work with non-profit entities; however, there may be some occasions when a for-profit entity is best suited.Applications submitted by for-profit entities may be subject to additional review following the panel selection process.  Additionally, the Department of State prohibits profit to for-profit or commercial organizations under its assistance awards.  Profit is defined as any amount in excess of allowable direct and indirect costs.  The allowability of costs incurred by commercial organizations is determined in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) at 48 CFR 30, Cost Accounting Standards Administration, and 48 CFR 31 Contract Cost Principles and Procedures.Please see 2 CFR 200.307 for regulations regarding program income.C.2 Cost Sharing or MatchingProviding cost sharing, matching, or cost participation is not an eligibility factor or requirement for this NOFO and providing cost share will not result in a more favorable competitive ranking.  Per 2 CFR 200.306, budget line items that are proposed for cost share must be allowable per 2 CFR 200, Subpart E—Cost Principles.C.3 OtherApplicants should have existing, or the capacity to develop, active partnerships with thematic or in-country partners, entities, and relevant stakeholders, including private sector partners and NGOs, and have demonstrable experience in administering successful and preferably similar projects.  DRL encourages applications from foreign-based NGOs headquartered in the geographic regions/countries relevant to this NOFO.  Applicants may form consortia in order to bring together organizations with varied expertise to propose a comprehensive program in one proposal.  However, one organization should be designated in the proposal as the lead applicant, with the other members designated as sub-award partners.  DRL reserves the right to request additional background information on applicants that do not have previous experience administering federal grant awards, and these applicants may be subject to limited funding on a pilot basis.DRL is committed to an anti-discrimination policy in all of its programs and activities.  DRL welcomes applications irrespective of race, ethnicity, color, creed, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, or other status.  DRL seeks applications that demonstrate that the recipient does not discriminate against any beneficiaries in implementation of a potential award, such as, but not limited to, by withholding, adversely impacting, or denying equitable access to the benefits provided through this award on the basis of any factor not expressly stated in the award.  This includes, for example, race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, gender expression, sex characteristics, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, disability, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, political affiliation, or veteran’s status.  The recipient should insert this provision, including this paragraph, in all sub-grants and contracts under a potential award.Any applicant listed on the Excluded Parties List System in the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) (www.sam.gov) and/or has a current debt to the U.S. government is not eligible to apply for an assistance award in accordance with the OMB guidelines at 2 CFR 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 (3 CFR,1986 Comp., p. 189) and 12689 (3 CFR,1989 Comp., p. 235), “Debarment and Suspension.”  Additionally, no entity or person listed on the Excluded Parties List System in SAM.gov can participate in any activities under an award.  All applicants are strongly encouraged to review the Excluded Parties List System in SAM.gov to ensure that no ineligible entity or person is included in their application.D. Application and Submission InformationD.1 Address to Request Application PackageApplicants can find application forms, kits, or other materials needed to apply on www.grants.gov and SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com) under the announcement title “DRL Strengthening Civil Society Resiliency in the Kyrgyz Republic,” funding opportunity number “SFOP0010247.”  Please contact the DRL point of contact listed in Section G if requesting reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities or for security reasons.  Please note that reasonable accommodations do not include deadline extensions.D.2 Content and Form of Application SubmissionFor all application documents, please ensure:All documents are in English and all costs are in U.S. Dollars.  If an original document within the application is in another language, an English translation must be provided (please note the Department of State, as indicated in 2 CFR 200.111, requires that English is the official language of all award documents).  If any document is provided in both English and a foreign language, the English language version is the controlling version;All pages are numbered, including budgets and attachments;All documents are formatted to 8 1⁄2 x 11 paper; and,All documents are single-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font, with 1-inch margins.  Captions and footnotes may be 10-point Times New Roman font.  Font sizes in charts and tables, including the budget, can be reformatted to fit within one page width.D.2.1 Application RequirementsComplete applications must include the following:Completed and signed SF-424, SF-424A, and SF-424B forms.  Please see SF-424 instructions in Section 2B of the PSI.Organizations that engage in lobbying the U.S. government, including Congress, or pay for another entity to lobby on their behalf, are also required to complete the SF-LLL “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities” form (only if applicable).  Please see SF-LLL guidance in Section 2B of the PSI.Cover Page (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) that includes a table with the organization name, project title, target country/countries, project synopsis, and name and contact information for the application’s main point of contact.  Please see Cover Page Section 2C of the PSI for a template and more details.Executive Summary (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) that outlines project goals, objectives, activities, etc.The Executive Summary should include a brief section that explicitly states:  (1) the problem statement addressed by the project, (2) research-based evidence justifying the unique project approach, and (3) quantifiable project outcomes and impacts.Table of Contents (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) listing all documents and attachments with page numbers.Proposal Narrative (not to exceed ten (10) pages, preferably as a Word Document).  Please note the ten-page limit does not include the Cover Page, Executive Summary, Table of Contents, Attachments, Detailed Budget, Budget Narrative, Audit, or NICRA.  Applicants are encouraged to combine multiple documents into a single Word Document or PDF (i.e., Cover Page, Table of Contents, Executive Summary, and Proposal Narrative in one file).  Please see Proposal Narrative Guidelines in Section 2F of the PSI for more details. The Proposal Narrative should demonstrate the applicant’s commitment to ensuring the participation of all people as a strategy for implementation.  Please integrate inclusion strategies in all sections of the Proposal Narrative to enhance programmatic impact.Budget (preferably as an Excel workbook) that includes three (3) columns containing the request to DRL, any cost sharing contribution, and the total budget.  A summary budget should also be included using the OMB-approved budget categories (see SF-424A as a sample) in a separate tab.  Costs must be in U.S. Dollars.  Detailed line-item budgets for sub-grantees should be included as additional tabs within the Excel workbook (if available at the time of submission).Please see Budget Guidelines Section 2G of the PSI for more information.The programming approach should be dedicated to strengthening inclusive societies as a necessary pillar of strong democracies.  Please include costs associated with this commitment in the Budget and Budget Narrative.Competitive proposals may include a summary budget for no additional months following the proposed period of performance.Budget Narrative (preferably as a Word Document) that includes substantive explanations and justifications for each line item in the detailed budget spreadsheet, as well as the source and a description of all cost-share offered.  