“Non-disclosure of this crime is a blow to the President’s image”

The US Department of State, US Embassy in our country, Reporters Without Borders (RSF), Norwegian Helsinki Committee, Human Rights Watch, OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Teresa Ribeiro, Co-Rapporteur of the PACE Monitoring Committee on Azerbaijan Stefan Schennak and others issued a statement in which they condemned the attack on journalist Ayten Mammadova. Immediately after this incident, well-known journalists and members of the country's civil society addressed President Ilham Aliyev and the heads of law enforcement agencies with an open letter containing a request to find and bring to justice the person who attacked journalist Ayten Mammadova and those who ordered this crime as soon as possible.

A criminal case was initiated on the fact of the attack on journalist Ayten Mammadova under the Article 134 of the Criminal Code (murder or threat of serious bodily harm), however, despite the fact that several days have passed since the incident, the identity of the one who threatened the journalist with a knife has not yet been established. All this, as well as the crimes committed recently against public and opposition activists, dissident people, raises doubts that this case will be solved.

Journalist Chingiz Sultansoy shared his thoughts on this with ASTNA.

* * *

Question: What do you think about this incident? Who initiated it? Who wants to silence a journalist? Is this an order from the authorities or the work of intra-power mafia groups?

Answer: The armed attack on the well-known journalist Ayten Mammadova in an elevator  car is a logical and natural consequence of the atmosphere of impunity and lawlessness in the country, the arbitrariness of officials, crimes against civil society activists and journalists. Although I did not expect an attack specifically on Ayten, nevertheless, I am always in anticipation of such attacks. I think, unlike previous resonant attacks, similar and different in form, - provocations against Tofik Yagublu and his arrest in connection with a "car accident", his beatings in the police by "unknowns", the detention and beating of Ali Karimli at a rally, abduction in the center the city of Bahtiyar Hajiyev and the use of torture against him, this was not ordered at the highest level, in the Presidential Administration.

Of course, the attack on a well-known journalist was also commissioned, this is an order of persons in power, holding positions, but this is an order that came from a lower level. It looks like this is an order from some high-ranking person in the prosecutor's office or the police. I would compare this crime, although it is very different, with the police beating of well-known human rights activists - Rufat Safarov and Zaur Akbar. I believe that even then the task did not come from the highest level, the decision was made by the minister or at an even lower level. In the case of Ayten Mammadova, the level may be even lower.

Question: However, you also assume that this is someone's order. Isn't that a threat?

Answer: Naturally, the adoption of a decision, an order at a lower level, does not reduce, but, on the contrary, increases the danger of a crime! This means that the people making such “decisions” is not only not decreasing, but, on the contrary, is expanding. This expansion, on the one hand, leads people to get used to such incidents, and on the other hand, by encouraging representatives of the authorities who make “orders”, it makes them commonplace, accelerates and increases the scale of the trend, which is extremely dangerous for the state and society - “infection with the virus of violence”.

In the previous question, you used the expression "domestic mafia groups." They can be called that, yes, but we must remember that such groups do not play an independent role in the totality of corruption-mafia relations that have engulfed all state power structures, they do not pursue any independent “mafia policy”. That is why I am against calling them "domestic mafia groups", as if separating them from others, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the prosecutor's office or the special services. It obscures the truth. When we call them “domestic mafia groups”, it turns out that, for example, the Ministry of Internal Affairs has departments, departments that function as expected, perform constitutional, legal duties, but among these departments there are also “mafia groups”. This is not so, because we have long passed this stage. Now they are all corrupt, mafia, have become uniform.

Their degree, income, money turnover may be different, but they could not reach the level of a real mafia. But this is a topic for another conversation.

Question: Why do they want to silence such an objective and professional journalist as Ayten Mammadova?

Answer: There is no doubt that the attempt to silence Ayten Mammadova is related to her journalistic activities, and specifically, to court reporting and the investigation into the murder of a minor Narmin Guliyeva in the village of Dondar Gushchu, Tovuz region, is beyond doubt. The journalist found and made public the weaknesses of the investigation and the trial. In all law enforcement agencies there are officials associated with this case who want, by placing the murder of a child on Ilkin Suleymanov, to close the case and thereby protect the real killer from punishment, they cover up or participate in the crime. Researches of Ayten gradually loosen, destroy the false "legal" constructions tailored by them. Obviously, fearing the complete collapse of their plans, exposure, they are forced to go on the offensive. The customer can be either themselves or their patrons who are a step or two above them. I think the latter is more likely.

Question: Although some time has passed since the incident, no serious progress is visible. Does this not indicate a lack of will to unravel this case?

