Complaint to the Prosecutor about the cancellation of the decision on the interruption of the pre-trial investigation
To the prosecutor of the Auzovsky district of Almaty
To R. Shardinov
from the defender of Dr. Kosaevna R-ieva, AGCA's lawyer
Galymzhan Turlybekovich Sarzhanov
Law and Law Law Firm
BIN 201240021767
050002, Almaty, Almaly district,
79/71 Abylai Khan Ave., office 304
info@zakonpravo.kz www.zakonpravo.kz
tel.: +7 708 578 57 58 / 8 727 971 78 58.
Claim
The Police Department of the Auezovsky District Police Department of the Almaty City Police Department investigated criminal case No. 247540031001422 against R. D.K. on suspicion of committing a crime under paragraphs 1), 4) of Part 3 of Article 190 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Subsequently, the criminal case was referred to the court by the prosecutor of the Auezovsky district of Almaty.
During the consideration of the criminal case by the Auezovsky District Court of Almaty, facts of corruption were revealed at KazNMU named after S.Zh. Asfendiyarov, as well as at the Kazakh-Russian Medical University in Almaty.
The above facts were confirmed in the verdict of the Auezovsky District Court of Almaty dated February 10, 2025 against R-ieva D.K. and in a private decision of the Auezovsky District Court of Almaty dated February 10, 2025 based on the results of the criminal case.
The Auezovsky District Court of Almaty city stated in a private ruling: "During the consideration of this criminal case, the court found a gross violation of the requirements of the Criminal Procedure Code by the investigator of the District Police Department at the Auezovsky District Police Department Ermek M.E. during the pre-trial investigation of this criminal case.
In particular, criminal procedure in accordance with paragraph 1 of part 1 of Article 180 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the CPC), one of the reasons for the start of a pre-trial investigation is sufficient data indicating signs of a criminal offense, in the absence of circumstances precluding proceedings in the case of "a statement by an individual or a report by an official about a criminal offense":
In court, the defendant, D.K. R-ieva, explained that in 2022, after enrolling seven of the nine students, with the assistance of U.M.D., she fully trusted U.M.D.U. in the specialty of residency at KazNMU. The money of the non-enrolled students of the U. M. D. was returned in parts.
During the meeting, Dr. U.M. told her to give him cash from the students who were applying to the residency, the victims credited the money to her account, after which she cashed the money and handed it to Dr. U.M. and gave him the lists of students who were applying for a residency grant, who for which specialty I did. The money was collected personally by Dr. M. in the cafe opposite the Grand Park trading house three or four times, in the Kazakhstan hotel, in the Moscow trading house, in the Aksai-5 microdistrict, house 25, apartment 6, in the cafe on Zhandosova Street and other places, she either handed it over to her personal driver, or passed it through her husband Ashilov Kasymkhan. In case of late repayment of the money of the students who did not receive it, Dr. U.M. instructed to close the debts at the expense of money given by other incoming students. Later, when the students who were enrolled by Dr. M. said that they had enrolled themselves and began demanding their money back, she informed Dr. U.M. about this, before calling him on the phone, and also wrote on WhatsApp about the refund.
The defendant, R-ieva D. K., also explained both in the investigation and in court that she transferred the money received from the victims to the settlement accounts of Dr. N., K. A., according to her testimony, they took the victims' money to be credited to the State Medical University or to a grant from local executive bodies, and U.M. D.- He took money to enroll students for a grant at the KazNMU residency and for transferring from a paid department to a grant.
The victims also explained both in court and during the investigation that D.K. R-ieva had told them that she would enroll them in education through the vice-rector of the university, U.M. D.A.
During the investigation, it was established that money in the amount of 8,400,000 tenge was received from the account of K-oi A.S. from the account of R-ieva D.K. in the period from August 8 to August 16, 2024.
The investigator also questioned N.D.an as a witness entitled to defense, where in his testimony he explained that D.K. R-ieva had transferred 5,500,000 tenge from her account to his account to enroll students, and in court he explained that students were enrolled in residency for 6,000 000 tenge, if a student enrolled in the residency program, he received 100,000 tenge from each student.
During the consideration of this criminal case in court, it was established that the victims, having studied for seven years at the Kazakh National Medical University named after S. Zh. Asfendiyarov, holding positions in the medical field, solve issues for admission to the residency through the Whatsapp social network and that among students admission to the residency is solved only by money, and their actions in turn the queue entailed the commission of a crime by R-ieva D.K.".
In addition to the private decision of the Auezovsky District Court of Almaty dated February 10, 2025, the facts of corruption at KazNMU named after S.Zh. Asfendiyarov and the Kazakh-Russian Medical University in Almaty were established by the Decision of the Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of the Almaty City Court dated April 2, 2025.
