I 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 3545 
To limit assistance to the Government of Uzbekistan, and for other purposes. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
JULY 28, 2005 
Mr. DELAHUNT (for himself and Mr. DOGGETT) introduced the following bill; 
which was referred to the Committee on International Relations, and in 
addition to the Committees on the Judiciary and Armed Services, for a 
period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the com-
mittee concerned 
A BILL 
To limit assistance to the Government of Uzbekistan, and 
for other purposes. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Uzbekistan Freedom 
Promotion Act of 2005’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 
Congress finds the following:
(1) The Department of State’s 2004 Country 
Reports on Human Rights Practices for Uzbekistan 
states the following: 
(A) ‘‘Uzbekistan is an authoritarian state 
with limited civil rights . . . President Islam 
Karimov and the centralized executive branch 
that serves him dominated political life and ex-
ercised nearly complete control over the other 
branches . . . The Government is highly central-
ized and is ruled by President Karimov and the 
executive branch through sweeping decree pow-
ers, primary authority for drafting legislation, 
and control of government appointments, most 
of the economy, and the security forces.’’. 
(B) ‘‘On December 26, [2004,] elections 
were held for seats in the lower chamber of the 
Supreme Assembly (Oliy Majlis) that fell sig-
nificantly short of international standards for 
democratic elections . . . Citizens could not ex-
ercise the right to change their government 
peacefully . . . The law makes it extremely dif-
ficult for opposition parties to organize, nomi-
nate candidates, and campaign.’’. 
(C) ‘‘Police and, to a lesser extent, NSS 
[National Security Service] forces tortured,
beat, and harassed persons . . . Members of the 
security forces responsible for documented 
abuses were rarely punished . . . Police, prison 
officials, and the NSS allegedly used suffo-
cation, electric shock, rape, and other sexual 
abuse; however, beating was the most commonly 
reported method of torture.’’. 
(D) ‘‘The number of persons in prison for 
political or religious reasons—primarily persons 
the Government believed were associated with 
extremist Islamist political groups, but also 
members of the secular opposition and human 
rights activists—was estimated to be between 
5,000 and 5,500.’’. 
(E) ‘‘The Government severely restricted 
freedom of speech and the press, and an atmos-
phere of repression stifled public criticism of 
the Government.’’. 
(F) ‘‘The Government continued to deny 
registration to several independent domestic 
human rights groups and increased pressure on 
unregistered groups . . . The Government de-
nied the registration applications of two opposi-
tion political parties. The Government harassed
and abused members of domestic human rights 
groups.’’. 
(G) ‘‘The Government restricted freedom 
of religion and harassed individuals suspected 
of belonging to extremist groups; several hun-
dred were arrested. The Government limited the 
activities of minority religions.’’. 
(H) ‘‘The public generally did not have ac-
cess to Government information, and informa-
tion normally considered in the public domain, 
such as prosecutions for corruption or official 
malfeasance, were seldom reported.’’. 
(2) On May 13, 2005, security forces of the 
Government of Uzbekistan conducted a brutal and 
indiscriminate assault on thousands of demonstra-
tors and onlookers in the city of Andijan, which re-
sulted in hundreds of deaths and many more inju-
ries. 
(3) The Office for Democratic Institutions and 
Human Rights of the Organization for Security and 
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) stated in its ‘‘Pre-
liminary Findings on the Events in Andijan, 
Uzbekistan, 13 May 2005’’ that many of the 
protestors ‘‘spoke about social and economic prob-
lems (lack of transparency, corruption in the govern-
ment, unfair trials, abuse by police, unemployment, 
taxation, etc) . . . this also attracted others to the 
square’’. 
(4) The Government of Uzbekistan has impris-
oned dozens of individuals who participated in peace-
ful demonstrations and continues to engage in wide-
spread arrests in the aftermath of the May 13, 
2005, assault. 
(5) The Government of Uzbekistan has consist-
ently denied that a massacre in Andijan took place, 
expelled local and foreign journalists from the re-
gion, and has refused to open the area to a full and 
independent investigation into the violence. 
(6) Following the massacre in Andijan, hun-
dreds of Uzbek citizens fled to neighboring 
Kyrgyzstan, which faces pressure from the Uzbek 
Government to quickly return them, despite well- 
grounded concerns that they may be arrested and 
tortured upon their return, and where, although pro-
tected as refugees under international law, they have 
been targeted by Uzbek authorities for illegal repa-
triation and face continued threat from Uzbek secu-
rity services operating in southern Kyrgyzstan. 
(7) In June 2005, the United States, the Euro-
pean Union (EU), the North Atlantic Treaty Orga-