STATEMENT OF CLAIM for Declaration of the Expulsion Order as Unlawful

To the Inter-District Court for Civil Cases of Astana

6 Geidar Aliyev Street,Astana, 010000, Republic of Kazakhstan

Claimant: STK

IIN ....

Representative under Power of Attorney:

Advocacy Office “Zakon i Pravo” (“Law and Right”)

BIN 201240021767

Office 304, 79/71 Abylai Khan Avenue,Almaly District, Almaty, 050002,Republic of Kazakhstan

info@zakonpravo.kzwww.zakonpravo.kz

Tel.: +7 708 971 78 58 / +7 727 971 78 58

Defendant: Non-Profit Joint-Stock Company“Astana Medical University”

BIN ...

49A Beybitshilik Street,Saryarka District, Astana, Republic of Kazakhstan

Tel.: +7 700 ...

STATEMENT OF CLAIM

for Declaration of the Expulsion Order as Unlawful

On 31 March 2022, STKarabekkyzy (hereinafter referred to as the “Claimant”) and the Non-Profit Joint-Stock Company “Astana Medical University” (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”) entered into Standard Agreement No. 7.4-21-1602 for the provision of educational services.

Pursuant to the said Agreement, the Defendant undertook to provide the Claimant with higher education services, organize the educational process, and, upon successful completion of the educational programme, issue the relevant document certifying her education.

On 15 April 2025, by Order No. 489-s/жс of the Chairperson of the Management Board – Rector of the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “Order”), STKarabekkyzy, a fourth-year student of the School of Medicine and the Claimant herein, was expelled from the University.

The said Order was issued on the basis of Minutes No. 6 of the Disciplinary Council meeting dated 10 April 2025.

On 31 March 2025, while taking an examination in Immunology, the Claimant was caught using a cheat sheet.

On 10 April 2025, the Defendant held a meeting of the Disciplinary Council, following which Minutes No. 6 were drawn up.

The Disciplinary Council qualified the Claimant’s actions as a violation of the requirements of the University’s internal regulatory documents, in particular subparagraphs 20) and 24) of paragraph 8 of the University’s Code of Ethics, which provide, inter alia, for liability:

20) for committing corruption-related offences and crimes, including giving or receiving a bribe (giving gifts, providing remuneration in any form, as well as acting as an intermediary in the giving of a bribe);

24) for using mobile communications, sheets of paper, headphones or other means of communication during current, interim and final assessments, and for violating examination and assessment rules.

Thus, the Disciplinary Council concluded that, during the examination, the Claimant had not only used a mobile phone but had also committed a corruption-related offence, and recommended that the Claimant be expelled from the University.

However, the Claimant considers the said Order unlawful and unfounded and submits that it was issued in violation of her rights and legitimate interests for the following reasons.

First, the Claimant did not give any bribe to any of the teachers. Although she was effectively accused of committing a corruption-related offence, no evidence has been presented as to what specific material valuables or monetary funds were allegedly transferred. The Claimant did not give any money, gifts or other material valuables to any employees of the Defendant.

Second, according to Minutes No. 6 issued by the Defendant and the memorandum, it was established that the Claimant had violated the provisions of the University’s Academic Integrity Code.

Under the University’s Academic Integrity Code, the procedure for recording and reviewing cases of academic integrity violations is specifically regulated. In particular, where a violation is identified during an examination or interim assessment, an appropriate report must be drawn up and the matter must be considered in accordance with the prescribed procedure.

However, the Claimant was not provided with information confirming that these procedures had been fully complied with.

Third, the principle of proportionality must be observed when disciplinary measures are imposed.

According to the practice of the Defendant’s Disciplinary Council during the period from January to April 2025, more than 80 students who had used cheat sheets were allowed to retake the relevant subject during the summer semester and were not expelled from the University.

Nevertheless, the most severe disciplinary measure – expulsion – was imposed on the Claimant.

Fourth, paragraph 10 of the University’s Code of Ethics provides for the liability of students.

The said paragraph provides that students may be subject to disciplinary liability and disciplinary measures for failure to perform or improper performance of academic plans and duties established by the University Charter, as well as for violations of the Code of Ethics, the Academic Integrity Code, contractual obligations and dormitory rules.

However, the said provision does not expressly provide for the imposition of the most severe disciplinary measure in the form of expulsion from the University.

This, in turn, demonstrates that the type of disciplinary measure applied by the Defendant exceeded the scope of liability specifically established by the University’s internal regulatory acts and that the decision taken was excessively severe.

