"Let them treat my son" – father of child electrocuted in kindergarten dissatisfied with court verdict

“Let them treat my son” – father dissatisfied with court decision after child was electrocuted at kindergarten

Earlier, Kun.uz published an investigation about a 6-year-old pupil of state kindergarten No. 66 in the city of Fergana, who fell into an unfenced underground high-voltage transformer substation on the kindergarten territory, sustaining severe injuries and body burns.

The boy has undergone several major surgeries. According to his father, the defendants are not taking full responsibility, and the court did not hand down an appropriate punishment to those responsible.

“Let the culprits fully pay for my child's treatment”

Abdurahmon Qodirov, the boy's father:

- We are not satisfied with the court decision regarding my son being electrocuted by high voltage on the kindergarten territory. A verdict was issued to recover material and moral damages in the amount of 15 million soums from each of the three people found guilty, totaling 45 million soums.

They are shifting all the blame for falling into the transformer substation onto my son. How can a child be to blame in such a situation? They say my son fell into the electrical panel due to his own negligence. If the basement is open and its perimeter is not enclosed with a special fence, is the child to blame? Shouldn't they have closed the high-voltage transformer substation in time? The fence around it was only installed after the accident happened...

My poor son has suffered so much because of other people's actions, and he is still suffering now. We had his hand operated on, they took a tendon and a nerve from his leg and transplanted them to another place, but worst of all, because the body was severely burned, the tendon did not take and came loose, and the burned hand is still not healing – who will answer for this? Will a kindergarten child just remain guilty by himself?

I handed my son over to the kindergarten safe and sound that day. Let them take my son from my hands, whether they take him abroad or treat him here, let them cure him. When you call to get medicine or for some other necessity, those who committed this wrongful act do not pick up. They answer if they want to, and if they don't, they don't...

These days, bruising has started under Abuzar's eyes. Doctors do not know the exact reason for this. His hand has stiffened like a board and is bent. He still has four step-by-step operations ahead of him. Let any father put himself in my shoes and see. To whom can we tell our pain? To which office should we go bowing our heads? No one is hearing our cry.

Let them take appropriate measures against those responsible for bringing my son Abuzar to this state. And let them cure my son, let them fully treat him, whether here or abroad.

“We are dissatisfied with the court verdict”

Obidjon Chopqiyev, lawyer:

- The preliminary investigation was conducted by the Fergana City Prosecutor's Office, and three individuals: a kindergarten teacher, a representative of "Fajr" LLC, and a specialist from the district electricity grid enterprise were charged as defendants under Article 116, Part 1 of the Criminal Code and sent to court. On June 26, 2024, the court verdict was read. Dissatisfied with the court verdict, we filed an appeal.

What is our dissatisfaction? Despite the wide scope of potential defendants, the court in practice limited itself to finding only three individuals guilty. On August 20, 2023, this preschool educational institution was accepted into operation, and the document to this effect bears the signature of the head of the regional territorial grid enterprise. Why is an electrical facility, namely a transformer, being signed off by the state if it has not been accepted into operation? This is the first side of the issue.

Secondly, a whole transformer is installed and connected to the grid by the territorial grid enterprise, yet no one, neither the head of the district electricity grid enterprise nor the heads of the regional electricity grid enterprise, is aware of it. This is the testimony they gave in court. The court, believing testimonies to the effect that they were unaware, limited itself to holding a simple specialist of the district electricity grid enterprise responsible. This was our main objection.

Currently, the court proceedings regarding our appeal are ongoing and have not yet concluded. In court, we filed an appeal with the same substance, namely that the circle of culprits is actually wide, but why were only three individuals held responsible, and we are trying to defend this in court, justifying it and presenting evidence.

To what extent will the child recover from his injuries? How long will his recovery take, and how much will it cost financially? The court looked at these circumstances superficially and only awarded about 45 million in material damages. Even a simple operation is quite expensive nowadays. Therefore, we have also drawn attention to these aspects, meaning we have objected. The reason is that his recovery will take a significant amount of time and expense. However, the court did not take these into account and ordered the recovery of only 45 million soums from the three individuals recognized as defendants.

During the first instance court proceedings, we heard many proposals from the defendants. There were many proposals regarding the child's treatment and taking him for surgical operations. However, all of these turned out to be proposals made only during the period leading up to the end of the trial.