Please see Budget Guidelines Section 2G of the PSI for more information.Competitive proposals may include a summary budget narrative for no  additional months following the proposed period of performance.The organization’s most recent audit, if applicable.  This should be a single audit, program-specific audit, or other audit in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS).  Please see Audit Section 2H of the PSI for more information.Logic Model (preferably as a Word Document).  Please see Logic Model Section 2I of the PSI for more information.Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative (not to exceed four (4) pages, preferably as a Word Document).  Please see Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative Section 2J of the PSI for more information.As stated within the DRL Guide to Program Monitoring and Evaluation (p. 6): DRL strongly encourages applicants to consider whether their monitoring and evaluation systems are utilizing human rights-based approaches, applying a gender and equity lens, and/or include the participation of sub-grantees and project participants.  Within the Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative, applicants should demonstrate their commitment to inclusive strategies and consider whether evaluation design, data collection, analysis, reporting and learning are conducted in an ethical and responsible way with all project participants (e.g. direct beneficiaries, sub-grantees).  Applicants should still make adequate provisions to protect the privacy of human subjects when collecting data from individuals.  For instance, when collecting data from project participants, consider whether your organization will have the necessary informed consent forms, confidentiality agreements, and data security protocols.  Applicants should be aware that, should an application move forward for funding consideration, DRL will request a detailed Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for further review and approval.  Risk Analysis (preferably as a Word Document).  Please see Risk Analysis Section 2K of the PSI for more information on this requirement, including Do No Harm principles and Preventing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA) policies/plans.Key Personnel (not to exceed two (2) pages, preferably as a Word Document).  Please include short bios that highlight relevant professional experience.  Given the limited space, CVs are not recommended for submission.Timeline (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document or Excel Sheet).  The timeline of the overall proposal should include activities, evaluation efforts, and program closeout.Gender and Inclusion Analysis (not to exceed three (3) pages, preferably as a Word Document) that provides a concise analysis of relevant gender norms, equity and equality for underserved communities and marginalized populations, power relations, and conflict dynamics in target countries.  Potential domains of analysis include institutional practices and barriers, cultural norms, gender roles, access to and control over assets and resources, and patterns of power and decision-making.  Applicants should briefly explain how they have integrated findings from their analysis into project design and/or other proposal documents, including a plan for regularly reviewing and updating the gender and inclusion analysis with local partners/beneficiaries, and making any necessary adjustments to project implementation.  A set of guiding questions can be found in Section 2L of the PSI.Security Plan addressing any issues involving in-person events and recruitment for said events, and safety for any online programs or communications, including independent IT security audits (to include a vulnerability assessment) of any proposed web application or platform.  Organization’s Security Plan should demonstrate consideration of the risks identified in the submitted risk assessment.  Costs may also be identified within the budget and budget narrative.  Applicants are also encouraged to include contingency plans for in-person or online activities.Contingency Plan for proposed activities should the originally planned activities not be able to be implemented.  The Contingency Plan should be submitted as an additional annex.  Applicants should demonstrate consideration of the risks identified in the submitted risk assessment and include specific alternative activities or locations as part of the Contingency Plan.  Any proposed “plan” must comply with 2CFR200.433 – Contingency provisions.  Plans must not include unallocable or unallowable expenses and must not result in a larger Total Award Value than the identified as the “competition ceiling.”  DRL requires prior approval by the Grants Officer of the “plan” before any activities can take place, or costs can be incurred against the “plan.”Lessons Learned (not to exceed one (1) page, preferably as a Word Document) from past programs (insert country or theme) that demonstrate how the implementer has safely operated and responded to programmatic challenges, learning from both successes and failures, in the operating environment.  To be incorporated into the ten (10) pages allowed for “Proposal Narrative.”Psychosocial Assistance (to be incorporated into the ten (10) pages allowed for “Proposal Narrative,” and into “Budget” and “Budget Narrative”).  A section in the proposal, budget, and budget narrative to reflect appropriate resources and support for the psychosocial health of staff (i.e., activities can range from access to educational materials and training opportunities to counseling services to other contextually relevant support).References:  For reference to international guidance, please see the following: Core Humanitarian Standard Commitment 8.9 (https://corehumanitarianstandard.org/files/files/CHS-Guidance-Notes-and-Indicators.pdf); and IASC Guidelines on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergency Settings Action Sheet 4.4 (http://www.who.int/mental_health/emergencies/guidelines_iasc_mental_health_psychosocial_june_2007.pdf).Applications that do not include the elements listed above will be deemed technically ineligible.    D.2.2 Additional Application DocumentsStrong applications will also contain the following:Individual Letters of Support and/or Memorandum of Understanding.  Letters of support and MOUs must be specific to the project implementation (e.g., from proposed partners or sub-award recipients) and will not count towards the page limit.Please refer to the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI), updated December 2023, on DRL’s website for detailed guidance on the documents above:  https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/programs-and-grants/.  For an application checklist and sample templates please see the Resources page on DRL’s website:  https://www.state.gov/resources-for-programs-and-grants/.  The sample templates provided on the DRL website are suggested, but not mandatory.DRL reserves the right to request additional documents not included in this NOFO.  Additionally, to ensure that all applications receive a balanced evaluation, the DRL review panel will review from the first page of each section up to the page limit and no further.Note:  If ultimately provided with a notification of non-binding intent to make a federal award, applicants typically have two to three weeks to provide additional information and documents requested in the notification of intent.  The deadlines may vary in each notification of intent and applicants must adhere to the stated deadline in the notification of intent.D.2.3 Additional Information Requested For Those Receiving Notification of IntentSuccessful applicants must submit, after notification of intent to make a federal award, but prior to issuance of a federal award:Written responses and revised application documents addressing conditions and recommendations from the DRL review panel;A copy of the applicant’s latest NICRA as a PDF file, if the applicant has a NICRA and includes NICRA charges in the budget;A completed copy of the Department’s Financial Management Survey, if receiving DRL funding for the first time;Submission of required documents to register in the Payment Management System managed by the Department of Health and Human Services, if receiving DRL funding for the first time (unless an exemption is provided);Other requested information or documents included in the notification of intent to make a federal award or subsequent communications prior to issuance of a federal award;Applicants who submit their applications through Grants.gov will be required to create a SAMS Domestic account in order to accept the final award.  