Pursuant to Article 43 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Education”, educational organizations are obliged to respect the rights of students and ensure the legality of the educational process.

Furthermore, the expulsion of students is regulated by paragraph 41 of the Model Rules for the Activities of Organizations of Higher and/or Postgraduate Education, approved by Order No. 595 of the Minister of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 30 October 2018.

Pursuant to the said paragraph, a student may be expelled only on specifically established grounds, namely due to academic failure, violation of the principles of academic integrity, violation of internal regulations, breach of contractual terms, or at the student’s own request.

Accordingly, the expulsion of the Claimant on the ground of having “committed a corruption-related offence” is not provided for by paragraph 41. In the absence of evidence substantiating such a serious allegation, the legality of the expulsion Order is therefore subject to serious doubt.

Pursuant to subparagraph 1) of paragraph 1 of Article 41 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Education”, the Charter of an educational organization, in addition to the requirements established by the civil legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, must contain the grounds and procedure for expelling students and pupils.

However, paragraph 117 of the Defendant’s Charter does not contain any specific provision requiring the mandatory expulsion of a student for violating the Code of Ethics, namely for using a mobile phone during an examination or where there is a suspicion of giving a bribe.

For the purpose of fully, comprehensively and objectively clarifying the above circumstances, a lawyer’s request was sent to the Defendant pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article 76 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Advocacy and Legal Assistance”.

The said lawyer’s request sought copies of the complete disciplinary proceedings materials concerning the Claimant, as well as copies of all evidence relied upon by the Disciplinary Council in making its decision, including a copy of the audio recording submitted by the University, if any.

However, the Defendant failed to provide any specific and sufficient evidence confirming the conclusion that the Claimant had committed a corruption-related offence.

In particular, no video recording, audio recording, witness statements or other objective evidence confirming that the Claimant had transferred money, offered a gift, transferred material valuables or otherwise attempted to give a bribe to any employees of the Defendant was provided.

Furthermore, the Claimant submitted a pre-trial complaint to the Defendant requesting reconsideration and cancellation of the Order.

In its response to the said pre-trial complaint dated 6 May 2026, the Defendant stated that there were no legal grounds for cancelling the Order and further stated that the Claimant had not been accused of committing any corruption-related offence, since such powers fall within the competence of the authorized state bodies responsible for combating corruption.

However, this position directly contradicts the contents of Minutes No. 6 of the Disciplinary Council dated 10 April 2025, which formed the basis of the Order.

Specifically, the said Minutes contain a legal assessment of the Claimant’s actions as “committing corruption-related offences and crimes, including giving or receiving a bribe”, while the Order itself was issued on the basis of those Minutes.

Thus, on the one hand, the Defendant states in the Disciplinary Council Minutes that the Claimant was accused of actions of a corruption-related nature, while, on the other hand, in its official response to the pre-trial complaint, the Defendant asserts that no such accusation was made.

This demonstrates the inconsistency of the Defendant’s legal position, the failure to conduct an objective and comprehensive examination of the circumstances during the disciplinary proceedings, and the fact that the decision taken was not based on sufficient evidence.

Moreover, despite imposing the most severe disciplinary measure – expulsion – on the Claimant, the Defendant failed to properly substantiate its necessity and proportionality.

Accordingly, the Defendant’s Order is inconsistent with the principles of legality, fairness, objectivity and proportionality, violates the Claimant’s right to education and her legitimate interests, and therefore should be declared unlawful and cancelled.

Based on the foregoing, and pursuant to Article 8 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan and Article 47 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Education”,

THE CLAIMANT HEREBY REQUESTS THE COURT TO:

• declare unlawful Order No. 489-s/жс dated 15 April 2025 issued by A. Turmukhametova, Chairperson of the Management Board – Rector of the Non-Profit Joint-Stock Company “Astana Medical University”;
• order the Non-Profit Joint-Stock Company “Astana Medical University” to reinstate STKarabekkyzy as a student of the Non-Profit Joint-Stock Company “Astana Medical University”;
• recover from the Non-Profit Joint-Stock Company “Astana Medical University” in favour of STKarabekkyzy KZT 600,000 (six hundred thousand tenge) in legal representation expenses incurred in connection with the provision of legal assistance;
• recover from the Non-Profit Joint-Stock Company “Astana Medical University” in favour of STKarabekkyzy KZT 4,325 (four thousand three hundred twenty-five tenge) in expenses incurred for payment of the state duty.

Respectfully,

Representative under Power of Attorney: I.M. Kenesbek

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