Appeal to the investigative court to the actions of the prosecutor and the investigator

Home / Forms / Appeal to the investigative court to the actions of the prosecutor and the investigator

Appeal to the investigative court to the actions of the prosecutor and the investigator

21 January 2026

Appeal to the investigative court to the actions of the prosecutor and the investigator

To the Maktaaral District Court of Turkestan region

Maktaaral district, Myrzakent settlement, madikhodzhayev Street, house No. 17.

130209@sud.kz

From The Defender: Lawyer Sarzhanov Galymzhan Turlybekovich

Legal Office" law and law"

IIN 201240021767.

Republic of Kazakhstan, 050002, Almaty, Almaly district,

Abylai Khan Ave., house 79/71, office 304.

www.zakonpravo.kz info@zakonpravo.kz

Tel.: +7 708 578 57 58 / 8 727 978 57 55.

Suspect: AE Kanatbaevich

Yin ....

Turkestan region, Maktaaral district, village N, Zhastar Street, house 12.

Complaint

(On the basis of Article 106 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the actions of the prosecutor of Maktaaral District of Turkestan region, senior investigator of the TB Police Department of Maktaaral District D. K. Zhaksylyk)

Dear Court, the reason for our appeal to you is the gross injustice and illegality that occurred during the pre – trial investigation of the criminal case against E. K. A. under my protection, we are deeply dissatisfied with the irresponsible actions of unskilled employees of the police and the prosecutor's office. Their actions undermine the dignity of a law enforcement officer.

In accordance with Article 1 of the Constitutional Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan" on the prosecutor's office", the prosecutor's office on behalf of the state exercises High supervision over compliance with the rule of law in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan within the limits and forms established by law. In accordance with Article 5 of the law, the prosecutor's office carries out high supervision of the rule of law (hereinafter referred to as supervision).

So, as for the event, time, place, method, cause, consequences of a violation of Criminal Law, 12.04.2025 at 11:01 AM, e-registration on the electronic portal of the Application No. ZT-2025-01196565, to the prosecutor of the Maktaaral District of the Turkestan region on the basis of Article 105 of the CPC of the Police Department of the Maktaaral District of the Turkestan region for the actions of the senior investigator of the TB Police Department of the 24, 58, 64, 65-1,78, 99, 100, 105 in accordance with the articles, we wrote a complaint under the guidance of:

* Adopt acts of prosecutor's supervision or acts of prosecutor's response in order to eliminate violations of the rule of law in accordance with the procedure established by law;

* Bringing to disciplinary responsibility police officers responsible for non-performance or improper performance of official duties;

* From the suspected E. K. A. on March 1, 2025 at 15 H. The protocol of interrogation of a suspect between 35 minutes and 16 hours and 10 minutes - exclusion from the materials of a criminal case with the recognition of illegal and unsuitable as evidence;

* Protection of materials obtained from the prosecutor's office under prosecutor's supervision;

* Respond to this application within the time limits established by Article 105, Part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

As specified in Article 58 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the prosecutor is an official within his competence exercising other powers in accordance with Article 83 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and this code, and in the presence of grounds for this, in accordance with the procedure provided for by this code, the prosecutor, by his decision, supervises the legality of pre-trial investigation.

As for the nature of the case, the materials of the criminal case No. 255143031000056 against E. K a (further suspect) on the signs of the composition of the criminal offense provided for by Part 2 of Article 174 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan are being considered in the Proceedings of the senior investigator of the TB Police Department of Maktaaralsky District of the Turkestan Region Police Department.

In the course of the investigation, E. K. A. was recognized as a suspect for intentional acts aimed at inciting religious discord, insulting national honor and dignity or religious feelings of citizens, and on March 2, 2025, he was detained in accordance with Article 131 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, arrested in a temporary detention center of the Police Department of Maktaaralsky district, and then arrested in a pre - trial detention center, sanctioned by the investigative court.

