By Nina Ognianova
The day before, Natalya Estemirova had seen off two colleagues from Moscow. Yelena Milashina, a reporter with the newspaper Novaya Gazeta, and Tanya Lokshina, an advocate with the international group Human Rights Watch, had traveled to Chechnya on separate assignments. Like many visiting journalists and human rights defenders, Milashina and Lokshina had stayed with Estemirova. Her Grozny apartment had become a headquarters for such visitors; Russian and international journalists often made it their first stop. Estemirova was their primary source, consultant, fixer, translator, protector.
ATTACKS ON
THE PRESS: 2009
• Main Index
EUROPE and
CENTRAL ASIA
Regional Analysis:
•
Why a killing in Chechnya
is an international issue
Country Summaries
• Armenia
• Azerbaijan
• Belarus
• Croatia
• Georgia
• Kazakhstan
• Kyrgyzstan
• Russia
• Ukraine
• Uzbekistan
• Other developments
Estemirova was to travel
to Moscow shortly, Milashina recalled later, so on July 14, 2009, the friends
said goodbye with the words: “I’ll see you soon.”
The next morning, as
Estemirova was leaving for work, four men forced her into a white Lada sedan.
She cried out that she was being kidnapped, but the car sped off. Her body,
three bullets to the chest, two to the head, was found eight hours later,
ditched along a road near the village of Gazi-Yurt in neighboring Ingushetia.
Witnesses saw the kidnappers, according to news reports, but they were too
afraid to speak. Despite ostensibly tight security along the
Chechnya-Ingushetia border, the kidnappers passed through guarded checkpoints
undisturbed.
A terrible, terrible
thing, but, really, what makes this death so important? After all, tens of
thousands have been killed in Chechnya over 15 brutal years of separatist
conflict. Why should this murder be an international issue?
Estemirova, 50, was one of
the few expert witnesses to the human toll in Chechnya. Writing for Novaya Gazeta and the news Web site Kavkazsky
Uzel, and reporting for Human
Rights Watch and the Russian rights group Memorial, she had accumulated a
damning body of evidence linking torture, disappearances, murders, arsons, and
punitive violence to Chechen authorities and, particularly, to the militia of
Chechen President Ramzan Kadyrov.
“A question hangs over her
execution, the most recent in a series of killings of those still willing to
chronicle
Estemirova is among 19 journalists murdered in
retaliation for their work in
Russia since 2000, CPJ research shows. Murder convictions have been won in only
one case and, even there, the masterminds have evaded punishment. In September,
a CPJ delegation traveled to
While our meetings did not
produce breaking news, we left with the sense that at least some officials
recognized the need to reverse this record of impunity. Their expressed
commitment to collaborate with international partners—as they pledged to do in
the case of slain
But great skepticism is
warranted. Throughout the decade, Kremlin and regional authorities have sought
to obstruct, marginalize, and demean their critics. Probing journalists have
been effectively banned from influential federal television channels—the main
news source for most Russians—and pushed to limited-audience print and Internet
publications. These journalists are vulnerable to attack given their isolation
and the official hostility to their work. This culture has caused extensive
damage: Coverage of important topics such as corruption, human rights abuses,
and organized crime goes largely unnoticed by the public. Impunity in attacks
on journalists induces further self-censorship among colleagues.
CPJ research has shown
that justice has been thwarted by systemic shortcomings at every
level—political, investigative, prosecutorial, and judicial. Investigations of
the murders of journalists have been consistently opaque, often compromised by
internal conflicts of interest, and frequently subjected to undue political
influence. Take the case of Maksim Maksimov, a St. Petersburg reporter who was
investigating corruption in the local Interior Ministry when he disappeared in
June 2004. In the hands of the same local authorities Maksimov had been
examining, the murder probe went nowhere. Investigators made no evident effort
to follow up on allegations that local officers themselves were involved in
Maksimov’s disappearance.
