Editor’s note: In an exclusive interview with neweurasia, Tajikistan’s Supreme Court Judge Nor Nurov for the first time speaks with the media about the lawsuit against three independent Tajik newspapers.  Conducted via phone with our blogger Alpharabius on February 4, 2010 at 18:15 GMT.

Alpharabius: Mr. Nurov, could you tell us what is the cause of your lawsuit against the newspapers?

Nurov: The cause is that all these newspapers are criticizing me and other judges in a very biased manner. Baseless accusations have been directed against us, but nothing, not a single word has been raised against the people who wrote these articles against us. There haven’t even been any doubts if they are telling the truth. All the papers of Tajikistan, all the journalists are against us, am I right?

A: Perhaps, but then why do you think this is happening?

N: I do not know why it is happening. Maybe someone is interested in this situation. I really do not know why it is happening. No one wants to know the details of the cases and the trials, no one asks the question if the judges are guilty or not. I shouldn’t even trust you as I’m answering your questions, because I am not sure if you believe me. It is a very complicated situation that could not be explained by phone.

A: Let’s try. The lawyer Solijona Juraev is accusing you of making illegal court decisions. He wrote that you sentenced several suspects not according to the law, but under pressure from the head of the Supreme Court.  How can you deny that?

Mr. Nurov protests again that he believes a phonecall is not a suitable medium, but then continues:

N: In this case I should say that the appeal court supported my verdict. If it was against the law then the appeal court might have changed it. No one has the right to say that it was unlawful.

A: However, Juraev published the transcription of his conversation he had with you on the phone, according to which you agreed that the court decision was illegal.

N: I do not want to comment on that now, I will comment on it in the court only. Right now I reiterate that all everything was fully according to the law and that the appeal court confirmed my verdict. That is it.

A: Excuse me if this is a hard question, but the people want to know how you have been “morally damaged”? What is the reason for your disagreement with the newspapers?

N: Look, our disagreement will be solved at the court. The court will solve everything.

A: All right. One more question: how did you calculate the amount of the moral damage?

N: I calculated it myself. It is a moral damage done by them [i.e., the defendants]. Of course, it is the court’s decision to keep this amount as I have requested it, or to change it. The court has the right to annul it, halve it, or to ask the defendants to pay the whole sum. I [also] asked to send this amount to the Roghun power plant fund. The court will make a decision.

A: Who do you think is more responsible for this damage, Juarev or the newspapers who published his letter?

Mr. Nurov states that he cannot hear the question due to technical difficulties with the phone.

A: The newspapers say that they just published Juarev’s letter and are ready to publish your answer.  Why haven’t you given them your answer?

N: Are you familiar with the Media Law of the Republic of Tajikistan? According to Article 29, Part 3, newspapers and the mass media have no right to discuss or analyze court sentences before they become effective. We warned them against publishing anything about decisions that were not yet binding. However, they have gone ahead and published [on this topic].

A: Excuse me, but you told me that the appeal court confirmed your verdict.  That means it became effective.  But the lawyer says he was not able to prevent it.  He believes the verdict is illegal; so did the state prosecutor. Is there a contradiction?

Mr. Nurov again states that he cannot hear the question.  He then reiterates his feeling that a phonecall is not an appropriate medium and insists he has to hang up.

A: Please, this is the last question.  I know it is late in Dushanbe, sorry about that. It is really the last question. Was it in accordance with the law that you asked the court to suspend all three newspapers until the end of what seems will be a long trial?

N: Yes, it is according to the law to suspend the newspapers’ temporarily.

A: Many experts believe that your lawsuit is related to upcoming parliamentary elections.

N: That is nonsense! How could the election be related to the trial? How could the election be related to crimes that we investigated and about which the newspapers accused us?

A: Some people call your lawsuit and the demand to close down the newspapers politically motivated actions. What do you say?

N: Look, one person attacked another person publicly via the mass media. Why should [the lawsuit] be considered as a political act?

A: Understood. Also, one of the Tajik observers wrote on Wednesday that the whole dispute is related to the power struggle or competition between the Supreme Court and the General Prosecutor’s Office. According to him the letter against your verdict was published in order to keep Mr. Bobojon Bobokhonov in the position of the General Prosecutor.

N: No. That is not right. Look, the case that I tried at the court was clear: someone killed the former Deputy General Prosecutor, his friend robbed the state budget, his relative occupied another’s property, and so on. How we can explain it as a struggle between two state entities? On the basis of what evidence could we say that? We have all the evidence to deny that. If the newspapers are ready to publish what we gathered through the investigation on that case we are ready to offer our own letter. There will be no evaluations, just facts, and we will allow the readers to make conclusion by themselves.

A: The newspapers say they are ready to do so.

N: We are ready, too. We will offer them all these facts soon. That is for sure!

A: Thank you for the interview. Would you like to make a final remark?

N: Yes. I want to say to everyone that I will submit all the details of the concerned criminal case to the readers through the Tajik press without any of my evaluation or estimations. Let them read and make their own conclusions themselves. That is it.