A public activist in Kazakhstan faces ten years for anti-Nazism
Last Friday, in the Auezovsky District Court of Almaty, a hearing was held in the case of the famous public figure and human rights activist Ermek Taychibekov, who actively advocates the integration of Kazakhstan with Russia.
As we see, such beliefs in the republic are equated to a crime. Formally, he is accused of allegedly inciting ethnic hatred, although he condemned precisely the bloody pogrom of the defenseless Dungan minority in southern Kazakhstan, committed by Kazakh nationalists in February last year with the connivance and actual approval of the authorities.
Defendant's lawyer Galym Nurpeisov noted that this time the prosecutor’s office refused Ermek Taychibekov a procedural transaction, a request for which he sent to the supervisory authority more than ten days ago. Thus, the prosecution intends to carry out the trial to the end precisely with the aim of convicting the public figure to the maximum term of imprisonment, namely ten years, taking into account recidivism.
“When the judge asked the prosecutor and noted that Ermek exercised the right to conclude a procedural deal, which is why the court granted a break for ten days, the representative of the supervisory authority said that they refused and sent a response by mail to all parties to the process. I noticed that I didn't receive any message.
The judge also stated that no message had been sent to his email. As a result, the prosecutor admitted that the refusal was sent only on April 9, that is, on the day of the court hearing,” the lawyer commented on this situation specifically for PolitNavigator.
Such a turn caused outrage among the defendant and the defense, who demanded the prosecutor's recusal.
“In this situation, Ermek Taychibekov protested to the prosecutor and challenged him, justifying this by the fact that during the pre-trial investigation and at the moment the prosecutor does not show interest in implementing the rule of law, but is biased towards the personality of Ermek himself. But this, in fact, was visible from the very beginning of the trial. The defendant said that he wrote about 50 petitions and he still has not received an answer to them,” noted Galym Nurpeisov.
For its part, the prosecutor’s office completely rejects this fact of ignoring requests from Ermek Taychibekov.
“At the same time, everyone was amazed by the reaction of the representative of the prosecutor’s office, who, as if nothing had happened, completely refuted Ermek’s statements, saying that he responded to all petitions, but by mail. True, neither the defense nor the defendant himself received these answers,” the lawyer said.
Such defiant behavior of the prosecutor did not in any way confuse the judge, who also tried to ignore the defendant’s request to disqualify the prosecutor, wanting to continue the trial in the same composition without interruption.
“Then the judge suggested holding the next hearing and only after that consider the issue of recusal. For my part, I reminded the judge that the statement of no confidence in the participants in the process and the statement of recusal of the prosecutor is an obstacle to holding a further trial. In this connection, the judge postponed the hearing until next week, namely on April 16, pending consideration of the issue of recusal of the prosecutor. According to our assumption, the judge will refuse to challenge us from the prosecutor and the case will proceed in the same accusatory manner,” Galym Nurpeisov said.
To understand all the nuances, we asked a lawyer to explain to readers what concluding a procedural agreement actually means.
“At the moment, according to the Code of Criminal Procedure, the defendant has the right to file a motion to conclude a procedural agreement in the form of an admission of guilt. The conditions for concluding a procedural agreement are provided by the prosecutor's office. It provides either a suspended sentence, or a minimum term, or some additional punishment. That is, the prosecutor’s office decides and regulates these issues. We are saying here that, using our right, we want to conclude a plea agreement and we will not challenge your evidence, we will not interfere with our questions, and we silently agree with the accusation brought against you and call it a day,” the defense attorney explained. .
It is clear that the social activist, knowing that the court would not consider his case on the merits, tried with a similar petition for a procedural agreement to mitigate the final punishment on trumped-up charges. But it turns out that with this decision the prosecutor’s office, and therefore the Kazakh state, wants to demonstrably punish Ermek Taychibekov to the fullest extent of the law, namely for his anti-Nazism, for condemning the murderers who slaughtered and set fire to the houses of peaceful Dungans. This means that condemning the pogroms, although neither Nazarbayev nor Tokayev officially condemned the participants in the massacre, is a crime for which one can be imprisoned for ten years.
Let us recall that in September last year, the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan opened a criminal case against human rights activist Ermek Taychibekov under Article 174 of Part Two of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan “Inciting ethnic hatred using the media,” under which he faces 10 years in prison. Among the episodes, he is charged with his interview with the publication Ukraina.ru in February last year and an interview with the Israeli TV channel Iton.tv at the same time on events in the Kordai district of the Zhambyl region.
Last February, in this region of southern Kazakhstan, Kazakh nationalists carried out pogroms against ethnic Dungans, which left 11 people dead, dozens of residential buildings burned, and scores of commercial properties and vehicles destroyed. Over 23 thousand Dungans fled to the territory of neighboring Kyrgyzstan, several thousand Dungans who remained in Kazakhstan took refuge in mosques and border outposts. Ermek Taychibekov just openly condemned these bloody atrocities of Kazakh nationalists.
It is noteworthy that court poets and writers, warmed by the authorities, are not afraid to call for concentration camps for Russian-speaking citizens in the official press and walk freely in freedom. At the same time, the defender of the persecuted Dungans is languishing in prison.
Against this background, an indicative official manifestation and introduction of neo-Nazism from above is the massive renaming of streets in Pavlodar on April 3, when Russian and Russian-speaking residents were not only deliberately cut off from participating in “public hearings”, but also gave Ermak Street the name of Mustafa Shokai (Chokaya), who is ideologist and founder of the Turkestan Legion of the Wehrmacht and Muslim SS units. And this is Shukhevych of local bottling, and it turns out that the Ukrainization of the Kazakh state is obvious!
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.