THE REGIME IS PLAYING WITH OUR LIVES

On 12 August the Prosecutor’s Office of Turkestan region filed a protest against a politically motivated court decision to replace the restriction of liberty with imprisonment for political prisoner and civil activist #SYZDYKBEK Sabit.

In a letter to the court of appeal, the Prosecutor’s Office requests that the decision of the previous court be overturned because Sabit SYZDYKBEK “has not been negligent towards the court requirements, has not violated them intentionally and the probation service has not proven that Sabit SYZDYKBEK violated the Code”.

The grounds for the protest were as follows:

– The probation service did not clarify the social status of the convicted person, did not explain the procedure of probation control, did not make a schedule of probation visits and did not explain the responsibility for non-compliance with the court requirements and conditions of probation control;

– The statement of the probation service includes information on the convicted person’s evasion of court-ordered duties, violation of public order, the period of non-appearance at the probation service and personal information about the convicted person.

However, probation provided only letters of invitation and acts. Also, the probation service did not apply measures of compulsory attendance for failure to appear for unjustified reasons;

– The probation service did not establish a violation and did not obtain an opinion from the relevant specialists when Sabit SYZDYKBEK left a comment on Facebook despite being prohibited from engaging in social and political activities through social networks.

Where was the Prosecutor’s Office before?

So, does it mean that the government puts in jail and the same government files a protest?

Probably, the regime wants to show the USA and the EU the “independence” of the Prosecutor’s Office and the court.

Certainly, SYZDYKBEK Sabit should be released immediately.

It should be reminded:

On 10 August 2021, civil activist Sabit SYZDYKBEK’s restriction of liberty was illegally replaced with a custodial sentence (for 9 months and 15 days) for allegedly failing to register with the probation service.

Earlier, on 4 March 2021, he had been unlawfully sentenced to 1.5 years of restriction of liberty and a 3-year ban on social and political activities for 3 years with a placement on probation under Article 405 Part 2 (“participation in the activities of an extremist organisation”).

The Court of Appeal reduced the term of restriction of liberty from 1.5 year to 1 year, adding 100 hours of community service.