Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06ALMATY2302
2006-06-28 09:54:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
US Office Almaty
Cable title:  

KAZAKHSTAN: FIVE-YEAR SENTENCE UPHELD FOR REGIONAL

Tags:  PHUM PGOV KZ 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO2928
PP RUEHDBU RUEHLN RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHTA #2302/01 1790954
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 280954Z JUN 06
FM AMEMBASSY ALMATY
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 5963
INFO RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 1600
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO 2123
RUEHAST/USOFFICE ASTANA
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ALMATY 002302 

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR SCA/CEN (J. MUDGE),DRL/PHD (C. KUCHTA-HELBLING)

SENSITIVE

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM PGOV KZ
SUBJECT: KAZAKHSTAN: FIVE-YEAR SENTENCE UPHELD FOR REGIONAL
POLITICAL ACTIVIST

REF: ALMATY 1759

ALMATY 00002302 001.2 OF 002


UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ALMATY 002302

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR SCA/CEN (J. MUDGE),DRL/PHD (C. KUCHTA-HELBLING)

SENSITIVE

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM PGOV KZ
SUBJECT: KAZAKHSTAN: FIVE-YEAR SENTENCE UPHELD FOR REGIONAL
POLITICAL ACTIVIST

REF: ALMATY 1759

ALMATY 00002302 001.2 OF 002



1. (U) Summary: On June 22, opposition activist Alibek
Zhumabayev's appeal was rejected by the Taraz Regional Court.
Zhumabayev had earlier been sentenced to five years in jail for
hooliganism, insulting President Nazarbayev's dignity and honor,
and organizing mass disorder. Zhumabayev's defense team had
asked the court to drop the charge of organizing mass disorder
and grant him amnesty regarding the other two charges. However,
a panel of three judges rejected these requests as groundless.
The hearing was held in an orderly, open fashion, leaving the
defense little chance to protest it on procedural grounds. About
50 people attended the hearing, most (if not all) of whom had
come in support of Zhumabayev. End summary.


2. (U) The June 22 proceedings began at about 10:30 in the
morning, 30 minutes later than originally scheduled. They were
held in a large courtroom with a seating capacity of over 100.
Just before the hearing began, one of the three judges walked to
the front of the room, surveyed the scene, and loudly announced
that his staff should admit anyone into the courtroom who so
desired. At this point about 20 people were in attendance,
including U.S. Embassy staff, an OSCE observer, Zhumabayev
friends and relatives, and opposition activists. When Zhumabayev
was escorted into the room, most of the audience stood and
cheered. Neither the court staff nor the panel of judges made
any attempt to quiet the crowd.


3. (U) Zhumabayev's defense team was made up of four people. The
first, Zhamshit Kapparov, was a professional lawyer who had been
appointed by the regional court after Zhumabayev dismissed his
previous defense team during a city court hearing in April
(reftel). Also speaking in Zhumabayev's defense were two
opposition activists, Petr Svoik and Marzhan Aspandiyarova, and
Zhumabayev's wife Aynur. The defense was well organized and each
speaker approached the case from a different angle. Kapparov
focused on legal and technical matters. Svoik argued that the
case was politically motivated. Aspandiyarova spoke of
international opinion and Kazakhstan's image in the world. And
Ms. Zhumabayeva made a personal appeal for the sake of her young

children.

--------------
The Legal Angle
--------------


4. (U) Kapparov argued that two of the three charges against
Zhumabayev (hooliganism and insulting the honor and dignity of
the President) were subject to amnesty according to a law signed
on January 9, 2006. He pointed out that these charges had been
filed, and the crimes allegedly committed, before the decision to
grant amnesty had been made. The third charge of organizing mass
disorder was added on January 19, 2006. While he admitted that
the amnesty law did not apply to this more serious offense,
Kapparov asked the court to dismiss the charge due to
insufficient evidence. Given the January 9 law, without the
third charge Zhumabayev should be set free immediately, he said.

--------------
The Political Angle
--------------


5. (U) Svoik began by saying, "It is no coincidence that OSCE and
U.S. Embassy representatives are here. This is a political
case." He then proceeded to highlight inconsistencies in the
case, some of which he said proved illegal action on the
government's part. Svoik also cited the investigation report as
evidence that the case against Zhumabayev was part of a plan
designed by the National Security Committee (KNB) to discredit
the opposition.


6. (U) The heart of Svoik's statement concerned the students who
had testified against Zhumabayev. They told investigators that
he had urged them to "do in Astana what happened in Kyrgyzstan."
During the city court proceedings, however, Zhumabayev's defense
team had asked the students a series of questions: Do you know
what rioting means?; Did Alibek ask you to gather supporters?;
Did he ask you to commit arson?; Did he ask you to destroy
property?; Did you see any firearms?; Were leaflets prepared?;
Was there an action plan? The students said "no" in each case.

--------------
The International Angle
--------------


ALMATY 00002302 002.2 OF 002



7. (U) Aspandiyarova made a more emotional appeal, switching from
Russian to Kazakh for rhetorical effect. She built off of
Svoik's statement in an apparent attempt to impart a sense of
shame in the proceedings to date. Along those lines, she noted
that Zhumabayev was arrested the same day that Kazakhstan
ratified the International Covenant on Civic and Political
Rights. Throughout, she implied that the international community
would judge Kazakhstan harshly should the appeal be rejected.
Specifically, she wondered aloud how the case would affect
Kazakhstan's aspirations to chair the OSCE and to become one of
the world's top 50 competitive nations.

--------------
Zhumabayev Unrepentant
--------------


8. (U) When Zhumabayev was asked to speak, he expressed little
remorse and addressed the court somewhat combatively. As his
remarks became increasingly antagonistic, Zhumabayev's friends
and defense team signaled and called out for him to be silent.
However, he continued: "Tomorrow these students will replace you.
They were scared and forced to testify against me. I did not
call for rioting. I wanted to stop Rakhmetov [the man who
admitted destroying campaign billboards, allegedly at
Zhumabayev's request]. I never looked for him. He came to me."
He then criticized what he characterized as the inability in
Kazakhstan to speak freely - to speak negatively of the
President, or to say that the situation was better in Kyrgyzstan,
as he said he believed.


9. (U) The court recessed for an hour while the judges
deliberated. When proceedings resumed, the judges rejected the
appeal as groundless in a short statement that echoed the remarks
of the procurator. A member of the audience shouted, "Shame on
you," but the judges did not react and left the room. By this
point in the day, about 50 people had come to watch the
proceedings. Most appeared shocked by the ruling.


10. (SBU) As Zhumabayev has already been in detention for seven
months, roughly four and a half years remain on his sentence. He
will be eligible for parole in just over a year. While
Zhumabayev has the right to appeal to the Supreme Court, his
defense team did not immediately agree on what to do next.
Aspandiyarova was strongly in favor of filing a complaint, but
Svoik was more cautious, saying, "We have to discuss this."
Aspandiyarova approached POLOFF and requested U.S. support in
this matter, be it through diplomatic channels or in the form of
a roundtable or seminar on political freedom in Kazakhstan.


11. (SBU) Communist Party member Tolen Tokhtasynov also
approached POLOFF to share his views on the case. According to
him, the KNB planned to trap Zhumabayev and make him testify
against opposition presidential candidate Zharmakhan Tuyakbay,
and against Tokhtasynov himself, who was Tuyakbay's campaign
manager. He said Zhumabayev had refused to cooperate with the
KNB.


12. (SBU) Comment: Court officials were clearly interested in
making the proceedings appear fair. The hearing was held in a
large room, and the presiding judge called three times for court
officials to admit anyone waiting outside. The proceedings took
almost three hours, several times the length of a normal appeal
hearing, and Zhumabayev's defense was allowed to speak for nearly
half of that time. Finally, the judges were exceptionally
tolerant of Zhumabayev's harsh criticism, his defense team's
pointed and somewhat accusatory remarks, and the audience's
repeated outbursts.


13. (SBU) Comment, cont.: While the sentence seems excessive
given the facts of the case and the lack of physical evidence, it
will be difficult for the defense to file a complaint on
procedural grounds. The opposition also strongly suspects that
the decision was dictated by Astana for political reasons; if
that is the case, further legal action would probably not lead to
a more favorable result for Zhumabayev. At this point, barring a
high-level political decision to release him, perhaps in an
effort to bolster Kazakhstan's international image, Zhumabayev's
prospects appear bleak. End comment.

ORDWAY