Time and again, CPJ
research shows, investigators failed to pursue work-related motives. In the few
cases that reached the courts, prosecutors brought weak or even bogus cases to
trial. In the corruption-ridden city of Togliatti, for instance, investigators
ignored journalism-related motives in the killings of Valery Ivanov and Aleksei
Sidorov, consecutive editors of the muckraking newspaper Tolyattinskoye Obozreniye. After coercing a confession, prosecutors
tried an innocent man in the murder of Sidorov. The man was acquitted, and the
case is unsolved.
At times, important
evidence has been lost or concealed. Novaya
Gazeta editor Yuri
Shchekochikhin died in 2003 from a rare dermatological condition that struck as
he was investigating a high-level corruption scheme. Officials at the
government-run clinic where the journalist had been treated sealed the medical
records, calling them a state secret. The records, eventually given to a Moscow
prosecutor, then vanished.
A historian by education and a Chechen-Russian
by descent, Estemirova possessed the intellectual rigor to methodically document facts
and the innate drive to fight injustice. Living under a regime that represses
women, she wore heels and red lipstick and looked men straight in the eye. In a
profile published three days after her death, The Times’ Chivers described the importance of her work: “To the families
whose pain she worked to relieve and whose stories she forced the world to see,
she was a resolute champion. To the men whose crimes she exposed, case by case,
with a quiet composure, she was a confounding enemy, a feminine nemesis they
could neither fathom nor dissuade.”
Apart from her own
reporting on dangerous assignments, Estemirova was a go-to person for outside
journalists and human rights defenders. “This loss is absolutely irreplaceable,
not only for us, her friends, but for [Russian] society and for the world.
Because if it weren’t for Natasha, nobody would know what really goes on in
Chechnya,” Lokshina told the Russian service of the U.S. government-funded
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). Lokshina, who had just collaborated
with Estemirova on a report documenting punitive house burnings by Chechen law
enforcement, went on to say: “Of course there are people living in Moscow and
abroad who try to cover Chechnya, but even if they travel to the region, they
are still tourists. … Natasha lived there, she was in the epicenter of events, and
she guided us.”
Her murder immediately
crippled reporting in Chechnya. The Grozny branch of Memorial, which Estemirova
headed, halted activities for nearly six months, while Novaya Gazeta announced it would indefinitely suspend trips to Chechnya because
it could not ensure the safety of its reporters. In microcosm, the impact of
Estemirova’s murder reflects the chilling effect that impunity has had on media
coverage overall in Russia.
International groups were
also harmed by the killing. Her reports for Memorial were regularly used by the
United Nations and the Council of Europe, for instance, in preparing their own
human rights strategies with regard to Chechnya and the North Caucasus,
Lokshina told CPJ.
Estemirova’s colleagues
believe she was killed in retaliation for her documentation of official abuses
in Chechnya. Authorities, including Kadyrov, had repeatedly summoned her to
“meetings” intended to threaten and intimidate her into stopping her work,
according to colleagues and news reports. At one such meeting, in March 2008,
Kadyrov asked Estemirova a series of questions about her personal life and
family, including her teenage daughter. Kadyrov told Estemirova that day: “Yes,
my arms are in blood up to my elbows. And I am not ashamed of it. I killed and
will kill bad people. We are fighting the enemies of the people,” Human Rights
Watch reported. Estemirova’s daughter was relocated after that meeting; the
journalist herself took brief trips away from home.
But, as always, she
returned to her work. A July 17, 2009, New
York Times report said that
Estemirova had been summoned three months earlier for questioning by Chechen
police, “an incident that so worried her co-workers at Memorial that they
reported it to the Council of Europe.” The Times also noted a meeting
between Estemirova’s Moscow-based Memorial supervisor, Oleg Orlov, and Nurdi
Nukhazhiyev, the pro-Kadyrov Chechen human rights ombudsman. Speaking five days
before Estemirova was killed, according to the account, Nukhazhiyev told Orlov
that high-ranking officials were “extremely dissatisfied” with Memorial’s most
recent investigations.
