He appealed to President Sadyr Japarov, Chairman of the Supreme Court Mederbek Satyiev, Prosecutor General Maksat Asanaliev, and Ombudsman Jamila Dzhamanbaeva to take control of the case.
According to the lawyer, Uezbaev became the target of criminal prosecution without sufficient grounds. He pointed out that the initiation of the criminal case was based on the conclusion of a working commission that was involved in the implementation of the Automated Traffic Management System (ATMS).
Jumashov noted that during the hearings at the Oktyabrsky District Court, witnesses—members of the working commission—were involved in the case, who, according to his claims, almost all signed the conclusion, but in fact, 99% of them do not agree with the commission's findings and do not see any elements of a crime in the actions of Uezbaev and other participants in the case.
The lawyer observed that the investigation relies entirely on the commission's conclusion. He shared his impressions from studying the witness interrogations, noting that the records looked like copies of the same text, where only the surnames of the witnesses were changed. He also emphasized that the interrogations were conducted with a clear accusatory bias, which violates the rules of criminal procedure.
Jumashov added that Uezbaev, as the department director, acted within the framework of the city hall. During the court session, it was revealed that the implementation of the ATMS was discussed at meetings attended by high-ranking officials, including the first deputy mayor, and this information reached the mayor. The documents preceding the implementation of the system confirm the agreement on pricing policy.
He also noted that another accused person was released under house arrest. According to part 4 of Article 18 of the Criminal Procedure Code, parties in a criminal process should have equal rights. He stated that inequality was manifested in the fact that one defendant had their preventive measure changed, while Uezbaev's did not. In December 2025, the preventive measures for Uezbaev were extended until February 5, 2026, and the lawyer claims that after this period, he should have been released.
On the day the preventive measure expired, the lawyer pointed out to the court the necessity of changing the measure to house arrest; however, the judge extended a measure that no longer existed. In this situation, he called on the Prosecutor General to take action against the judge and appealed to the president to pay attention to Uezbaev's case.
Additionally, Uezbaev's relatives also appealed to the president with a request for his release.
