Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Journal home page:
https://inscience.uz/index.php/socinov/index
Treaty law of the EU and Uzbekistan: a comparative legal
analysis
Sokhiba INOYATOVA
1
Tashkent State University of Law
ARTICLE INFO
ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received February 2025
Received in revised form
15 February 2025
Accepted 15 March 2025
Available online
25 April 2025
This article provides a comprehensive analysis of mandatory
methods for protecting civil rights, focusing on legislative
practices in the European Union (EU) and the challenges of
implementing similar measures in Uzbekistan. The research
identifies core mechanisms embedded in EU legal doctrine
–
such as the principle of effectiveness, proportionality, and state
obligations in ensuring fundamental rights
–
and assesses their
transposability into Uzbekistan’s legal and institutional
framework. The study also explores comparative jurisprudence
and evaluates how binding protections can be adopted without
undermining national legal sovereignty. Recommendations are
made to support Uzbekistan’s efforts in aligning its civil rights
protection system with international standards.
2181-
1415/©
2025 in Science LLC.
https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-1415-vol6-iss2-pp
This is an open access article under the Attribution 4.0 International
(CC BY 4.0) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.ru)
Keywords:
civil rights,
European Union,
Uzbekistan,
mandatory protection,
legislative practice,
legal harmonization,
enforcement mechanisms,
constitutional law,
human rights,
legal implementation.
Yevropa Ittifoqi va O‘zbekiston shartnoma huquqi: qiyosiy
huquqiy tahlil
ANNOTATSIYA
Kalit so‘zlar
:
fuqarolik huquqlari,
Yevropa Ittifoqi,
O
‘
zbekiston,
majburiy himoya,
qonunchilik amaliyoti,
huquqiy uyg‘
unlashtirish,
ijro mexanizmlari,
konstitutsiyaviy huquq,
inson huquqlari,
qonuniy amalga oshirish.
Ushbu maqolada fuqarolik huquqlarini himoya qilishning
majburiy usullari har tomonlama tahlil qilinib, Yevropa Ittifoqi
(EI)dagi qonunchilik amaliyoti va O
‘
zbekistonda shu kabi chora-
tadbirlarni amalga oshirish muammolariga e
’
tibor qaratiladi.
Tadqiqotda Yevropa Ittifoqi huquqiy doktrinasiga kiritilgan
asosiy mexanizmlar, masalan, samaradorlik, mutanosiblik va
asosiy
huquqlarni
ta
’
minlashda
davlat
majburiyatlari
prinsipi aniqlanadi va ularning O
‘
zbekistonning huquqiy va
institutsional bazasiga o
‘
tkazilishi baholanadi. Tadqiqot,
shuningdek, qiyosiy yurisprudensiyani o
‘
rganadi va milliy
1
PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Civil Law, Tashkent State University of Law. E-mail: s.gafarova@list.ru
Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Issue
–
6
№
2 (2025) / ISSN 2181-1415
62
huquqiy suverenitetga putur etkazmasdan qanday qilib
majburiy himoyalarni qabul qilish mumkinligini baholaydi.
O
‘
zbekistonning fuqarolik huquqlarini himoya qilish tizimini
xalqaro
standartlarga
moslashtirish
borasidagi
sa
’
y-
harakatlarini qo
‘
llab-quvvatlash bo
‘
yicha tavsiyalar berildi.
Договорное право ЕС и Узбекистана: сравнительно
-
правовой анализ
АННОТАЦИЯ
Ключевые слова:
гражданские права,
Европейский союз,
Узбекистан,
обязательная защита,
законодательная
практика,
правовая гармонизация,
механизмы обеспечения,
конституционное право,
права человека,
правовая реализация.
В статье представлен комплексный анализ обязательных
методов защиты гражданских прав с упором на
законодательную практику в Европейском союзе (ЕС) и
проблемы внедрения аналогичных мер в Узбекистане.