Although President Dmitry
Medvedev condemned the killing, Kadyrov’s reaction left reason to believe that
justice would not be served. Immediately after the murder, Kadyrov said he was
taking the investigation “under personal control” and declared the killers
“deserve no support and must be punished as the cruelest of criminals,” the
news agency Interfax reported. He sent a different message a month later, in an
interview with the Russian service of RFE/RL. Responding to a suggestion that
independent, outside investigators might be better suited to handle the probe,
Kadyrov told RFE/RL: “If the law works here, why should we invite outside
people? … If Kadyrov is guilty, if Kadyrov’s people are guilty, let it be
proved.
“Why would Kadyrov murder
a woman who no one needs?” he asked. “She never had any dignity, honor,
conscience.” Kadyrov went on to file a defamation lawsuit against Memorial’s
Orlov, who had publicly accused the Chechen president of involvement in
Estemirova’s kidnapping and murder.
In her 10 years of
reporting on the Second Chechen War, Estemirova documented and publicized human
rights abuses by all parties in the conflict, including the separatists. Her work
could have provided a number of parties with motive to kill. But can an
independent investigation truly be conducted by Chechen authorities when its
iron-fisted president says “no one needs” the victim? Can anyone really believe
local investigators have the freedom to examine work-related motives, including
Estemirova’s reporting on official human rights abuses? CPJ and others have
called on the federal-level Prosecutor General’s Office headed by Yuri Chaika
and the Investigative Committee headed by Aleksandr Bastrykin to assign the
case to independent detectives from outside the North Caucasus region, and to
require regular progress reports from them.
Fundamental steps can be
taken in the other, failed probes. Closed investigations must be reopened; investigations
that are open in name but stalled in practical terms must be restarted. Under
Russia’s centralized law enforcement system, federal officials in Moscow have
the ultimate practical responsibility for solving journalist murders; they must
demand specific progress reports from their subordinates at the district and
regional levels. Russia’s top leaders, President Medvedev and Prime Minister
Vladimir Putin, share the moral responsibility for Russia’s impunity record;
they must hold their appointees accountable for progress in journalist
killings. Medvedev and Putin should also publicly state their recognition of
the important role independent news-gatherers, investigative reporters, and
critical commentators play in Russia’s society.
Although extreme in its
animosity, Kadyrov’s reaction to the Estemirova murder was similar to the views
expressed by other Russian officials in response to earlier media killings:
Broadly promise to investigate, but diminish the crime, marginalize the victim,
and dismiss the possibility of official involvement. Even as he pledged an
investigation into the 2006 killing of Novaya
Gazeta reporter Anna
Politkovskaya, then-President Putin called her work “insignificant” and said he
could not “imagine that anybody currently in office could come to the idea of
organizing such a brutal crime.”
Politkovskaya, like
Estemirova, had devoted her career to documenting human rights crimes in
Chechnya. She was threatened, jailed, forced into exile, and poisoned, CPJ
research shows. Her last story, published after her death, detailed the alleged
torture of Chechen civilians by military units loyal to Kadyrov. The slaying of
Politkovskaya in her Moscow apartment building remains unsolved.
The international community has a clear
interest in fighting impunity in the
Estemirova case and in all Russian journalist killings. Without reporters
uncovering facts about human rights abuses, politics, crime, and corruption,
those sensitive issues are concealed from the world. A closed society cannot be
regarded as a reliable neighbor and partner in the community of free,
democratic nations.
While in Moscow, CPJ heard
a resounding message—from victims’ families, colleagues, and press freedom
advocates—that international attention to Russian journalists at risk can help
prevent recurring attacks. “Journalists are always more protected when their
fates are monitored from abroad,” said Musa Muradov, a North Caucasus
correspondent for the business daily Kommersant
and a 2003 recipient of
CPJ’s International Press Freedom Award. While such monitoring carries no
guarantees, he added, “to a certain extent, it can save us.”
Veteran press freedom
advocates Aleksei Simonov with the Glasnost Defense Foundation and Oleg
Panfilov with the Center for Journalism in Extreme Situations—whose
organizations regularly document attacks on the press in Russia—told CPJ that
international attention is vital in eliciting responses from Russian officials.
“If 10 Russian press freedom groups got together and wrote a protest letter to
top Kremlin officials, there will be no reaction,” Panfilov told CPJ. “Russian
authorities only respond to international criticism.”
Rimma Maksimova, the
mother of the St. Petersburg reporter Maksim Maksimov, also noted the
importance of international scrutiny in breaking through a culture of media
indifference and public apathy in Russia. “For five years, I have been bumping
my head into an impervious wall,” she said of her repeated efforts to talk with
investigators about her son’s case. “No one talks to me, no one responds to my
requests for information.”
The international
community has a number of tools to prod Russian authorities. Through its
membership in the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the
pan-European human rights monitor, and in the Council of Europe, Russia is
obligated to comply with principles on freedom of expression outlined in the
European Convention on Human Rights. The council should ensure that Russia
fully complies with the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in
freedom of expression cases. In the event that Russia does not comply with its
obligations, the council should use penalty mechanisms up to suspension of
membership.
Though not a member of the
European Union, Russia has partnership agreements with the EU. The two parties
regularly hold human rights consultations, known as Human Rights Dialogues,
during which press freedom issues are discussed. As part of CPJ’s September
mission on combating impunity, a delegation traveled to Brussels and met with
EU representatives responsible for placing impunity on the EU-Russia agenda for
upcoming Human Rights Dialogues. We urged that the EU Mission in Russia monitor
press freedom and apply to Russian journalists the EU guidelines on human
rights defenders. Under the guidelines, the EU provides official support and
resources to human rights defenders. In our meetings with representatives of
the European Parliament, we emphasized the need for closer scrutiny of Russia’s
impunity record through subcommittee hearings.
Attention to Russia’s
impunity record is also needed from the U.N. Human Rights Council and, in the
United States, from the Obama administration and Congress. World leaders must
engage their Russian counterparts and seek results at every opportunity. If
results are lacking, international monitors should be dispatched to conduct
independent, fact-finding missions. Those should end in timely reports with
clear, practical recommendations; where violations are proved, international
institutions must not shy away from sanctioning Russia.
When the subject of
impunity is raised, Russian leaders have often gone on the offensive, demanding
the world stop meddling in the country’s internal affairs, and suggesting the
nation’s transition from Soviet collectivism to a modern market economy has
been smooth compared to, say, America’s Wild West era. But this is not the Wild
West—this is Russia in the 21st century, an influential country claiming an
equal seat at the table of global leaders. In a world more interconnected and
interdependent than ever, that seat comes with a portfolio of privileges and
obligations.
The need to address the
issue is urgent. Impunity emboldens enemies of the press to continue practicing
the rawest form of censorship. In Russia, the maxim “No person, no problem”
reflects both the philosophy of the murderers and the failure of the justice
system to rein them in. It also spells out the vulnerability of Russian
journalists who take on risky subjects—like lone soldiers in a battlefield, they
make easy targets for elimination. It’s worth remembering that they are
fighting for everyone. World leaders in the European Union, in the United
Nations, in the U.S. State Department and U.S. Congress are obliged to back
them, to press the case with the Kremlin, and to demand President Medvedev and
his government stand for the rule of law and on the side of humanity.
Nina
Ognianova, CPJ’s Europe and Central Asia program coordinator, led a CPJ mission
to Moscow and Brussels in September 2009. She is lead author of CPJ’s September
2009 report, Anatomy of Injustice, which examined the unsolved murders of
journalists in Russia from 2000 to 2009. CPJ’s Global Campaign Against Impunity
is underwritten by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation.

Delicious
Digg
Google
Reddit
StumbleUpon