In accordance with Article 99 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, participants in criminal proceedings have the right to apply to the person conducting the pre-trial investigation, the prosecutor, the judge (court) with a request to establish circumstances relevant in the criminal process, to carry out procedural actions or to make procedural decisions to ensure the rights and legitimate interests of the person who applied with a petition or the person they represent.

The petition is subject to consideration and resolution as soon as it is declared. In cases where it is not possible to make a decision on the application immediately, it must be resolved no later than three days from the date of its application.

According to the investigator, "the suspect E. A. - from 01.07.2024 to 01.01.2025, together with his acquaintance Baglan Yerzhanovich Musabekov, born on 23.06.1991, in a preliminary conspiracy with 40 people in the group "Atakent Brothers" on the social network "watsap", prohibited by law for the promotion of the religion of a negative orientation, which they profess "Dilmurat Abu – Muhammad" deliberately committed the crime of inciting religious discord by repeatedly spreading the sermons of Mahamatov Dilmurat and nazratullah Abu-Mariam". "what's the matter?"

The Republic of Kazakhstan, having established itself as a democratic, secular, legal and social state, its highest values are man, human life, rights and freedoms (paragraph 1 of Article 1 of the Constitution).

At the same time, everyone has the right to protect their rights and freedoms by all means that do not contradict the law and receive qualified legal assistance (paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article 13 of the Constitution).

In this regard, 04.04.2025 from the side of the defense, we sent a petition to the investigator to remove the protocol of interrogation of the suspect from the materials of the criminal case, recognizing it as illegal and invalid as evidence.

On March 1, 2025, at 15 o'clock, the investigation conducted a thorough investigation of its motives. From 35 minutes to 16 hours. Within 10 minutes, the suspect completed the interrogation protocol.

Section 4 of Article 216 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan as for the specifics of interrogation of a suspect, it states that in cases provided for in Article 67 of this code, the presence of a defender is mandatory, taking into account the provisions of part two of Article 69 of this code.

However, during the discussion of this protocol with E. K. A. in the pre-trial detention center from 03.04.2025, the investigation revealed a gross violation of Section 4 of Article 216 of the criminal legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

In fact, on March 1, 2025, at 15 o'clock. From 35 minutes to 16 hours. During the interrogation of the suspect within 10 minutes, it was established that the defender was not present, and the signature of S. Aknazarov, who was called as a defender in the protocol, was put later or by another person.

So, the investigator of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 60-64, 80, 81, 110, 115, 197, 199, 208-210, 212, 216 it is established that the interrogation was carried out in violation of the requirements of the code without compliance with the norms of articles.

Article 64 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. When detaining a suspect, before starting any investigative actions in the presence of a suspect, the criminal prosecution body is obliged to immediately explain to the suspect his rights provided for by this code, a note is made in the protocol of interrogation of the suspect and in resolutions on recognizing the person as a suspect and qualifying the actions of the suspect.

However, on the part of the investigation, the provisions of this article were drawn up formally and, in fact, the rights of the suspect before interrogation were not explained.

Factual data inadmissible as evidence in accordance with Article 112 of the CPC, if they are obtained in violation of the requirements of this code, contribute or may contribute to the reliability of factual data obtained during a pre-trial investigation or trial of a case by depriving the participants in the process of rights guaranteed by law or by: Factual data obtained in violation of Criminal Procedure Law shall be recognized as inadmissible data as evidence and shall not be subject to prosecution, nor shall they be used in proving any circumstances specified in Article 113 of this code.

In accordance with Section 3 of Article 60 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the investigator is obliged to carry out criminal prosecution by taking all measures for a comprehensive, complete and objective study of the circumstances of the case.

However, on April 09, 2025, the investigator issued a resolution on the refusal to satisfy the petition letter in which the investigator stated in the inquiry part of his resolution: “the claim of the defense lawyer Sarzhanov Galymzhan Turlybekovich is subject to rejection. Because on March 1, 2025, at 15 o'clock. From 35 minutes to 16 hours. During the 10 minutes of filling out the protocol of interrogation of the suspect E. A., S. Aknazarov was involved as a defender of E. K. A.

