“Bring someone sighted!”: How an internal notary regulation outweighed the law in Uzbekistan

In Tashkent, Uzbekistan, a visually impaired man named Abdullo encountered blatant discrimination at a notary office, highlighting systemic issues faced by people with disabilities. Abdullo, who has been blind since birth, visited a notary with his son to issue a simple power of attorney for receiving a bank card. Instead of receiving the service, he was told he needed a representative from the Society of the Blind of Uzbekistan.

The situation became even more absurd when a notary employee, during a phone call, asked if his visual impairment was congenital or acquired. Upon learning it was congenital, the employee insisted on the mediator from the Society of the Blind. This implies that individuals with acquired visual impairments might not face the same bureaucratic hurdle, a distinction that defies logic and exacerbates the discriminatory nature of the requirement.

This case is not an isolated incident but reflects a broader problem where state regulations effectively marginalize legally capable citizens with visual impairments. Despite being fully competent and responsible individuals, they are often treated as second-class citizens, denied the autonomy to manage their own affairs.

Uzbekistan's Law “On the Rights of Persons with Disabilities” explicitly recognizes the facsimile signature, a specially made stamp replacing a handwritten signature, as legally valid for persons with disabilities. This right is further supported by Article 29 of the same law. However, notaries frequently disregard this law, citing an internal Ministry of Justice regulation from 2019. This departmental act, which prohibits accepting documents with facsimile signatures, is being applied above the law, creating a direct conflict with both the specific law on disability rights and Article 15 of the Constitution, which upholds the supremacy of law.

“

Have you been blind since birth, or did you acquire the disability?