DUSHANBE, October 8, 2009, Asia-Plus — Reports by some Russian media that Tajikistan’s new law on the state language allegedly provides for fine for the use of the Russian language in official correspondence and even advertising materials are absolutely unfounded, Olimjon Salimzoda, the head of the Majlisi Namoyandagon (Tajikistan’s lower chamber of parliament) Committee on International Affairs, Public Associations and Information, said in an interview with Asia-Plus, commenting on a recent statement by Arkady Dubnov, a reporter for Russia’s Vremya Novostey.
Dubnov, in particular, noted that the new language law that had gone into effect in Tajikistan removed Russian as a language for interethnic communication and allegedly banned the use of Russian in official correspondence and even advertising materials. According to him, those break these rules will allegedly have to pay a fine about US$160.00 for physical entities and up to US320.00 for legal entities.
Tajik MP says this statement is absolutely unfounded. “I consider the statement by Mr. Dubnov to be the next provocation of so-called Russian experts in Tajikistan,” Salimzoda said.
According to him, the law is aimed at protecting and strengthening of a role of the Tajik language in society and not aimed against languages of other peoples living in Tajikistan.
“In accordance with the new law, all official papers of Tajikistan’s public management bodies will be conducted in the Tajik language, while advertising materials may be prepared in Tajik or Russian,” said the parliamentarian, “Nobody limits publishing Russian-language newspapers and magazines or broadcasting TV and radio programs in the Russian language in Tajikistan. Moreover, in accordance with Tajikistan’s Constitution, the Russian language continues enjoying the status of a language for interethnic communication.”
Tajik MP also noted that many former Soviet republics had shifted to carrying out official correspondence in the state language long ago, however, “this fact has never alarmed the Russian pseudo-patriots.”