Accounts must be logged into to every 60 days in order to maintain an active account.D.3 Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)All prime organizations, whether based in the United States or in another country, must have a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) and an active registration with the SAM.gov before submitting an application.  DRL may not review applications from or make awards to applicants that have not completed all applicable UEI and SAM.gov requirements.  A UEI is one of the data elements mandated by Public Law 109-282, the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), for all Federal awards.Note:  As of April 2022, a DUNS number is no longer required for federal assistance applications.The 2 CFR 200 requires that sub-grantees obtain a UEI number.  Please note the UEI for sub-grantees is not required at the time of application but will be required before the award is processed and/or directed to a sub-grantee. Note:  The process of obtaining or renewing a SAM.gov registration may take anywhere from 4-8 weeks.  Please begin your registration as early as possible.Organizations based in the United States or that pay employees within the United States will need an Employer Identification Number (EIN) from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and a UEI number prior to registering in SAM.gov.  Please note that as of February 2023, organizations based in the United States that do not intend to apply for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) awards are no longer required to have a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code to apply for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities. If an applicant organization is mid-registration and wishes to remove an NCAGE code from their SAM.gov registration, the applicant should submit a help desk ticket (“incident”) with the Federal Service Desk (FSD) online at www.fsd.gov using the following language:  “I do not intend to seek financial assistance from the Department of Defense.  I do not wish to obtain a CAGE code.  I understand that I will need to submit my registration after this incident is resolved in order to have my registration activated.”Organizations based outside of the United States and that do not pay employees within the United States do not need an EIN from the IRS, but do need a UEI number prior to registering in SAM.gov.  Please note that as of December 2022, organizations based outside of the United States that do not intend to apply for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) awards are no longer required to have a NATO CAGE (NCAGE) code to apply for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities. If an applicant organization is mid-registration and wishes to remove an NCAGE code from their SAM.gov registration, the applicant should submit a help desk ticket (“incident”) with the Federal Service Desk (FSD) online at www.fsd.gov using the following language:  “I do not intend to seek financial assistance from the Department of Defense.  I do not wish to obtain an NCAGE code.  I understand that I will need to submit my registration after this incident is resolved in order to have my registration activated.”Organizations based outside of the United States and that DO NOT plan to do business with the DoD should follow the below instructions: Step 1:  Proceed to SAM.gov to obtain a UEI and complete the SAM.gov registration process.  SAM.gov registration must be renewed annually.Organizations based outside of the United States and that DO plan to do business with the DoD should follow the below instructions:Step 1:  Apply for an NCAGE code by following the instructions on the NSPA NATO website linked below:NCAGE Homepage:https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/AC135Public/sc/CageList.aspx   NCAGE Code Request Tool (NCRT):https://eportal.nspa.nato.int/Codification/CageTool/home   For NCAGE help from within the United States, call +1 (888) 227-2423.For NCAGE help from outside the United States, call +1 (269) 961-7766.Or, email NCAGE@dlis.dla.mil for any problems in applying for an NCAGE code.Step 2:  After receiving an NCAGE code, proceed to SAM.gov to obtain a UEI and complete the SAM.gov registration process.  SAM.gov registration must be renewed annually.All prime organizations must also continue to maintain active SAM.gov registration with current information at all times during which they have an active Federal award or application under consideration by a federal award agency.  SAM.gov requires all entities to renew their registration once a year in order to maintain an active registration status in SAM.gov.  It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure it has an active registration in SAM.gov and to maintain that active registration.  If an applicant has not fully complied with the requirements at the time of application, the applicant may be deemed technically ineligible to receive an award and use that determination as a basis for making an award to another applicant.Please refer to 2 CFR 25.200 for additional information.Note:  SAM.gov is not the same as SAMS Domestic.  It is free of charge to register in both systems, but the registration processes are different.Information is included on the SAM.gov website to help international registrations, including “Quick Start Guide for International Registrations” and “Helpful Hints.”  Navigate to www.SAM.gov, click “HELP” in the top navigation bar, then click “Explore” and “New to SAM.gov?” for general information.  Please note, guidance on SAM.gov and the guidance on GSA’s website about requirement for registering in SAM.gov is subject to change and is currently being updated.  Applicants should review the website for the most up-to-date guidance.The attached “AQM Guidance for NCAGE-SAM.gov for Foreign Applicants Feb. 2023” is a compilation of resources gathered by the Department’s Office of Acquisitions Management (AQM).  Any content shown from SAM.gov is not owned by the Department of State.  This guidance and instruction are to the best of our knowledge based at the time of posting this solicitation.  Where guidance in these attachments differs from the SAM.gov website, SAM.gov prevails and the applicant is encouraged to seek and document responses provided by the SAM.gov help desk.D.3.1 ExemptionsAn exemption from these requirements may be permitted on a case-by-case basis if:An applicant’s identity must be protected due to potential endangerment of their mission, their organization’s status, their employees, or individuals being served by the applicant. For an applicant, if the federal awarding agency makes a determination that there are exigent circumstances that prohibit the applicant from receiving a UEI and completing SAM.gov registration prior to receiving a federal award.  In these instances, federal awarding agencies must require the recipient to obtain a UEI and complete SAM.gov registration within 30 days of the federal award date.Organizations requesting exemption from UEI or SAM.gov requirements must email the point of contact listed in the NOFO at least two weeks prior to the deadline in the NOFO providing a justification of their request.  Approval for a SAM.gov exemption must come from the warranted Grants Officer before the application can be deemed eligible for review.Note:  As of December 2022, organizations based outside of the United States that do not intend to apply for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) awards are no longer required to have a NATO CAGE (NCAGE) code to apply for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities.  