Securitisation and human rights discourse: violations of freedom of expression during Covid-19 in Central Asia

Abstract

The purpose of the research is to analyze the legal criteria for constitutionally permissible methods of restricting freedom of expression when combating a pandemic in Central Asian countries. Central Asian states continue to control the flow of information as well as conceal the scale of damage caused by the pandemic, even at such difficult times. Author argues that states have used the pandemic as an excuse to suppress public debate and criticism and to control the media using securitisation discourse. Therefore, this thesis relies on the framework of securitization to understand how the discourse is constructed to legitimise the emergency measures taken under the pretext of stopping the spread of "false" information about Covid-19. An exploratory approach is used as there is limited information on the topic. The author hopes to contribute to the existing literature on securitisation as well as regional studies in the context of the pandemic. The study shows that Covid-19 and the associated state of emergency have been used to divert attention from passing controversial laws and using emergency measures that would be unacceptable in normal times. Furthermore, study explains that people accept the government's rhetoric without suspicion because of the corollary of the historical memory of the Soviet Union, its legacy and its influence on people's perceptions of power. As a result, the laws passed have led to regulations restricting freedom of speech and expression, and freedom of the press becoming excessive and going beyond what is permissible. The author claims that the main problem is that these laws have no time limit and will have a long-term effect. In essence, the research and its method revealed the hidden aspects of political discourse - identifying opportunities for abuse of power.