В исследовании определяются основные механизмы,
заложенные в правовую доктрину ЕС, такие как принцип
эффективности, пропорциональности и государственные
обязательства по обеспечению основных прав, и оценивается
их транспонируемость в правовую и институциональную
базу Узбекистана. В исследовании также изучается
сравнительная
юриспруденция
и
оценивается,
как
обязательные меры защиты могут быть приняты без
подрыва национального правового суверенитета. Даны
рекомендации по поддержке усилий Узбекистана по
приведению своей системы защиты гражданских прав в
соответствие с международными стандартами.
INTRODUCTION
The protection of civil rights is fundamental to the rule of law and democratic
governance. In recent decades, the European Union (EU) has developed a sophisticated
and legally binding framework for protecting civil rights through supranational
legislation and jurisprudence. These "mandatory methods" serve not only as safeguards
for individuals but also as instruments of legal harmonization across member states.
Uzbekistan, in its ongoing reform agend
a under the “New Uzbekistan” strategy, has
demonstrated a willingness to enhance human rights protections and align more closely with
international standards. However, implementing mandatory protections akin to those in the
EU presents both opportunities and complex legal, institutional, and cultural challenges.
This article seeks to answer the following research questions:
–
What are the key mandatory mechanisms of civil rights protection in EU law?
–
How compatible are these mechanisms with the legal framework of Uzbekistan?
–
What are the challenges and solutions for effective implementation in the Uzbek context?
Theoretical framework of civil rights protection. Civil rights, often referred to as
fundamental human rights, are universally recognized entitlements guaranteed to
individuals by their humanity. They include rights such as the right to life, liberty,
privacy, freedom of expression, and protection against discrimination. These rights are
protected through both national legal systems and international human rights
instruments.
Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Issue
–
6
№
2 (2025) / ISSN 2181-1415
63
DEFINITIONS AND CATEGORIES
Civil rights are typically distinguished from political, economic, and social rights. While
all are interdependent, civil rights specifically relate to individual freedoms and the legal
protections required to ensure those freedoms are not violated by state or private actors.
Scholars such as Dworkin (1977) and Rawls (1971) emphasize the role of civil
rights in guaranteeing the moral autonomy and equality of individuals. These rights are
inalienable and often codified in constitutional or supranational documents such as the
European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of
the European Union
Sources of Civil Rights Protection.
Globally, civil rights are protected through
multiple layers of legal norms:
–
Domestic Constitutions (e.g., Article 13
–36 of Uzbekistan’s Constitution)
–
International Treaties (e.g., the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights
–
ICCPR)
–
Regional Charters (e.g., EU Charter of Fundamental Rights)
–
Soft law and customary norms
In the context of the EU, civil rights protection has evolved from being implicit in
economic integration to being explicitly codified in treaties and EU legislation. Mandatory
methods refer to legal obligations imposed on member states to implement and enforce
such rights effectively
The Role of the Rule of Law.
The concept of the rule of law (Rechtsstaat) is central
to understanding mandatory civil rights protections. According to Dicey (1885), the rule
of law entails legal certainty, equality before the law, and the supremacy of law over
arbitrary power.
In the EU, the rule of law is one of the foundational values under Article 2 of the
Treaty on European Union (TEU). Civil rights are enforceable not only through domestic
mechanisms but also through EU institutions such as the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
Enforcement and Justiciability.
Mandatory protections imply that civil rights must be:
–
Legally enforceable (justiciable before courts)
–
Non-derogable in certain contexts (e.g., torture, slavery)
–
Backed by effective remedies (e.g., access to courts, legal aid)
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), although external to the EU,
complements the ECJ’s efforts in ensuring that civil rights are not merely aspirational but
legally binding and effectively
Principles of Direct Effect and Supremacy.
The principles of direct effect and
supremacy form the cornerstone of the EU legal order and are essential for the
enforcement of mandatory civil rights.
Established in
Van Gend en Loos v. Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen
(Case
26/62, 1963), the doctrine of direct effect allows individuals to invoke EU law provisions
directly before national courts without the need for national implementing legislation.
Civil rights provisions in directives, regulations, and the Charter can therefore be
self-executing, enabling individuals to claim rights immediately in courts of member states.
Example: A citizen may invoke Article 47 of the EU Charter to claim the right
to a fair trial before national courts.
Supremacy.
The
supremacy
of EU law over national law was articulated in
Costa v.
ENEL
(Case 6/64, 1964). This ensures that even constitutional provisions of member
states cannot override EU legal norms once the area is within EU competence.
Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Issue
–
6
№
2 (2025) / ISSN 2181-1415
64
This principle underpins the mandatory nature of civil rights protections.
Once rights are granted under EU law, member states must honor them, even if it
contradicts national law.
The Role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
The ECJ plays a pivotal role in
interpreting and enforcing civil rights across the EU through its jurisprudence. It ensures
that civil rights provisions are uniformly applied and that member states fulfill their
obligations.
National courts can refer cases to the ECJ to interpret EU law. This mechanism has
been crucial for expanding and clarifying civil rights protections.
Landmark Cases:
–
Kücükdeveci v. Swedex GmbH
(Case C-555/07): Anti-discrimination based on age.
–
Google Spain v. AEPD and Mario Costeja González
(Case C-131/12): Right to be
forgotten.
–
Digital Rights Ireland (Joined Cases C-293/12 and C-594/12): Invalidated data
retention directive as disproportionate.
Through such judgments, the ECJ enforces the principle of proportionality, ensuring
that any limitation on civil rights must be necessary, appropriate, and not excessive.
Examples of Mandatory Civil Rights Mechanisms.
The Racial Equality Directive
(2000/43/EC) and Employment Equality Directive (2000/78/EC) mandate non-
discrimination based on race, religion, disability, age, and sexual orientation.
They are directly effective and require the establishment of equality bodies in
member states.
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (Regulation (EU) 2016/679)
provides mandatory protection of personal data and privacy. It includes:
–
Right to access and correction
–
Right to erasure (right to be forgotten)
–
Right to data portability
Violations can lead to significant administrative penalties, emphasizing
the mandatory enforcement mechanism through independent supervisory authorities
(e.g., national Data Protection Authorities).
Under Directive 2016/1919, the EU mandates that suspects and accused persons
in criminal proceedings be given access to legal aid. It obligates states to establish fair
and accessible procedures to guarantee this right.
Uzbekistan's Legal Framework for Civil Rights
.
Since gaining independence in
1991, Uzbekistan has undergone significant legal and institutional reforms aimed at
enhancing civil rights. While notable progress has been made
–
especially in the last
decade
–
ensuring the
mandatory
and
effective
protection of civil rights remains a key
challenge. This section explores Uzbekistan's current constitutional, legislative, and
institutional frameworks for civil rights protection and assesses their compatibility with
European models.
CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES
The
Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan (updated in 2023)
serves as
the foundational document guaranteeing civil rights. Several articles explicitly affirm the
inviolability of fundamental freedoms:
–
Article 13:
Guarantees the supremacy of law and protection of human rights.
–
Article 14:
Declares the separation of powers and rule of law as governing principles.
Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Issue
–
6
№
2 (2025) / ISSN 2181-1415
65
–
Article 25:
Enshrines the right to life, liberty, and personal inviolability.
–
Article 26:
Protects against torture and cruel treatment.
–
Article 29:
Ensures freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.
–
Article 30:
Establishes freedom of expression and access to information.
–
Article 44:
Provides judicial protection for citizens whose rights are violated.
These provisions form the constitutional bedrock for civil rights but are largely
declarative
unless accompanied by effective enforcement mechanisms.