Answer: Your doubts are justified. The crime must be solved, the perpetrator, the customer and the persons behind them must be punished. This is undeniable. Our task is to demand the disclosure of the crime, to keep the problem on the agenda, to achieve this. Why don't I say "try" but "achieve"? Because, no matter how difficult it may be, I consider it possible, in any case, there is such a possibility. If only because if the order did not come from the Presidential Administration, then the head of the country himself has no direct interest in the fact that the criminal was not found. Of course, the internal policy of President Ilham Aliyev is fundamentally wrong, it is based on the principle “the police (law enforcement officers) are always right. They cannot be punished." But, in this case, not finding the culprit who evaded punishment, he defends law enforcement agencies that hide the child murderer, which is much worse than protecting the police and criminals who beat and tortured political and public figures and activists! In the first case, if he consolidates his power, albeit in the wrong way, as he considers right, with the help of violence, torture and fear, then in this case, he protects the police, which patronizes child killers, that is, he protects child killers! The difference is quite large and harms the image of a cruel, but "enlightened ruler", which is portrayed by the PR service. Does Ilham Aliyev realize this? I don't know, the future will show.

Question: There is an opinion in society that an atmosphere of impunity has been reigning in the country lately. Opposition activist Tofig Yagublu was accused of beating himself. In connection with the kidnapping and humiliation of socio-political activist Bahtiyar Hajiyev, there are no serious results so far. It is said that the surveillance cameras along the route taken by his abductors did not work. And now the misfortune of a journalist. What does all this say?

Answer: The atmosphere of impunity reigns not only recently, it has reigned since the beginning of Ilham Aliyev's presidency. It was before him, but it increased and intensified during the reign of Ilham Aliyev. In other words, this is the current policy - arbitrariness in the country, impunity of officials, open violation of human rights, custom-made nature of crimes against civil society, including journalists, and, of course, by introducing impunity for perpetrators, pursuing a policy of oppression of citizens in every sense, psychological and physical oppression and compulsion to completely shut up. This policy aims to make the power of the family as perpetual as in Syria or South Korea, by passing on power by inheritance.

Question: Some  people compare this incident with the murder of the late journalist Elmar Huseynov. Elmar Huseynov was shot dead while exiting the elevator at the entrance of the building where he lived. Ayten Mammadova was also attacked in an elevator. The murderers of Elmar Huseynov, as well as the late publicist Rafik Tagiyev, have not yet been found. Therefore, there are those who believe that the investigation of attacks on journalists and the search for perpetrators was never in the interests of the authorities, and this attack will be another case in a series of other such crimes. What should the authorities do to refute this thesis?

Answer: There is a similarity in the attack on Ayten Mammadova and the murder of journalist Elmar Huseynov, only at the scene of the crime - the entrance of the building where the journalists live. The differences, in fact, are much greater. In the case of Elmar - a pistol, in the case of Ayten khanum - a knife, Elmar - killed, Ayten khanum - minor injuries and threats. But these are trifles. The main difference is that the decision to kill Elmar Huseynov was made at the highest level, and in the case of Ayten Mammadova, as I said, there are no serious grounds for thinking so. And there are even more mysteries in the murder of the writer and publicist Rafik Tagi, here I will not go into depth so that the interview is not too long. This is also a topic for a separate discussion.

Those who believe that the investigation of attacks on journalists and the search for criminals are not in the interests of the authorities are right, but I have already said about the differences in the attack on Ayten. Therefore, there is hope, albeit small, that the crime will not be included in the number of unsolved ones. Let's see who they mean when they talk about the authorities. The leaders of law enforcement agencies do not go into these "subtleties", they do not care, they do not want to reveal the crime, period. But why should President Aliyev take the blame for this crime, and therefore the role of the patron of the murderer of children? I think that he should at least consider that this damages his image, his reputation. It is one thing to have an authoritarian president who represses and intimidates his people, and another thing to be a defender of those who patronize child murderers, that is, a president who defends child murderers. The difference is significant. If the crime is solved, then President Aliyev will be free from all accusations and suspicions. It's an image issue...

Question: If this time the criminals are not found, what promises this trend for the country, the authorities, the media, society?

Answer: If this time the perpetrator is not found, then this trend promises the country and society even more crimes, violence, impunity. The media is already suppressed and destroyed, not only the opposition, there are no independent media left in the country, the remaining opposition and independent journalists are engaged in self-censorship. At the end of this path there is a chaos, a social explosion, not such a positive example of the "Arab Spring" as in Tunisia and partly in Egypt, but as in Libya and Syria ...