[FN3] The relevant part of article 13 of the Law "On Mass Media" reads: 'The application for registration of the mass media organization should specify its: 1. Founder(s); 2. Name, working language(s), and legal address; 3. Aims and tasks; 4. Supposed readership (viewership, audience); 5. Supposed periodicity of publication or broadcast, volume of the publication, sources of funding, material and technical supply. If the said data change, the mass media is obliged to re-register according to existing procedures. If these changes are not essential, the registration entity could make a decision that it is not necessary to re-register this mass media organization.' -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------2.4 The last issue of "Oina" was published on 7 March 2001. On 23 March 2001, the head of the "Kamolot" Foundation wrote a letter to the Press Department informing it that "Kamolot" was opting out. According to the Press Department, this opt-out triggered a duty on "Oina" to apply for reregistration. Accordingly, in a decision dated 28 March 2001, and apparently pursuant to its authority under article 16 of the Law "On Mass Media" and applicable regulations, the Press Department (a) cancelled "Oina's" license to publish, (b) directed an order to all printing shops in the region prohibiting them from printing copies of "Oina", and (c) noted that "Oina" could apply for reregistration and that the Press Department would consider any such submission 'in strict compliance with law'. 2.5 On 29 March 2001, Mr. Mavlonov and the private firm "Simo" submitted a re-registration application. [FN4] According to Mr. Mavlonov, this application was in conformity with Uzbek law. [FN5] -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------[FN4] Under paragraph 1.3 of "Oina" statutes, 'the newspaper is not a legal person and operates using its founder's bank account and official seal/stamp'. [FN5] Reference is made to article 13 of the Law "On Mass Media" and to paragraph 4 of a Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 160 "On the procedures of Registration of the Mass Media in the Republic of Uzbekistan" of 15 April 1998 (hereinafter, "Resolution No. 160") and its annex. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------2.6 On an unspecified date, Mr. Mavlonov received a document by post entitled "Decision of the meeting of the mass media organs registration commission under the Samarkand regional Administration Press Department" dated 27 April 2001. The commission resolved as follows: 'Due to the fact that the newspaper "Oina" grossly violated article 6 of the Law "On Mass Media" [...]; due to the numerous faults committed as becomes clear from the materials presented, and pursuant to the Law "On Mass Media" and mass media organs registration Regulations and Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of 23 May 2000 devoted to the improvement of mass media activity towards enlightenment and national ideology building, it is unsuitable to re-register the newspaper "Oina".' The newspaper was considered to have published articles inciting inter-ethic hostility, as well as to have spread the view that Samarkand was a 'city of Tajiks', which allegedly constituted a violation of laws prohibiting calls for changes to the territorial integrity of the country. The decision also stated that the newspaper had published articles suggesting that local officials were 'far from enlightened', which was considered to be insulting. 2.7 No specific published articles were referred to in the decision; however, Mr. Mavlonov considers that the only two articles upon which the commission might have based the above comments are a Tajik writer's interview published in "Oina's" last edition, in which he referred to Samarkand as a 'pearl of Tajik culture', and was critical of the low salaries of Tajik teachers; another may have been an open letter published on 23 November 2000, addressed to the mayor of Samarkand, which sought an explanation of why insufficient resources had been allocated to fund the purchase of Tajik schoolbooks. It also questioned whether closing down Tajik classes was consistent with the