Legislative Gaps and Implementation Challenges
. Although the legislative base
in Uzbekistan has expanded significantly, several challenges remain in terms of
enforcement
,
accessibility
, and
consistency
with international norms.
Civil rights protections are spread across multiple laws, such as:
–
Law “On Guarantees of the Rights and Freedoms of Citizens” (1995)
–
Law “On Appeals of Individuals and Legal Entities” (2014)
–
Law “On Protection of Personal Data” (2019)
–
Law “On Gender Equality” (2019)
However, the absence of a
comprehensive civil rights code
or a
binding Charter
of Rights
like in the EU creates fragmentation and ambiguity in enforcement.
Despite constitutional guarantees, practical access to courts remains limited due to:
–
High legal costs
–
Lack of legal aid infrastructure
–
Limited public awareness of rights
–
Judicial dependence on the executive
Unlike the EU, Uzbekistan lacks independent enforcement bodies such as equality
commissions or data protection authorities with real sanctioning powers. The Human
Rights Ombudsman has limited influence and resources.
Judicial Protection of Civil Rights
.
The
judiciary
in Uzbekistan plays a key role in
protecting civil rights, but its effectiveness is often undermined by:
–
Weak case law tradition
(lack of binding precedent)
–
Limited training of judges in human rights law
–
Bureaucratic and political influence
Although some progress has been made
–
such as the establishment of
Administrative Courts
and
e-court systems
–
judicial independence remains a concern
raised by international observers, including the
UN Human Rights Council.
Additionally, the
Constitutional Court of Uzbekistan
has limited competence to
handle individual complaints, unlike the ECJ or the ECtHR, which serve as major
guarantors of civil rights in the EU.
Uzbekistan’s civil rights framework includes
progressive constitutional
guarantees
and
growing legislative support,
yet it falls short in implementing
mandatory mechanisms
that ensure actual protection, redress, and accountability.
Compared to the EU, Uzbekistan lacks the institutional robustness and direct
enforceability required to transform formal rights into practical realities.
Barriers to Implementation in Uzbekistan.
Despite notable reforms, several
structural and sociocultural barriers continue to hinder the full and effective
implementation of mandatory civil rights protection mechanisms in Uzbekistan. These
barriers must be carefully analyzed to ensure any attempt to transplant European models
is adapted appropriately to local realities.
Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Issue
–
6
№
2 (2025) / ISSN 2181-1415
66
Institutional Weaknesses.
Uzbekistan’s institutions responsible for civil rights
enforcement remain in a transitional state, which undermines the realization of binding
legal protections.
–
Limited independence of the judiciary restricts its ability to serve as an impartial
arbiter of rights.
–
The Human Rights Ombudsman lacks the enforcement powers of similar EU
bodies and functions more as an advisory office.
–
Administrative bodies, such as ministries and local khokimiyats, often lack clear
mandates or training to uphold civil rights in their daily operations.
–
Enforcement of court decisions remains inconsistent, particularly in rural areas.
Additionally, there is no constitutional mechanism equivalent to the ECJ or ECtHR
through which individuals can systematically challenge the state’s failure to protect rights.
Legal Culture and Public Awareness.
Civil rights culture in Uzbekistan is still
developing. Several factors hinder the public’s capacity to understand and demand their
rights effectively:
–
Low legal literacy: Many citizens are unaware of their constitutional rights or
how to invoke them.
–
Limited civic engagement: NGOs and civil society actors face bureaucratic and
political barriers to operating freely.
–
The historical legacy of authoritarianism has shaped a legal culture where
obedience to authority is valued over challenging state actions.
Without a strong bottom-up demand for civil rights, top-down reforms remain
largely symbolic.
Harmonization with International Obligations.
Uzbekistan has ratified key
international human rights treaties, including the ICCPR, CEDAW, and CAT. However,
domestic implementation lags due to:
–
Lack of incorporation mechanisms: Treaties are not automatically applicable
unless implemented through national law.