As of February 2023, organizations based in the United States that do not intend to apply for U.S. DoD awards are no longer required to have a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code to apply for non-DoD foreign assistance funding opportunities.D.4 Submission Dates and Times Applications are due no later than 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST), on Monday, May 6, 2024 on https://www.grants.gov/ or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com) under the announcement title “DRL Strengthening Civil Society Resiliency in the Kyrgyz Republic,” funding opportunity number “SFOP0010247.” Grants.gov and SAMS Domestic automatically log the date and time an application submission is made, and the Department of State will use this information to determine whether an application has been submitted on time.  Late applications are neither reviewed nor considered.  Known system errors caused by Grants.gov or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.service-now.com) that are outside of the applicant’s control will be reviewed on a case by case basis.  Applicants should not expect a notification upon DRL receiving their application.D.5 Funding RestrictionsPrior to issuing a federal award with a total amount of federal share greater than $250,000, the Department of State is required to review and consider any information about the applicant that is found in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM.gov (41 USC §2313).  An applicant, at its option, may review information in the designated integrity and performance systems accessible through SAM.gov and comment on any information about itself that a federal awarding agency previously entered and is currently in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM.gov.  The Department of State will consider any comments by the applicant, in addition to the other information in the designated integrity and performance system, in making a judgment about the applicant&#8217;s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed by applicants as described in 2 CFR 200.206.DRL will not consider applications that reflect any type of support for any member, affiliate, or representative of a designated terrorist organization.  Please refer the link for Foreign Terrorist Organizations:  https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/Project activities whose direct beneficiaries are foreign militaries or paramilitary groups or individuals will not be considered for DRL funding given purpose limitations on funding.In accordance with Department of State policy for terrorism, applicants are advised that successful passing of vetting to evaluate the risk that funds may benefit terrorists or their supporters is a condition of award.  If chosen for an award, applicants will be asked to submit information required by DS Form 4184, Risk Analysis Information (attached to this solicitation) about their company and its principal personnel.  Vetting information is also required for all sub-award performance on assistance awards identified by the Department of State as presenting a risk of terrorist financing.  Vetting information may also be requested for project beneficiaries and participants.  Failure to submit information when requested, or failure to pass vetting, may be grounds for rejecting your proposal prior to award.The Leahy Law prohibits Department foreign assistance funds from supporting foreign security force units if the Secretary of State has credible information that the unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.  Per 22 USC §2378d(a) (2017), “No assistance shall be furnished under this chapter  or the Arms Export Control Act  to any unit of the security forces of a foreign country if the Secretary of State has credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.”  Restrictions may apply to any proposed assistance to police or other law enforcement.  Among these, pursuant to section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (FAA), no assistance provided through this funding opportunity may be furnished to any unit of the security forces of a foreign country when there is credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights.  In accordance with the requirements of section 620M of the FAA, also known as the Leahy law, project beneficiaries or participants from a foreign government’s security forces may need to be vetted by the Department before the provision of any assistance.  If a proposed grant or cooperative agreement will provide assistance to foreign security forces or personnel, compliance with the Leahy Law is required.U.S. foreign assistance for Burma or Burmese beneficiaries is subject to restrictions.  This includes restrictions, pursuant to section 7043(a)(3) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2023 (Div. K, P.L. 117-328)(SFOAA), on funds appropriated under title III of the act for assistance for Burma.  Section 7043(a)(3) provides that “none of the funds appropriated by this Act that are made available for assistance for Burma may be made available to the State Administration Council or any organization or entity controlled by, or an affiliate of, the armed forces of Burma, or to any individual or organization that has committed a gross violation of human rights or advocates violence against ethnic or religious groups or individuals in Burma, as determined by the Secretary of State.”  In addition, funds cannot be made available to any individual or organization that has committed serious human rights abuse.Organizations should be cognizant of these restrictions when developing project proposals as these restrictions will require appropriate due diligence of program beneficiaries and collaboration with DRL to ensure compliance with these restrictions.  Program beneficiaries subject to due diligence vetting will include any individuals or entities that are beneficiaries of foreign assistance funding or support.  Due diligence vetting will include a review of open-source materials.Federal awards generally will not allow reimbursement of pre-award costs; however, the Grants Officer may approve pre-award costs on a case-by-case basis.  Generally, construction costs are not allowed under DRL awards.  For additional information, please see the DRL Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for Applications:  https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/programs-and-grants/.D.6 Application SubmissionAll application submissions must be made electronically via www.grants.gov or SAMS Domestic (https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com).  Both systems require registration by the applying organization.  Please note that the Grants.gov registration process can take ten (10) business days or longer, even if all registration steps are completed in a timely manner.It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that it has an active registration in SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov.  Applicants are required to document that the application has been received by SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov in its entirety.  DRL bears no responsibility for disqualification that result from applicants not being registered before the due date, for system errors in either SAMS Domestic or Grants.gov, or other errors in the application process.  Additionally, applicants must save a screen shot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully.Faxed, couriered, or emailed documents will not be accepted.  Reasonable accommodations may, in appropriate circumstances, be provided to applicants with disabilities or for security reasons.  Applicants must follow all formatting instructions in the applicable NOFO and these instructions.DRL encourages organizations to submit applications during normal business hours (Monday – Friday, 9:00 AM-5:00 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST)).  If an applicant experiences technical difficulties and has contacted the appropriate help desk but is not receiving timely assistance (e.g., if you have not received a response within 48 hours of contacting the help desk), you may contact the DRL point of contact listed in the NOFO in Section G.  The point of contact may assist in contacting the appropriate help desk.The Grants Officer will determine technical eligibility of all applications.SAMS Domestic Applications:Applicants using SAMS Domestic for the first time should complete their “New Organization Registration.”  