In particular, the Judicial Board of the Criminal Division of the Almaty City Court stated in its ruling: "The Court of First Instance, in support of its decision to issue a private ruling, concluded in its ruling that in the separate criminal case against the accomplices of the convicted R-ieva D.K. – D-a U.M., To- No comprehensive, complete investigative actions have been carried out against A. and others, and no corresponding procedural decision has been taken.
This conclusion of the court is based on the norms of criminal law and the actual circumstances of the case.
As established by the court, D. K. R-ieva spoke in her interrogations about the involvement of Dr. U. M. and K.A. in this criminal offense, and about their active role in this crime. However, the pre-trial investigation authorities, having identified the convicted woman's accomplices, i.e. Dr. U.M., K-U.A., limited themselves to questioning them as witnesses, without using all the actions provided for by law to investigate comprehensively, fully and objectively all the circumstances, did not carry out other investigative actions.
Also, no procedural decision was made regarding Dr. U.M., K.A., and no investigative actions were carried out to determine their involvement in this crime.
As a result of the above-mentioned gaps and violations of the law, the rights and freedoms of the victims in this case were harmed.
Thus, the pre-trial investigation authorities violated the requirements of Article 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, did not establish factual data, did not fully and objectively investigate the circumstances relevant to the case.
The prosecutor's arguments in the petition that investigative actions have been fully carried out in the highlighted criminal case cannot serve as a basis for canceling a private court decision, since according to the case file, the court did not establish the fact of carrying out the necessary investigative actions during the study of the highlighted case.
Based on the above, the judicial board recognizes the private decision of the court of first instance as legitimate, and finds no grounds for its cancellation and satisfaction of the petition."
As part of the highlighted criminal case registered in the ERDR for No. 247540031001166, I filed petitions with the UP of the Auezovsky district, some of which were satisfied. In particular, the petitions were granted.:
- about the additional interrogation of D.K. R-ieva, the interrogations of D.U.M., K. A.S., N.D. (resolution of investigator Kuanbek E. dated 03/14/2025);
- about the seizure of phones of R-ieva D.K., Dr. U.M., K.A.S., N.D., Ashilova K.E. (resolution of investigator Kuanbek E. dated 03/14/2025);
- on the inspection of the phones of R-ieva D.K., Dr. U.M., K.A.S., N.D., Ashilova K.E. (resolution of investigator Kuanbek E. dated 03/14/2025);
- on requesting incoming and outgoing calls from cellular operators between the district of D.K., D.A. U.M., K.A.S., N.D., Ashilova K.E. (resolution of investigator Kuanbek E. dated 03/14/2025);
- on establishing the identity of a guy named "Nursultan" (resolution of investigator Kuanbek Ye. dated 03/25/2025);
- on additional interrogation of the victims (resolution of investigator Kuanbek Ye. dated 03/25/2025);
- on requesting bank account statements from R-ieva D.K., Dr. U.M., K.A.S., N.D., Ashilova K.E. (resolution of investigator Kuanbek E. dated 03/25/2025);
- on establishing the identity of the driver, Dr. U.M., the mobile phone number of the driver, Dr. U.M., on requesting incoming and outgoing calls between the driver, Dr. U.M., and Ms. D.K. (resolution of Investigator Kuanbek E. dated 03/25/2025).
However, to date, the above-mentioned investigative actions have not been carried out, evidence of the involvement of Dr. U.M. and K. A.S. in the committed criminal offense has not been obtained, and they have not been given a proper legal assessment.
Moreover, according to a letter from the Department of the Committee of Legal Statistics and Special Accounts of the State Duma of the Republic of Kazakhstan in Almaty dated 05/23/2025, the terms of the pre-trial investigation were interrupted on 03/28/2025, which I consider illegal, since the investigator did not comply with the requirements of Article 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
In confirmation of the involvement of the above-mentioned persons, I enclose extracts from the Kaspi application of R-ieva D.K. about money transfers to A.S., as well as downloaded correspondence from chats in the WhatsApp application between R-ieva D.K. and Dr. U.M., correspondence in the WhatsApp application betweenieva D.K. and K-oi A.S.
Based on the above, I ask:
- to recognize the investigator's inaction as illegal;
- to cancel the decision on the interruption of the pre-trial investigation;
- to oblige the pre-trial investigation body to conduct a full, comprehensive and objective investigation of the circumstances of the case, having completed all the procedural actions provided for by the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, including to execute the resolutions that satisfied my petitions.
Appendix: correspondence from chats in the WhatsApp application between R-ieva D.K. and Dr. U.M., correspondence in the WhatsApp application between R-ieva D.K. and K. A.S., receipts from Kaspi R-ieva D.K. about money transfer to K. A.S. – 7 copies., screenshot of the correspondence in the WhatsApp application between R-ieva D.K. and K-oya A.S., a letter from the Department of the Committee of Legal Statistics and Special Accounts of the State Duma of the Republic of Kazakhstan in Almaty.
With respect,
Lawyer Sarzhanov G.T.
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
