Kyrgyzstan

Detains migrants or asylum seekers?

Yes

Has laws regulating migration-related detention?

Yes

Refugees

253

2023

Asylum Applications

775

2023

International Migrants

194,816

2024

Population

7,186,009

2024

Overview

Kyrgyzstan; Kyrgyzstan does not have dedicated immigration detention facilities. Although its laws do not provide for administrative immigration detention, there are laws that provide for criminal prosecution of unauthorized entry.

Types of facilities used for migration-related detention
Administrative Ad Hoc Criminal Unknown

Reports of Refoulement in Kyrgyzstan Amidst Fears of Shrinking Asylum Space 

In December, UNHCR expressed “grave concern” at the disappearance of an asylum seeker in Kyrgyzstan and his refoulement to his country of origin. Similar incidents have been reported in recent years, with rights observers also decrying the country’s shrinking asylum space.  According to UNHCR, on 16/17 October an asylum seeker was arrested by security services […]

Read More…

A view of Bishkek's Pre-Trial Detention Centre No.1 (Source: AKIPress)

Kyrgyzstan: Covid-19 and Detention

Kyrgyzstan considers labour migration to be “part of the national development strategy” with remittances accounting for a substantial part of the country’s economy. Large numbers of Kyrgyz nationals work in countries across Asia and Europe, including in particular Russia (which recorded 959,000 border crossings by Kyrgyz nationals in 2019), Kazakhstan, and Turkey. In 2019, 29.2 […]

Read More…

Migrant Camp in the Orenburg Region in Russia, (Current Time,
Last updated: July 2024

DETENTION STATISTICS

Migration Detainee Entries
Not Available
protprot 2019

DETAINEE DATA

Total Number of Children Placed in Immigration Detention (Year)
Not Available
protprot 2017

DETENTION CAPACITY

ALTERNATIVES TO DETENTION

ADDITIONAL ENFORCEMENT DATA

PRISON DATA

Criminal Prison Population (Year)
10,030
protprot 2016
9,828
protprot 2012
10,163
protprot 2010
15,127
protprot 2007
16,934
protprot 2004
18,400
protprot 2001
21,254
protprot 1998
13,775
protprot 1994
9,707
protprot 1992
Percentage of Foreign Prisoners (Year)
4.9%
protprot 2016
4.8%
protprot 2012
Prison Population Rate (per 100,000 of National Population)
167
protprot 2016
181
protprot 2012
183
protprot 2010
284
protprot 2007
329
protprot 2004
369
protprot 2001
446
protprot 1998
304
protprot 1994
218
protprot 1992

POPULATION DATA

Population (Year)
7,186,009
protprot 2024
6,700,000
protprot 2023
6,500,000
protprot 2020
6,500,000
protprot 2020
5,940,000
protprot 2015
International Migrants (Year)
194,816
protprot 2024
199,011
protprot 2020
200,260
protprot 2019
204,400
protprot 2015
International Migrants as Percentage of Population (Year)
2.71%
protprot 2024
3.05%
protprot 2020
3.4%
protprot 2015
Refugees (Year)
253
protprot 2023
347
protprot 2019
333
protprot 2018
341
protprot 2017
334
protprot 2016
354
protprot 2015
482
protprot 2014
Ratio of Refugees Per 1000 Inhabitants (Year)
0.06
protprot 2016
0.08
protprot 2014
Asylum Applications (Year)
775
protprot 2023
169
protprot 2019
181
protprot 2016
256
protprot 2014
Refugee Recognition Rate (Year)
25
protprot 2014
Stateless Persons (Year)
227
protprot 2023
548
protprot 2018
855
protprot 2017
2,334
protprot 2016
13,678
protprot 2015

SOCIO-ECONOMIC DATA & POLLS

Gross Domestic Product per Capita (in USD)
$ 1,190,000
protprot 2018
$ 1,278,000
protprot 2014
Remittances to the Country (in USD)
$ 2,482,000,000
protprot 2018
$ 2,245,000,000
protprot 2014
Remittances From the Country (in USD)
$ 452,000,000
protprot 2017
Unemployment Rate
%
protprot 2018
%
protprot 2014
Net Official Development Assistance (ODA) (in Millions USD)
624.1
protprot 2014
Human Development Index Ranking (UNDP)
120 (Medium)
protprot 2015

LEGAL & REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

Does the Country Detain People for Migration, Asylum, or Citizenship Reasons?

Yes

2023

Yes

2019
Does the Country Have Specific Laws that Provide for Migration-Related Detention?

Yes

2024
Legal Tradition(s)

Civil law

2017

GROUNDS FOR DETENTION

LENGTH OF DETENTION

DETENTION INSTITUTIONS

PROCEDURAL STANDARDS & SAFEGUARDS

Procedural Standards
Name
In Law
In Practice
Year
Information to detainees
No
2019
Access to consular assistance
No
2019
Access to asylum procedures
No
2019

COSTS & OUTSOURCING

COVID-19 DATA

TRANSPARENCY

MONITORING

NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS MONITORING BODIES

NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISMS (OPTIONAL PROTOCOL TO UN CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE)

NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS (NGOS)

GOVERNMENTAL MONITORING BODIES

INTERNATIONAL DETENTION MONITORING

INTERNATIONAL TREATIES & TREATY BODIES

International Treaties Ratified
Ratification Year
Observation Date
CRPD, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
2019
2019
CTOCTP, Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children
2003
2017
CTOCSP, Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime
2003
2017
VCCR, Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
1994
2017
ICERD, International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
1997
2017
ICESCR, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
1994
2017
ICCPR, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
1994
2017
CEDAW, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
1997
2017
CAT, Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
1997
2017
CRC, Convention on the Rights of the Child
1994
2017
ICRMW, International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families
2003
2017
CRSR, Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees
1996
2017
OPCAT, Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
2008
2008
Ratio of relevant international treaties ratified
Ratio: 13/19
Individual Complaints Procedures
Acceptance Year
ICCPR, First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 1994
1994
CEDAW, Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, 1999 2002
2002
Ratio of Complaints Procedures Accepted
Observation Date
2/7
2017
Relevant Recommendations or Observations Issued by Treaty Bodies
Recommendation Year
Observation Date
Committee on Migrant Workers 49.The Committee is concerned about reports that Kyrgyz migrant workers and members of their families face discriminatory attitudes and are often targets of hate crimes and xenophobic assaults in the main countries of employment, in particular in the Russian Federation. The Committee is particularly concerned about the lack of protection of Kyrgyz migrant workers abroad from violations of their rights, including arbitrary detention and expulsion and deprivation of liberty in temporary immigration detention centres, and about the lack of protection from recruitment as mercenaries in the Russian Federation. The Committee is also concerned about the lack of information regarding cultural initiatives for the community of Kyrgyz migrant workers, including online courses on the Kyrgyz language and history. 2023
2023
2024
Committee on the Rights of the Child § 58. "The Committee recalls its report of the day of general discussion on the rights of all children in the context of migration (2012) and recommends that the State party ensure that children of internal migrant workers are provided with adequate living conditions and immediate access to health care and education irrespective of their residency status." 2014
2014

> UN Special Procedures

Visits by Special Procedures of the UN Human Rights Council
Year of Visit
Observation Date
Working Group on Discrimination Against Women and Girls 2022
2022
2022
Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances 2019
2019
2019
Relevant Recommendations or Observations by UN Special Procedures
Recommendation Year
Observation Date
Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances 13.A lack of awareness of the principle of non-refoulement, which has allegedly resulted in deportations despite the individuals being at risk of enforced disappearance, has also been reported. More generally, while legislative changes have been made to prevent enforced disappearance, there appears to be limited attention given to the issue in other relevant forums. For example, the issue has not been addressed in the human rights action plan for 2019–2021, nor has it been discussed during the meetings of the Coordination Council on Human Rights, the body in charge of monitoring and coordinating reforms in the field of human rights. 27.The Working Group was informed by several interlocutors that delayed registration was seen as entirely normal by detainees and that even some judges were not aware that it constituted a violation. Some delays in registration reportedly involve foreign citizens, particularly labour migrants, who are often held for several days without their embassies being notified as required. 37.Kyrgyzstan has failed to integrate its non-refoulement obligation into its legislation. The Working Group was informed that only transfers and removals that may lead to torture, not those involving the risk of being subjected to enforced disappearance, were prohibited. Indeed, it received reports of transfers that had resulted in enforced disappearances, in particular of persons returned to China and Uzbekistan. 42.The principle of non-refoulement is a critical safeguard against enforced disappearance. The Working Group reiterates the need to ensure that the principle is enshrined in Kyrgyz legislation and implemented in practice so that no individual is expelled, returned or extradited to a State where there are substantial grounds to believe that he or she may be at risk of enforced disappearance. (i) Ensure effective implementation of the principle of non-refoulement with respect to individuals, including those arriving in an irregular manner, in cases where there are substantial grounds to believe that, if deported or refused entry, they may be at risk of enforced disappearance; (j) Conduct training and awareness-raising sessions for government officials on the non-refoulement principle; 2019
2019
2019

> UN Universal Periodic Review

Relevant Recommendations or Observations from the UN Universal Periodic Review
Observation Date
No 2010
2017
No 2015
2017
No 2020

> Global Compact for Migration (GCM)

GCM Resolution Endorsement
Observation Date
2018

> Global Compact on Refugees (GCR)

REGIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS MECHANISMS

HEALTH CARE PROVISION

HEALTH IMPACTS

COVID-19

Country Updates
Kyrgyzstan considers labour migration to be “part of the national development strategy” with remittances accounting for a substantial part of the country’s economy. Large numbers of Kyrgyz nationals work in countries across Asia and Europe, including in particular Russia (which recorded 959,000 border crossings by Kyrgyz nationals in 2019), Kazakhstan, and Turkey. In 2019, 29.2 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) was made up of remittances, which places Kyrgyzstan amongst the top five countries with respect to remittances as a share of GDP. The COVID-19 pandemic, however, has underscored the economic vulnerability of countries that rely on remittances. As previously reported on this platform (see 19 November Uzbekistan update), labour migrants in Russia were almost twice as likely to lose jobs than Russian nationals. According to the Kyrgyz Embassy in Russia, more than half of all Kyrgyz migrants in the country lost their jobs during the pandemic--a fact that has led to a significant drop in remittances and growing concerns for the Kyrgyz economy. During the early months of the pandemic, when borders temporarily closed and flights were suspended, many Kygyz migrant workers who sought to return home due to job losses found themselves stranded in Russia. When rumours circulated that the border would open in Orenburg Oblast to enable transit through Kazakhstan, an estimated 600 Kyrgyz migrants arrived in the area, where they were forced to wait for several weeks in overcrowded tent camps until buses arrived. By 22 May, those stranded in the area had been returned to Kyrgyzstan--although upon arrival, many were placed in a newly erected quarantine facility in the Semetey Observation facility (formerly the U.S. Ganci Airbase) in Chui Oblast. On 18 May, a group of detained returnees protested their confinement in the facility--and rumours that they would continue to undergo quarantine restrictions while those testing positive for COVID-19 were being released. According to media reports, several returnees attacked doctors and attempted to overturn an ambulance. Following the riot, most of the returnees were permitted to leave and to complete their quarantine period at home. By 24 August, some 35,469 Kyrgyz migrants had been returned from Russia via charter flights and bus transfers. Nevertheless, the Kyrgyz government faced criticism for its delays in returning nationals stranded in Russia. Kyrgyz authorities argued that employment opportunities remained more favourable in Russia. The Kyrgyz Ambassador to Russia said, “The Russian economy is stronger and more stable than ours. After quarantine, the economic crisis will continue around the world. I advised our countrymen to wait here and not to go anywhere.” There have been sporadic reports about the use of immigration detention in Kyrgyzstan. In mid-2020, Human Rights Watch raised concerns regarding the detention of an Uzbek asylum seeker (journalist Bobomurod Abdullaev) in the Kyrgyz State Committee for National Security (GKNB) detention facility. Previously, in 2006, UNHCR raised concerns regarding the detention of four Uzbek refugees (fleeing from the unrest and security crackdown in Uzbekistan’s Andijan region) in Osh Pre-Trial Detention Centre. In 2020, this facility was subject to complaints, including accusations of ill-treatment by detainees. The GDP has been unable to confirm whether the centre continues to confine non-nationals for immigration-related reasons, or what steps--if any--authorities have taken to protect detainees during the pandemic.
Did the country release immigration detainees as a result of the pandemic?
Yes
protprot 2020
Did the country use legal "alternatives to detention" as part of pandemic detention releases?
Unknown
protprot 2021
Did the country Temporarily Cease or Restrict Issuing Detention Orders?
Unknown
protprot 2021
Did the Country Adopt These Pandemic-Related Measures for People in Immigration Detention?
Unknown (Unknown) Unknown Unknown Unknown
protprot 2021
Did the Country Lock-Down Previously "Open" Reception Facilities, Shelters, Refugee Camps, or Other Forms of Accommodation for Migrant Workers or Other Non-Citizens?
Unknown
protprot 2021
Were cases of COVID-19 reported in immigration detention facilities or any other places used for immigration detention purposes?
Unknown
protprot 2021
Did the Country Cease or Restrict Deportations/Removals During any Period After the Onset of the Pandemic?
Unknown
protprot 2021
Did the Country Release People from Criminal Prisons During the Pandemic?
Unknown
protprot 2021
Did Officials Blame Migrants, Asylum Seekers, or Refugees for the Spread of COVID-19?
Unknown
protprot 2021
Did the Country Restrict Access to Asylum Procedures?
Unknown
protprot 2021
Did the Country Commence a National Vaccination Campaign?
Yes
protprot 2021
Were Populations of Concern Included/Excluded From the National Vaccination Campaign?
Unknown (Unknown) Unknown Unknown Unknown
protprot 2021