To register with SAMS Domestic, click “Login to https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com” and follow the “create an account” link.Please note that establishing an account in SAMS Domestic may require the use of smartphone for multi-factor authentication (MFA).  If an applicant does not have accessibility to a smartphone during the time of creating an account, please contact the ILMS help desk and request instructions on MFA for Windows PC.Organizations must remember to save a screen shot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully.SAMS Domestic Help Desk:  For assistance with SAMS Domestic accounts and technical issues related to the system, please contact the ILMS help desk by phone at +1 (888) 313-4567 (toll charges apply for international callers) or through the Self Service online portal that can be accessed from https://mygrants.servicenowservices.com .  Customer support is available 24/7.Grants.gov Applications:Applicants who do not submit applications via SAMS Domestic may submit via www.grants.gov.Please be advised that completing all the necessary registration steps for obtaining a username and password from Grants.gov can take ten (10) business days or longer.Please refer to the Grants.gov website for definitions of various &#8220;application statuses&#8221; and the difference between a submission receipt and a submission validation.  Applicants will receive a validation e-mail from Grants.gov upon the successful submission of an application.  Validation of an electronic submission via Grants.gov can take up to two business days.  Additionally, organizations must remember to save a screenshot of the checklist showing all documents submitted in case any document fails to upload successfully.Grants.gov Helpdesk: For assistance with Grants.gov, please call the Contact Center at +1 (800) 518-4726 or email support@grants.gov.  The Contact Center is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, except federal holidays.See https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/federal-holidays/ for a list of federal holidays.E. Application Review InformationE.1 Proposal Review CriteriaThe DRL review panel will evaluate each application individually against the following criteria, listed below in order of importance, and not against competing applications.  Please use the below criteria as a reference, but do not structure your application according to the sub-sections.Quality of Project IdeaApplications should be responsive to the program framework and policy objectives identified in the NOFO, appropriate in the country/regional context, and should exhibit originality, substance, precision, and relevance to DRL’s mission of promoting human rights and democracy.  Projects should have the potential to have an immediate impact leading to long-term, sustainable reforms. DRL prefers new approaches that do not duplicate efforts by other entities.  This does not exclude from consideration projects that improve upon or expand existing successful projects in a new and complementary way.  In countries where similar activities are already taking place, an explanation should be provided as to how new activities will not duplicate or merely add to existing activities and how these efforts will be coordinated.  Proposals that promote creative approaches to recognized ongoing challenges are highly encouraged.  DRL prioritizes project proposals with inclusive approaches for advancing these rights.Project Planning/Ability to Achieve Objectives A strong application will include a clear articulation of how the proposed project activities contribute to the overall project objectives, and each activity will be clearly developed and detailed.  A comprehensive monthly work plan should demonstrate substantive undertakings and the logistical capacity of the organization.  Objectives should be ambitious yet measurable, results-focused and achievable in a reasonable timeframe.  A complete application must include a Logic Model to demonstrate how the project activities will have an impact on its proposed objectives.  The Logic Model should match the objectives, outcomes, key activities, and outputs described in the narrative.  Applications should address how the project will engage relevant stakeholders and should identify local partners as appropriate.If local partners have been identified, DRL strongly encourages applicants to submit letters of support from proposed in-country partners.  Additionally, applicants should describe the division of labor among the direct applicant and any local partners.  If applicable, applications should identify target geographic areas for activities, target participant groups or selection criteria for participants, and the specific roles of sub-awardees, among other pertinent details.DRL recognizes that all programs have some level of risk due to internal/external variables that have the potential to adversely affect a program.  Risk management should address how the project design incorporates the identification, assessment, and management of key risk factors.  DRL will review the Risk Analysis based on the organization’s ability to identify risks that could have an impact on the overall program as well as how the organization will manage these risks.Institution’s Record and Capacity DRL will consider the past performance of prior recipients and the demonstrated potential of new applicants.  Applications should demonstrate an institutional record of successful democracy and human rights programs, including responsible fiscal management and full compliance with all reporting requirements for past grants.  Proposed personnel and institutional resources should be adequate and appropriate to achieve the project&#8217;s objectives.  Projects should have potential for continued funding beyond DRL resources.Addressing Barriers to Equal ParticipationDRL strives to ensure its projects advance the rights and uphold the dignity of all persons.  As the U.S. government’s lead bureau dedicated to promoting democratic governance, DRL requests a programming approach dedicated to strengthening inclusive societies as a necessary pillar of strong democracies.  Discrimination, violence, inequity, and inequality targeting any members of society undermines collective security and threatens democracy.  DRL prioritizes inclusive and integrated program models that assess and address the barriers to access for individuals and groups based on their race, ethnicity, religion, income, geography, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability.  The proposal should also demonstrate how the project will further engagement in underserved communities and with individuals from underserved communities.  Applicants should describe how programming will impact all of its beneficiaries, including support for underserved and underrepresented communities.  This approach should be an integral part of both the concept and explicit design, and implementation of all proposed project activities, objectives, and monitoring.  Strong proposals will provide specific analysis, measures, and corresponding targets as appropriate.  Stakeholders shall identify the difference between opportunities and barriers to access, and design projects accordingly to not perpetuate these inequalities, but rather enhance programmatic impact by including all people in society.  The goal of this approach is to bring communities and those in power together in support of more stable and secure societies.Cost EffectivenessDRL strongly encourages applicants to clearly demonstrate project cost-effectiveness in their application, including examples of leveraging institutional and other resources.  However, cost-sharing or other examples of leveraging other resources are not required.  Inclusion of cost-sharing in the budget does not result in additional points awarded during the review process.  Budgets should have low and/or reasonable overhead and administration costs, and applicants should provide clear explanations and justifications for these costs in relation to the work involved.  All budget items should be clearly explained and justified to demonstrate necessity, appropriateness, and connection to the project objectives.Please note:  If cost share is included in the budget, the recipient must maintain written records to support all allowable costs that are claimed as its contribution to cost share, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal government.  Such records are subject to audit.  In the event the recipient does not meet the minimum amount of cost-sharing as stipulated in the recipient’s budget, DRL’s contribution may be reduced in proportion to the recipient’s contribution.Multiplier Effect/Sustainability Applications should clearly delineate how elements of the project will have a multiplier effect and be sustainable beyond the life of the grant.  A good multiplier effect will have an impact beyond the direct beneficiaries of the grant (e.g. participants trained under a grant go on to train other people; workshop participants use skills from a workshop to enhance a national level election that affects the entire populace).  A strong sustainability plan may include demonstrating continuing impact beyond the life of a project or garnering other donor support after DRL funding ceases.Project Monitoring and Evaluation Complete applications will include a detailed M&amp;E Narrative, which detail how the project’s progress will be monitored and evaluated.  Incorporating well-designed monitoring and evaluation processes into a project is an efficient method for documenting the change (intended and unintended) that a project seeks.  Applications should demonstrate the capacity to provide objectives with measurable outputs and outcomes.The quality of the M&amp;E sections will be judged on the narrative explaining how both monitoring and evaluation will be carried out and who will be responsible for those related activities.  The M&amp;E Narrative should explain how evaluation(s), internal or external, will be incorporated into the project implementation plan or how the project will be systematically assessed in the absence of one.  Please see the section on Monitoring and Evaluation Narrative in the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for more information on what is required in the narrative.Note: Applicants are no longer required to submit a detailed Monitoring and Evaluation Plan in their proposals.  However, applicants should be aware that, should an application move forward for funding consideration, DRL will request a detailed Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for further review and approval.The output and outcome-based performance indicators should not only be separated by project objectives but also should match the objectives, outcomes, and outputs detailed in the Logic Model and Proposal Narrative.  Performance indicators should be clearly defined (i.e., explained how the indicators will be measured and reported) either within the table or with a separate Performance Indicator Reference Sheet (PIRS).  For each performance indicator, the table should also include baselines and quarterly and cumulative targets, data collection tools, data sources, types of data disaggregation, and frequency of monitoring and evaluation.  There should also be metrics to capture how project activities target those who face discrimination due to their religion, gender, disabilities, ethnicity or sexual orientation and gender identity, where applicable.  Please see the section on Monitoring and Evaluation Plan in the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI) for more information on what is required in the plan.E.2 Review and Selection ProcessDRL strives to ensure that each application receives a balanced evaluation by a DRL review panel.  AQM will determine technical eligibility for all applications.  All technically eligible applications for a given NOFO are reviewed against the same seven criteria, which include quality of project idea, project planning/ability to achieve objectives, institutional record and capacity, inclusive programming, cost effectiveness, multiplier effect/sustainability, and project monitoring and evaluation.Additionally, the DRL review panel will evaluate how the application addresses the NOFO request, U.S. foreign policy goals, and the priority needs of DRL overall.  DRL may also take into consideration the balance of the current portfolio of active projects, including geographic or thematic diversity, if needed.In most cases, the DRL review panel includes representatives from DRL, the appropriate Department of State regional bureau (to include feedback from U.S. embassies), and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) (to include feedback from USAID missions).  In some cases, additional panelists may participate, including from other Department of State bureaus or offices; U.S. government departments, agencies, or boards; representatives from partner governments; or representatives from entities that are in a public-private partnership with DRL.  At the end of the panel’s discussion about an application, the review panel votes on whether to recommend the application for approval by the DRL Assistant Secretary.  If more applications are recommended for approval than DRL can ultimately fund, the review panel will rank the recommended applications in priority order for consideration by the DRL Assistant Secretary.  The Grants Officer Representative (GOR) for the eventual award does not vote on the panel.  All panelists must sign non-disclosure agreements and conflicts of interest agreements.DRL review panels may provide conditions and recommendations on applications to enhance the proposed project, which must be addressed by the applicant before further consideration of the award.  To ensure effective use of DRL funds, conditions or recommendations may include requests to increase, decrease, clarify, and/or justify costs and project activities.F. Federal Award Administration InformationF.1 Federal Award NoticesDRL will provide a separate notification to applicants on the result of their applications.  Successful applicants will receive a letter electronically via email requesting that the applicant respond to review panel conditions and recommendations.  This notification is not an authorization to begin activities and does not constitute formal approval or a funding commitment.Final approval is contingent on the applicant successfully responding to the review panel’s conditions and recommendations; being registered in required systems, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Payment Management System (PMS), unless an exemption is provided; and completing and providing any additional documentation requested by DRL or AQM.  Final approval is also contingent on Congressional Notification requirements being met and final review and approval by the Department’s warranted Grants Officer.If awarded, payments under this award will be made through PMS or by completing form SF-270, Request for Advance or Reimbursement.  Final determination will be made in conjunction with the Grants Officer.  Unless otherwise stipulated, the recipient may request payments on a reimbursement or advance basis.Instructions for requesting payments via PMS are available at:  https://pms.psc.gov/.Instructions for requesting payments via SF-270 are available at: https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/forms/sample/SF270-V1.0.pdf.Advance payments must be limited to the minimum amounts needed and be timed to be in accordance with the actual, immediate cash requirements of the recipient in carrying out the purpose of this award.  The timing and amount of advance payments must be as close as is administratively feasible to the actual disbursements by the recipient for direct program or project costs and the proportionate share of any allowable indirect costs.The notice of Federal award signed by the Department’s warranted Grants Officers is the sole authorizing document.  If awarded, the notice of Federal award will be provided to the applicant’s designated Authorizing Official via SAMS Domestic to be electronically counter-signed in the system.F.2 Administrative and National Policy and Legal RequirementsDRL requires all recipients of foreign assistance funding to comply with all applicable Department and Federal laws and regulations, including but not limited to the following:The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards set forth in 2 CFR Chapter 200 (Sub-Chapters A through F) shall apply to all non-Federal entities, except for assistance awards to Individuals and Foreign Public Entities.  