Tragedy of the 5-year-old girl in Namangan: the issue of punishment back on the agenda

A grave crime involving a 5-year-old girl as a victim in Uchkurgan district, Namangan region, has sparked widespread public discussion. The reaction of Saida Mirziyoyeva, Head of the Presidential Administration, to the incident has brought the issue of further strengthening accountability for perpetrators to the forefront.

Notably, the discussion was not limited to toughening punishments. Jurists, lawyers, human rights defenders, and public activists are also putting forward a number of proposals on crime prevention, ensuring children's safety, pre-identifying potential criminals, and strengthening control mechanisms.

What position did Saida Mirziyoyeva express?

Saida Mirziyoyeva, Head of the Presidential Administration, expressed her reaction to the tragedy in Uchkurgan district on her Telegram channel, emphasizing the need to strengthen responsibility for such horrific crimes as much as possible.

The statement caused a broad public discussion. Especially, the issue of its legal interpretation was debated by lawyers and human rights defenders.

Doctor of Legal Sciences Nodirbek Salayev drew attention to the legal grounds of this initiative. He noted that there is a basis for improving legal mechanisms for toughening penalties for crimes related to sexual violence against minors in Uzbekistan.

Salayev cited the 2026 State Program and the President's Decree No. PF-33 dated March 3 as an example. Based on these documents, he noted that a draft law has been developed providing for life imprisonment for the rape of minors and violent acts of a sexual nature against them.

Does this mean the return of the death penalty?

This was one of the most frequently mentioned aspects of the discussion.

Journalist and lawyer Zafarbek Solijonov stated that Saida Mirziyoyeva's statement should not be interpreted as an initiative to reintroduce the death penalty.

In his view, it is about expressing the public's sharp reaction to a grave crime and applying the severest punishment within the framework of current legislation.

In Uzbekistan, the death penalty was abolished starting from January 1, 2008. Article 25 of the Constitution also prohibits the death penalty.

Therefore, at the center of the discussion is the issue of setting the upper limit of punishment within the framework of the law and ensuring its inevitability.

"Along with the severity of punishment, its inevitability is also important"

Razzok Altiyev, Doctor of Philosophy in Legal Sciences (PhD) and acting professor, also expressed his view on this issue.

According to his assessment, the main emphasis in Saida Mirziyoyeva's statement is directed at the need to strengthen accountability and punish the guilty according to their deeds.

Viewing life imprisonment as a severe punitive measure, Altiyev emphasized that the inevitability of punishment is also of particular importance in the fight against such crimes.

This perspective reveals an important aspect of the discussion: along with toughening the punishment for a crime, mechanisms that ensure the perpetrator answers before the law must also work effectively.

What other measures are human rights defenders proposing?h2>

The discussion was not limited to punishment alone.

Abdurakhmon Tashanov, chairman of the "Ezgulik" society, supported the need to toughening penalties for sexual crimes against children. He proposed developing separate legislative mechanisms against such crimes and submitting additional measures for parliamentary discussion.

At the same time, human rights defenders also view the issue of prevention as one of the primary tasks.

Because in addition to assigning punishment after a crime has been committed, mechanisms must also work to protect a child before they fall into a dangerous situation.

Is an "early warning" system needed to protect children?

Blogger Shakhnoza Soatova also supported the toughening of punishment and its inevitability. However, in her opinion, without preventive mechanisms, it is difficult to prevent tragedies.

Soatova put forward a number of proposals.

In particular:

• forming a special register regarding individuals who have committed crimes against children;

• conducting mandatory background checks for individuals working with children;

• strengthening control mechanisms related to children's safety;

• introducing explanatory programs on personal inviolability and safety for preschool-aged children.

She emphasized the need to give children aged 3–6 the skill of understanding personal boundaries and telling adults about dangerous situations through programs like "My body is my territory".

The issue of the register: should it be open?

Public activist Aziza Umarova also supported the idea of introducing a register for persons who have committed crimes against children. However, she also raised the issue of the openness of such information.

In her view, it is important to strengthen mechanisms for checking the past of candidates during the hiring process in organizations and institutions working with children.

Umarova cited the experience of Kazakhstan as an example, noting that there, information about persons convicted of crimes against the sexual integrity of minors is reflected on the portals of legal statistics bodies.

She also drew attention to issues of repeat crime statistics, control over the movement of convicted persons, and candidate screening when hiring at children's institutions.

The other side of the problem — prevention

As can be seen from the discussions, public demands are divided into two main directions.

The first direction is the application of strict and inevitable punishment within the law against a person who has committed a grave crime.

The second direction is reducing the likelihood of such crimes occurring in advance.

This encompasses such issues as checking persons working with children, identifying risk groups, raising the awareness of parents and educators, equipping children with personal safety skills, and making mechanisms for appealing to law enforcement agencies more effective.

At this exact point, punishment and prevention appear as two mutually reinforcing mechanisms.

Which issues should public discussion resolve now?

The opinions expressed in the wake of the tragedy in Uchkurgan district unite around a single issue: how can children be protected more effectively from such crimes?

At a time when initiatives to toughen punishment are being legally discussed, experts emphasize the necessity of not leaving the prevention system aside.

After all, establishing justice after a crime has been committed is important. But protecting a child before they become a victim of a crime is an even higher priority task.

In this sense, the discussion surrounding Saida Mirziyoyeva's statement has brought not only the issue of punishment, but also the necessity of further strengthening the child safety system onto the agenda.