"I don't know," he said, " but I don't know." In the process of interrogating any person in the web-based ERDR system, it is not possible to re-sign the process protocol after signing it in electronic form."I don't know," he said.

However, the investigator, without taking into account the circumstances given by the defense, without taking all measures for a comprehensive, complete and objective study of the circumstances of the case, considers the case unilaterally and commits a violation, adhering only to the side of the prosecution of the suspect.

Based on the above, the prosecutor's office in the process of checking our stated motives:

1) video recording tape located in the investigator's office on March 1, 2025, at 15 hours. From 35 minutes to 16 hours. During the interrogation of the suspect EA within 10 minutes of receiving information from the captured video tape;

2) March 1, 2025, 15 H. From 35 minutes to 16 hours. Within 10 minutes, a detealization of the phone number of the defense attorney S. Aknazarov, who took part in the investigation, is carried out to determine the presence or absence of a communication operator belonging to the police department during the defense during the investigation.

we asked the prosecutor's Office to conduct this case in the hope that it would be possible to achieve the truth.

However, in the resolution of the prosecutor of Maktaaral District of April 17, 2025, senior adviser of Justice Dosayev A. T., on the refusal to satisfy the complaint, there is no report on the conduct of the actions proposed by the Defense party, while the prosecutor stated that "the Defense's arguments for recognizing the protocol of interrogation from the suspect E. K. as illegal and excluding it from the list of evidence are not supported by objective data." "I don't know," he said.

The defender's competence does not include obtaining a phone number for detealization and obtaining an audio and video recording of the APB. In this case, it is a gross violation of the law on the part of the prosecutor's office that the prosecutor's office, within the limits of its competence, did not obtain materials exposing the illegal actions of the investigator, while it was possible to carry out detealization of the phone number and obtain an audio video recording of the APB.

If the prosecutor's office had obtained these materials and presented evidence with the same materials, then there would be no doubt about the defense. The defense attorney is not obliged to prove questionable procedural actions in the case, but the prosecutor is obliged to investigate questionable tregu actions.

Unresolved doubts about the guilt of the suspect, accused, and defendant are interpreted in their favor, as indicated in the norm of Article 19 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan "presumption of innocence". It is stated that doubts arising in the application of criminal and criminal procedure laws should also be resolved in favor of the suspect, accused, defendant.

According to Article 106 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, a person whose rights and freedoms of a suspect in a criminal case are directly affected by the actions (omissions) and decisions of the prosecutor, investigative and inquiry bodies has the right to apply to the court with a complaint to refuse to accept an application for a criminal offense, a violation of the law in the commission of actions (omissions) and making decisions.

A complaint may be submitted to the District Court at the place of residence of the body conducting the criminal process within fifteen days from the date of familiarization of the person with the disagreeable decision, or within the same period after receiving the notification of the prosecutor about the refusal to satisfy the complaint filed in his name, or from the day fifteen days after filing the complaint, if the answer to the complaint submitted to the prosecutor has not been received.

Based on the above and in accordance with Articles 106 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan,

We ask the court:

* The decision of the investigator on the refusal to satisfy the defense petition dated April 09, 2025 – to cancel it, recognizing it illegal;

* The decision of the prosecutor of maktaaral district, senior adviser of Justice Dossayev A. T., dated April 17, 2025, on the refusal to satisfy the Defense's complaint – invalidating it as illegal;

* Assign the prosecutor and investigator the obligation to eliminate violations of the rights and legitimate interests of the E. K. A. in a criminal case;

* In order to eliminate violations of the rule of law in accordance with the procedure established by law and in order to bring to disciplinary responsibility employees of the prosecutor's office and police responsible for non-performance or improper performance of official duties.

Best regards,

Defender: Sarzhanov Galymzhan Turlybekovich

Attention!

Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.

For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.

Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases