"Standards should apply equally to bloggers and officials." Why are the cases of officials considered closed? Topic discussion

"Standards should apply equally to bloggers and officials." Why are cases of officials being tried in private? Discussion of the topic

Over the past year, the system of certain sectors in Uzbekistan has once again undergone a comprehensive review. During this period, dozens of high-ranking officials have been brought to criminal responsibility.

In particular, the criminal cases of former Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs Bekmurod Abdullayev, former director of the State Assets Agency Akmalkhon Ortikov, and former head of the Internal Security Department of the State Security Service Alijon Ashurov, who was involved in the Korean case, which allegedly caused $90 million in damage, have begun to be considered in courts.

However, the courts ruled to consider the process in private due to the presence of information protected by law. This means that the trial of these officials will not be made public. Some lawyers and activists consider this situation to be contrary to the principles of openness and transparency and advocate for open trials.

In the next interview, the newspaper discussed which specific points of the legislation are being considered closed within the framework of court cases, how justified these reasons are, at a time when the opposite trend is observed in democratic countries, and when such cases can be considered open. The interview was attended by Tursunali Akbarov, press secretary of the Tashkent city courts, and human rights activist Abdurakhmon Tashanov.

You can watch the full video on our YouTube page. The abbreviated text of the interview is provided below.

According to official Tursunali Akbarov, in the first half of 2026, Tashkent city courts sentenced 727 officials in 451 criminal cases. 3 of them were acquitted, and the rest were sentenced depending on the degree of guilt.

"15 criminal cases were opened against 18 individuals under Article 210 (Bribery) of the Criminal Code. Of these, one defendant was acquitted, and 17 were sentenced by a court verdict within the framework of the law. In addition, Article 45 (Deprivation of a certain right) was applied to those sentenced. That is, a person found guilty by the court is also deprived of the right to work for a certain period, for example, up to three years," says Akbarov.

The category of corruption crimes has expanded significantly. Previously, only cases were related to Articles 210 (Accepting Bribery) and 211 (Giving Bribery) of the Criminal Code, but now:

"15 articles are included in the category of corruption crimes, and in the first six months of the year, 451 criminal cases were considered in Tashkent city alone against 727 individuals. These are cases that have been brought to court, we do not interfere with those under investigation. Persons with the status of suspects or defendants are in the investigative body and have not yet appeared in court. Those who have appeared in court are considered defendants," he said.

It was added that 68 of the sentenced officials are women, 180 are under 30 years old, 27 are over 60 years old, and 10 are foreign citizens.

In accordance with Article 55 of the Criminal Code, a reduction in punishment is provided for in several cases. Tursunali Akbarov noted that, based on this, officials who compensated for the damage were not sentenced to imprisonment, but to restriction of liberty, deprivation of certain rights, or fines. It is noted that there are a large number of them. This number was not disclosed during the interview.

Human rights activist Abdurakhmon Tashanov said that cases related to crimes committed by officials have been considered in a closed manner, not only now, but for a long time. According to the activist, the process is not legal, but is being qualified socio-politically.

"As an example, we can cite cases at the level of the Prosecutor General's Office headed by Rashidjon Kadyrov (former Prosecutor General - ed.) and the former Chairman of the State Security Service Ikhtiyor Abdullayev. In general, almost all cases involving ministers and government members were considered in a closed manner.

Officials justify the closed trials with state secrets or other excuses, but in fact this does not quite correspond to the policy of openness, openness, and transparency that the government claims."

"Let's take the 'office case', there were also well-known people in it. For example, there were some incidents against [Komil] Allamjonov, an employee of the Presidential Administration, but these cases were also closed. Currently, about 30 officials of the Ministry of Internal Affairs are being charged. Their cases are also being closed for reasons related to state secrets."

"Here, the end does not justify the means. Why? Because from the perspective of transparency, the court could have identified those areas where state or corporate secrets could be revealed and separately closed, and the rest could have been open," says Tashanov.

The interlocutor said that no one is against the fact that information protected by law is not disclosed, but this is not a reason to hold a court session completely closed. In his opinion, there may be interested parties in this situation.

"Recently, there has been another trend: our lawyers themselves, in agreement with their clients, are filing motions under the pretext that "the defendants do not want to appear in public," and the courts are closing the process as if they need an excuse. But in fact, these are not the very inherent rights of those accused of corruption crimes, that is, the rights of the public take precedence. They raised children with our taxes; they stole our bread, they picked our pockets. "That's why we need to observe their trial openly," the respondent said.

Tursunali Akbarov, the press secretary of the Tashkent city courts, refuted Abdurakhmon Tashanov's comments, saying that they are "speaking based on imagination rather than thinking."

Article 19 of the Criminal Procedure Code establishes the procedure for the open hearing of criminal cases in court. According to it, criminal cases are heard openly in all courts, with the exception of cases that conflict with the interests of protecting state secrets, as well as cases involving sexual crimes.

Tursunali Akbarov said that after a ruling on a closed trial is issued, it is not discussed, only an appeal can be filed against it.

"Before issuing a ruling on a closed trial, the judge discusses the parties' petitions in this regard with the participation of the parties and then accepts them. Currently, 4 public court cases are being considered in Tashkent. The first of these is the case of former Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs Bekmurod Abdullayev and others, which is being heard by a judge of the Yangihayot District Court for Criminal Cases in the Yunusobod District Court for Criminal Cases. The second is the case of former Director of the State Assets Management Agency Akmalkhon Ortikov and others in the Mirabod District Court for Criminal Cases. The third is the case of Alijon Ashurov and others in the Bektemir District Court for Criminal Cases. The fourth is the case of the former head of Uzbekneftegaz and others. This case against Uzbekneftegaz officials is being heard in an open court session. The other three are closed. But all three were discussed in open court," Akbarov said.

According to information, the volume of the case involving officials of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, including Bekmurod Abdullayev, is 368 volumes, and the amount of damage caused in it is large (the amount was not disclosed). Of the 30 defendants, 19 were sentenced to imprisonment, and the rest were given bail, a receipt, and appropriate behavior.

There are 3 main reasons for the closed trial of this criminal case: state procurement, penal institutions, and the presence of personal information. After discussing the lawyers' request, the judge issued a ruling on the closed trial.

Akbarov emphasized that he considers this justified.

"Whether we like it or not, the disclosure of closed information can harm the interests of both the state and society," – said the court representative.

The case of the former head of the State Assets Management Agency, Akmalkhon Ortikov, is related to closed auctions, and the main reason for this was the non-disclosure of information.

"You know, there are legal procedures for conducting a closed auction. Here, too, information is confidential. Moreover, closed auctions are considered cases related to objects of strategic importance to the state, related to ensuring its security. Moreover, only previously known and designated persons participate in these auctions. So, there is also an issue of data protection here. Based on this, it was determined that this case will also be considered in a closed court session," Akbarov said.

The official noted that the migration criminal case was taken into separate proceedings, a separate investigation was conducted against 4 defendants, and then the case documents were submitted to the court. In addition to bribery (Article 210), it is also assumed that there are signs of legalization of proceeds from criminal activity (Article 243).

"You know, in all countries, including ours, information related to the military sphere is classified information and is protected by law. Based on these grounds, it was determined that the court sessions on criminal cases being considered in all three courts will be held in a closed format. This is a legal requirement," Akbarov said.

Prepared by Dilshoda Shomirzayeva