CAUCASUS ANALYTICAL DIGEST No. 61–62, 17 April 2014 12
E-Democracy in Azerbaijan By Ulviyya Asadzade, Baku Abstract The article examines the state of e-democracy in Azerbaijan, namely, the conditions for adult citizens to par- ticipate in the decision-making process by means of information and communication technologies.
Difficult Conditions opment of e-democracy as well. The same human rights According to recent OSCE reports, about 80 percent abused in real life are abused in virtual life as well, illus- of the population in Azerbaijan receives its infor- trated by the so called “Facebook prisoners,” as well as mation from TV channels, which, critical observers by the violation of the “virtual rights of assembly” and point out, mainly carry propaganda for the current “virtual freedom of expression.” government instead of providing citizens with qual- ity information. What Is E-Democracy? Furthermore, almost half of the population lacks There is no single definition of e-democracy. It can be access to regular, high-quality internet, which prevents generally described as the use of new information and them from receiving information from alternative communication technologies (ICT) to enhance citi- sources, including social media. This problem becomes zens’ engagement in democratic processes (E-Democ- more obvious during the elections, when the citizens lack racy, 2009). opportunities to obtain free and impartial information. On March 23–24, 2010, the European governments Finally, citizens who dare to criticize government met in Lisbon to announce the European Union strat- decisions in social media face prosecution and may even egy for the next 10 years. One of the key elements of end up in prison. this strategy was to avoid the digital divide by ensuring As a result of this situation, this article argues that that no citizen is left behind in using web-based tech- despite the opportunities for civic participation created nologies for decision-making and administrative pur- by online media, there is still a long way to go until poses (Meier, 2012). e-democracy develops in Azerbaijan. What is the distinction between e-democracy and e-government? Norris argues that while developing the The State of Democracy in Azerbaijan ICT infrastructure for e-government, the aim of the As an oil-rich country, Azerbaijan is described in inter- authorities is not to provide a platform for e-democracy, national reports as a place where human rights and free- but rather to maintain the tools for delivering govern- doms are repressed. mental messages faster and for making administrative According to the World Report 2014 issued by processes more effective, while activists and civil soci- Human Rights Watch, the Azerbaijani government’s ety leaders use this infrastructure for empowering civic records on freedom of expression, assembly, and associa- activism and participation (Norris, 2010). tion deteriorated during 2013: “The authorities arrested dozens of political activists on bogus charges, impris- E-Democracy in Azerbaijan: Access to oned critical journalists, broke up several peaceful pub- Online Media lic demonstrations, and adopted legislation that fur- Usually democracy studies are organized around the fol- ther restricted fundamental freedom” (Watch Human lowing themes: freedom and equality, human rights, col- Rights, 2014). lective decision making, legitimacy, and justice (Frank Another human rights organization, Freedom House, Cunningham, 2005). considers Azerbaijan as a “not free country,” in contrast Article 1.1 of the Constitution of the Republic of to “free” and “partly free countries” (Freedom House, Azerbaijan reads: “The sole source of state power in Map of Freedom, 2014). the Republic of Azerbaijan is the people of Azerbai- However, in a recent speech, President Ilham Ali- jan.” However, the citizens of Azerbaijan are not pro- yev dismissed the critique regarding democracy issues vided with sufficient opportunities to employ this Con- in Azerbaijan, emphasizing the existence of free internet stitutional right. The ruling family controls almost all in the country (APA, 2013). Yet, according to the crit- the TV channels (Kazimova, 2011), whereas 80 percent ics, although the internet platform is free and no restric- of the population receive information from television. tions are imposed on accessing websites, the deficiency Hence their access is mainly limited to information that of democracy in the country naturally affects the devel- is pro-ruling party, consequently, they lack the political CAUCASUS ANALYTICAL DIGEST No. 61–62, 17 April 2014 13
awareness to make informed decisions in elections. The Freedom of E-Expression opposition candidates find themselves in unfavorable Freedom House describes the traditional media in conditions as the restrictive media environment mars Azerbaijan as not free, while the internet as partly free. the election campaigns (OSCE, 2013). Indeed, the internet has created an opportunity to escape However, for the last five years, since the internet the direct censorship imposed on the traditional media and social media have been on the rise, there also has and is mostly free from systematic blocking of websites; been an increase in civil participation too. For a cer- yet, the online activists are increasingly exposed to deten- tain part of the population, social media, especially tion and intimidation. Moreover, the Criminal Code Facebook (up to 700,000 Azerbaijanis are registered was amended on June 4, 2013, to explicitly extend the on Facebook), which enjoys more freedom than the application of defamation provisions to internet content. traditional media, has become an alternative source Finally, the recent amendments to the legal framework of information and even a platform for civic activities unduly restrict the constitutional guarantees on access (Freedom House, 2014). to information (OSCE, 2013). Despite these changes, however, they can hardly be A few examples from a large body of evidence illus- generalized to the national level. Although the govern- trate the problems. Jabbar Savalan, a 23-year-old stu- ment announced 2013 as an ICT year, there are only dent and a member of the opposition Popular Front 500 villages out of 4,000 in Azerbaijan with access to Party (PFP) in Azerbaijan, was sentenced to two and broadband internet. As 53 percent of the population a half years in prison on May 4, 2011 on drug charges. is rural, almost half of them have limited access to the International Human Rights organizations, including internet (Mammadli, 2014), hence to the alternative Amnesty International, recognized his arrest as fabri- information spread via the social media. cated, relating it to his post on Facebook a day before, Some may argue that the rural population can go in which he called for anti-government protests in Baku online using mobile internet platforms. However, the (Amnesty International, 2011). infrastructure for the mobile internet is not well devel- Additionally, MRI declared that the detention of oped yet: Even 3G is not available for all the mobile social network activist Abdul Abilov on drug pos- internet providers throughout the country, to say noth- session charges was politically motivated, as Abi- ing about 4G. lov is an administrator of the Facebook page “Let’s In addition, the internet is quite expensive in Azer- say stop to flatterers” (
information throughout their personal social networks Yet, there are two main reasons that prevent Azer- (Pearce, 2014). baijani citizens from being actively involved in e-partic- There have also been some cases when the discus- ipation: First, about 50 percent of the population does sions held in the social media influenced government not have access to high quality internet, which prevents decisions. For instance, Safar Abiyev, the former Min- them from participating in online civic activities. Sec- ister of Defense, who held this position for 18 years, ond, citizens who are critical about government deci- was fired after a soldier’s death led to a wave of protest sions face prosecution, a situation that provokes exten- that had been inspired by a heated discussion on Face- sive self-censorship in social media. book (Pearce, 2014). The Azerbaijani government should meet its legal obligations by making information sources accessible to Conclusion its citizens and should guarantee the population’s con- Azerbaijani citizens have gained an enhanced opportu- stitutional rights, such as freedom of expression, assem- nity to employ their democratic rights on virtual plat- bly, and association, including via the online platform. forms as social media, especially Facebook, enjoys more freedom than the traditional media, which is extensively controlled by the government.
About the Author Ulviyya Asadzade is a journalist in Baku.
References • Amnesty International. (2011). Retrieved February 26, 2014, from Amnesty International: