Uzbekistan is moving closer to implementing one of the world's strictest photography laws after its parliament voted on October 7 to ban photographing and filming people without their explicit permission. The legislation, which now awaits largely ceremonial Senate approval, would require photographers to obtain verbal or written consent before capturing images of individuals, marking a significant shift in the Central Asian nation's approach to privacy rights.
Under the proposed law, violations would carry substantial penalties including fines of up to $1,364 and the confiscation of camera equipment. The legislation specifically addresses concerns about children's privacy, requiring parents or caregivers to provide permission before anyone under 16 can be photographed. This provision reflects lawmakers' stated goal of protecting vulnerable populations from unauthorized image capture.
However, significant questions remain about how authorities would enforce such sweeping restrictions. Anzor Bukharsky, a prominent Uzbek photographer who leads photo expeditions for tourists, highlighted the practical challenges the law would create. "Can a citizen claim that the person in the photograph is really them if they are wearing a gas mask or Santa Claus makeup?" Bukharsky asked, pointing to the unclear application of the law in cases involving crowds, disguised individuals, or people who appear incidentally in photographs.
Critics argue that the legislation's true motivation may stem from a series of embarrassing scandals involving corrupt police officers and government officials who were caught on camera. The timing and scope of the ban have raised concerns that it could be used as a tool to suppress independent journalism and activist documentation of government misconduct. The law's evolution from its original 2020 draft version, which only prohibited publication of images, to the current version that bans capture and storage entirely, has heightened these concerns.
The photography restrictions could significantly impact Uzbekistan's growing tourism industry, which attracts millions of visitors annually drawn to the country's spectacular Silk Road architecture and cultural heritage sites. Bukharsky noted that today's tourists are increasingly younger and more adventurous compared to the elderly, package-tour demographic that dominated the country's early years of independence. "These younger tourists are interested less in brick landmarks and saints' tombs as the exoticism of the East: everyday life, national traditions, costumes, the narrow streets of the old part of the city, bazaars, and tandoors," he explained.
The cultural shift in tourism preferences means that visitors now seek authentic experiences and want to document local life, markets, and traditional activities – exactly the type of photography that would be most affected by the new restrictions. "Tourists want to capture all this on camera, and up till now they've done so without any problem," Bukharsky said. The law could fundamentally change the atmosphere in popular tourist destinations like markets and historic neighborhoods, where locals have traditionally been welcoming to photographers.
Beyond tourism concerns, media freedom advocates worry that the legislation will provide authorities with broad powers to suppress independent reporting and activism. "The most important thing is that this new law does not become a source of manipulation or tool for repression against unreliable bloggers and media outlets," Bukharsky warned. The vague language and broad scope of the ban could allow selective enforcement against journalists and critics of the government.
Despite these concerns, some observers believe the law may not be rigorously enforced, particularly given Uzbekistan's ambitious plans to expand its tourism sector. One commentator noted the country's tradition of selective law enforcement, posting that "the harshness of our laws are compensated by the optional enforcement of them." This pattern suggests that while the photography ban may officially become law, its practical implementation could be inconsistent, potentially creating confusion for both locals and visitors about what activities are actually prohibited.