–
Conflicting norms: Some domestic laws remain inconsistent with treaty
obligations.
–
Insufficient monitoring: Reporting to UN treaty bodies is irregular and often
lacks civil society participation.
The absence of a clear legislative roadmap for harmonizing domestic law with
international commitments further weakens legal coherence and effectiveness.
Recommendations.
To enhance the implementation of mandatory civil rights
protection in Uzbekistan, the following steps are recommended:
–
Reform the judiciary to ensure independence, especially through merit-based
appointments and transparent disciplinary procedures.
–
Expand the mandate and resources of the Human Rights Ombudsman and
consider creating specialized agencies (e.g., Data Protection Authority, Anti-
Discrimination Commission).
–
Develop a Civil Rights and Liberties Code to consolidate fragmented provisions
and align them with international norms and the EU Charter model.
–
Integrate human rights and civil liberties courses into legal education curricula.
–
Launch public awareness campaigns to promote knowledge of civil rights,
targeting youth, women, and rural populations.
–
Simplify the legal registration and operation of NGOs.
Жамият
ва
инновациялар
–
Общество
и
инновации
–
Society and innovations
Issue
–
6
№
2 (2025) / ISSN 2181-1415
67
–
Encourage public-private partnerships for rights monitoring, legal aid, and civic
education.
–
Establish formal dialogue platforms with the EU and international organizations
to share best practices.
–
Undertake legislative audits to evaluate and revise laws conflicting with
international obligations.
–
Introduce constitutional complaint procedures that allow individuals to bring human
rights cases directly to the Constitutional Court, similar to the German or Spanish models.
CONCLUSION
The European Union’s mandatory methods of civil rights protection offer valuable
lessons for states like Uzbekistan that seek to modernize their legal systems in line with
international standards. The EU’s model is characterized by
legal enforceability,
institutional independence, and citizen accessibility.
Uzbekistan has made commendable efforts in constitutional reform and the
ratification of international treaties. However, implementation remains the greatest
challenge. Institutional fragility, underdeveloped legal culture, and insufficient
harmonization with international norms limit the transformation of rights from legal
norms into lived realities.
By addressing these barriers through a holistic reform agenda
–
including
institutional strengthening, legal codification, public engagement, and international
cooperation
–
Uzbekistan can move closer to a rights-based governance model. Such
alignment would not only improve domestic governance but also enhance Uzbekistan’s
international image and integration into global legal and political structures.
REFERENCES:
1.
Craig, P., & de Búrca, G. (2020).
EU Law: Text, Cases, and Materials
(7th ed.).
Oxford University Press.
2.
Dworkin, R. (1977).
Taking Rights Seriously
. Harvard University Press.
3.
Rawls, J. (1971).
A Theory of Justice
. Harvard University Press.
4.
Dicey, A. V. (1885).
An Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution
.
Macmillan.
5.
Bekmuradov, K. (2021). “Human Rights in Uzbekistan: Between Constitutional
Proclamation and Practical Realization.”
Central Asia Legal Review
, 3(2), 45
–
62.
6.
European Union. (2000).
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
.
Official Journal C 364.
7.
European Commission. (2018).
Strengthening the Rule of Law within the Union
. Brussels.
8.
ECtHR. (2022).
Annual Report of the European Court of Human Rights
.
9.
United Nations Human Rights Committee. (2019).
Concluding Observations on
the Fourth Periodic Report of Uzbekistan (CCPR/C/UZB/CO/4)
.
10.
Venice Commission. (2020).
Opinion on the Legal Framework for Civil Society in
Uzbekistan
.
11.
Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council
(General Data Protection Regulation).
12.
Case C-26/62,
Van Gend en Loos v. Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen
[1963] ECR 1.
13.
Case C-6/64,
Costa v. ENEL
[1964] ECR 585.
14.
Case C-131/12,
Google Spain v. AEPD and González
[2014] ECLI:EU:C:2014:317.