Sub-Chapters A through E shall apply to all foreign organizations, and Sub-Chapters A through D shall apply to all U.S. and foreign for-profit entities. The applicant/recipient of the award and any sub-recipient under the award must comply with all applicable terms and conditions, in addition to the assurance and certifications made part of the Notice of Award.  The Department’s Standard Terms and Conditions can be viewed at https://www.state.gov/about-us-office-of-the-procurement-executive/.Additionally, DRL supports implementation of the National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality; the Women Peace and Security (WPS) Act of 2017, which highlights the U.S. commitment to the meaningful participation of women in conflict prevention, management, and resolution; and the Department of State WPS Implementation Plan.  For additional information, please refer to the following link: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1141.Due to the determination made under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) for funds obligated during FY 2024, assistance that benefits the governments of the following countries may be subject to a restriction under the TVPA.  The Department of State determines on a case-by-case basis what constitutes assistance to a government; the general principles listed below apply.Assistance to the government includes:All branches of government (executive, legislative, judicial) at all levels (national, regional, local);Public schools, universities, hospitals, and state-owned enterprises, as well as government employees;Cash, training, equipment, services, or other assistance provided directly to the government, assistance provided to an NGO or other implementer for the benefit of the government, and assistance to government employees.Subject to TVPA for funds obligated during FY 2024:AF:  Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Guinea-Bissau, South SudanEAP:  Burma, China (PRC), Macau, North KoreaEUR:  Belarus, RussiaNEA:  Iran, SyriaSCA:  AfghanistanWHA:  Cuba, Curacao, Nicaragua, Sint MaartenAdditional requirements may be included depending on the content of the program.F.3 ReportingApplicants should be aware of the post-award reporting requirements for federal assistance awards as reflected in 2 CFR 200 Appendix XII &#8211; Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters.  DRL awards require that all reports (financial and progress) are uploaded to the federal award file in SAMS Domestic on a quarterly basis.  The Federal Financial Report (FFR or SF-425) is the required form for financial reports and must be submitted in PMS, and a copy of the report submitted in PMS then uploaded to the award file in SAMS Domestic.  Progress reports uploaded to the award file in SAMS Domestic must include a narrative as described below as well as Program Indicators (or other mutually agreed upon format approved by the Grants Officer), including standard (F) framework indicators and DRL framework indicators.  F and DRL framework indicators will be reviewed and negotiated during the final stages of issuing an award on a project-by-project basis.Narrative progress reports should reflect the focus on measuring the project’s progress on the overarching objectives and should be compiled according to the objectives, outcomes, and outputs as outlined in the award’s Scope of Work (SOW) and in the Monitoring &amp; Evaluation Narrative.  An assessment of the overall project’s achievements should be included in each progress report.  Where relevant, progress reports should include the following sections:Relevant contextual information (limited);Explanation and evaluation of significant activities of the reporting period and how the activities reflect progress toward achieving objectives, including meeting benchmarks/targets as set in the approved M&amp;E Plan.  In addition, attach the M&amp;E Plan, comparing the target and actual numbers for the indicators;Any qualitative impact or success stories from the project, when possible;Copy of baseline, mid-term, and/or final evaluation report(s) conducted by an external evaluator; if applicable;Relevant supporting documentation or products related to the project activities (such as articles, meeting lists and agendas, participant surveys, photos, manuals, etc.) as separate attachments;Description of how the recipient is pursuing sustainability, including looking for sources of follow-on funding;Any problems/challenges in implementing the project and a corrective action plan with an updated timeline of activities;Reasons why established goals were not met;Data for the required F and/or DRL framework indicator(s) for the quarter as well as aggregate data by fiscal year;Program Indicators or other mutually agreed upon format approved by the Grants Officer;   Proposed activities for the next quarter; and,Additional pertinent information, including analysis and explanation of cost overruns or high unit costs, if applicable.Foreign Assistance Data Review:  As required by Congress, the Department of State must make progress in its efforts to improve tracking and reporting of foreign assistance data through the Foreign Assistance Data Review (FADR).  The FADR requires tracking of foreign assistance activity data from budgeting, planning, and allocation through obligation and disbursement.  Successful applicants will be required to report and draw down federal funding based on the appropriate FADR Data Elements, indicated within their award documentation.  In cases of more than one FADR Data Element, typically program or sector and/or regions or country, the successful applicant will be required to maintain separate accounting records.A final narrative and financial report must also be submitted within 120 days after the expiration of the award.Please note:  Delays in reporting may result in delays of payment approvals and failure to provide required reports may jeopardize the recipient&#8217;s’ ability to receive future U.S. government funds.  DRL reserves the right to request any additional programmatic and/or financial project information during the award period.G.  Contact InformationFor technical submission questions related to this NOFO, please contact drl-sca-programinfo@state.gov.For assistance with SAMS Domestic accounts and technical issues related to the system, please contact the ILMS help desk by phone at +1 (888) 313-4567 (toll charges apply for international callers) or through the Self Service online portal that can be accessed from https://afsitsm.service-now.com/ilms/home.  Customer support is available 24/7.Please note that establishing an account in SAMS Domestic may require the use of smartphone for multi-factor authentication (MFA).  If an applicant does not have accessibility to a smartphone during the time of creating an account, please contact the helpdesk and request instructions on MFA for Windows PC.For assistance with Grants.gov accounts and technical issues related to using the system, please call the Contact Center at +1 (800) 518-4726 or email support@grants.gov.  The Contact Center is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, except federal holidays.For a list of federal holidays visit:https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/federal-holidays/Except for technical submission questions, during the NOFO period U.S. Department of State staff in Washington and overseas shall not discuss this competition with applicants until the entire proposal review process has been completed and rejection and approval letters have been transmitted.H.  Other InformationApplicants should be aware that DRL understands that some information contained in applications may be considered sensitive or proprietary and will make appropriate efforts to protect such information.  However, applicants are advised that DRL cannot guarantee that such information will not be disclosed, including pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) or other similar statutes.The information in this NOFO and “Proposal Submission Instructions for Applications” is binding and may not be modified by any DRL representative.  Explanatory information provided by DRL that contradicts this language will not be binding.  Issuance of the NOFO and negotiation of applications does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the U.S. government.  DRL reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets.This NOFO will appear on www.grants.gov, SAMS Domestic, and DRL’s website https://www.state.gov/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/programs-and-grants/. Background Information on DRL and General DRL FundingDRL has the mission of promoting democracy and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms globally.  DRL supports projects designed through an evidence-based framework that empower local civil society partners to promote and defend democracy globally, including efforts to counter authoritarianism, promote human rights, and meaningfully address diversity, equity, and inclusion as a core element of good governance.  DRL typically focuses its work in countries facing human rights violations and abuses, where democracy and human rights defenders are under pressure, and where governance infrastructure is undemocratic, in transition, or at risk of backsliding.Additional background information on DRL and its efforts can be found on https://www.state.gov/bureaus-offices/under-secretary-for-civilian-security-democracy-and-human-rights/bureau-of-democracy-human-rights-and-labor/.
- United States Welcomes the Kyrgyz Republic’s Continued Repatriation of its Nationals Matthew Miller, Department SpokespersonThe Kyrgyz Republic repatriated 99 women and children from the al-Hol and Roj displaced persons camps in northeast Syria Monday, bringing its total repatriations from northeast Syria over the past year to 432 and furthering its dedication to both its nationals and international security. The Kyrgyz Republic’s efforts are an example to other countries that have yet to repatriate their nationals from the region.Approximately 30,000 individuals from more than 60 countries outside Syria remain in the al-Hol and Roj camps, most of whom are children under the age of 12. Increasing the number and pace of repatriations is critical to resolving the intertwined security and humanitarian challenges in al-Hol and al-Roj displaced persons camps and ensuring the continued defeat of ISIS. The United States stands ready to assist countries in their effort to repatriate their nationals.In addition to the Kyrgyz Republic’s partnership, we are grateful to the Government of Kuwait for its continuing support of repatriations from northeast Syria. We are likewise grateful to our local partner, the Syrian Democratic Forces, for facilitating this operation and we look forward to its continuing assistance in returning displaced persons at the al-Hol and Roj camps to their countries of origin.
- Inaugural C5+1 Critical Minerals Dialogue among the United States and Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan Office of the SpokespersonOn February 8th, the U.S. Department of State hosted the inaugural meeting of the C5+1 Critical Minerals Dialogue (CMD), an initiative announced by President Biden and the presidents of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan at the September 19, 2023, C5+1 Presidential Summit in New York.Following the largest mining conference in Africa, Mining Indaba, where Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Jose W. Fernandez advanced cooperation on securing and strengthening critical mineral supply chains, he chaired the C5+1 discussion on goals and objectives of the CMD, which will seek to increase the region’s involvement in global critical minerals supply chains, strengthen economic cooperation, and advance the clean energy transition, while also protecting Central Asia’s unique ecosystems.Assistant Secretary of State for Energy Resources Geoffrey Pyatt moderated the event, accompanied by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Central Asian Affairs John Mark Pommersheim and colleagues from across the U.S. government who work on critical minerals. Senior officials from each of the Central Asian governments shared their interest in developing investment opportunities in critical minerals that meet the highest environmental, social standards, and governance.In the spirit of C5+1 collaboration, each country underscored the benefit of working together to advance our shared critical minerals objectives including diversification of markets and development of technologies in a manner that will benefit all our citizens. Among the initiatives discussed, the United States emphasized opportunities through the Minerals Security Partnership and Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment. In the lead-up to the mining and exploration convention in Toronto, Canada, called Prospectors &amp; Developers Association of Canada (PDAC), the United States welcomed input from the C5 countries to promote new partnership and investment opportunities and efforts to continue the dialogue through national coordinators within the C5+1 framework.Learn more about C5+1 collaboration at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/09/21/c51-leaders-joint-statement/ .Learn more about the Minerals Security Partnership at: https://www.state.gov/minerals-securit-partnership/.  To stay up to date, follow Under Secretary Fernandez on X: @State_E, LinkedIn: @State-E, and Facebook: @StateDeptE.For press inquiries, please contact: E_Communications@state.gov.
- Mining Equipment and Critical Minerals in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan Topic: Mining Equipment and Critical Minerals in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan Hosts:   U.S. Ambassador to Uzbekistan Jonathan Henick US. Ambassador to Tajikistan Manuel Micaller Jr.  U.S. Ambassador to Kyrgyzstan Lesslie Viguerie Date and Time: 11:00 am ET Tuesday, February 27, 2024  Description:  Join U.S. Ambassadors to Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan and Elena Son, Executive Director of the American-Uzbekistan Chamber of Commerce, the U.S.-Kyrgyzstan Business Council, and the U.S.-Tajikistan Business Council, to learn about the three countries’ mining and emerging critical mineral sector and the experiences of U.S. companies operating in these evolving markets.   Simon Glancy, Managing Partner of Strategic Solutions, a consulting firm which advises global companies on doing business in Central Asia&#8217;s strategic industries, including mining, will provide a brief overview of state mining policy and foreign investor activity in the mining industry in all three countries, focusing on critical minerals. He will also discuss business opportunities for firms to sell equipment and services in these markets. Please register by February 25, 2024.
- Recent Actions Against Independent Media in the Kyrgyz Republic Matthew Miller, Department SpokespersonThe United States is deeply concerned by reports of recent actions taken by the government of the Kyrgyz Republic against independent media outlets and journalists. These actions contribute to a pattern of government activity that appears aimed at stifling public debate and free expression. We encourage the Kyrgyz authorities to ensure journalists can operate without undue pressure or harassment. A free and independent press is essential for protecting human rights, maintaining effective democratic institutions, and promoting peace and security.
- U.S. Welcomes the Kyrgyz Republic’s Continued Repatriation of its Nationals Matthew Miller, Department SpokespersonThe Kyrgyz Republic’s repatriation of 96 women and children from the al-Hol displaced persons camp in northeast Syria, the fourth such return of its nationals this year alone, demonstrates the Republic’s tremendous commitment to both its nationals and to alleviating a security and humanitarian crisis, the only durable solution to which is repatriation.In total, the Kyrgyz Republic has repatriated 333 of its nationals this year, a substantial portion of the nearly 5,000 individuals returned to their countries of origin in 2023.  The overall pace of repatriations from northeast Syria in 2023, accelerated by substantial U.S. support, increased by nearly a third over the previous year, helping to ease the burden of providing humanitarian services and reducing the risk of ISIS exploitation of this vulnerable population.Approximately 33,000 individuals from more than 60 countries outside Syria remain in the al-Hol and Roj camps, most of whom are children under the age of 12.We are grateful to our international and local partners, the Syrian Democratic Forces, and the Government of Kuwait, for their support in returning displaced persons at al-Hol and Roj to their countries of origin.