Activists on Trial: Entrepreneur Responds to Extortion Charges, Verdict Postponed after Judge Feels Unwell

On October 13, Closing arguments were held at the Specialized Interdistrict Criminal Court of Almaty in the case against civic activists Damir Kusheyev and Ruslan Karimov, Orda.kz reports.

The verdict, however, was postponed.

Along with entrepreneurs Andrey Belyansky and Kurman­gazy Aitmukanov, they are charged under Part 4 of Article 194 of the Criminal Code of Kazakhstan — “extortion on an especially large scale.” Defense attorneys asked the court to acquit their clients. In their final statements, the defendants also requested full acquittal.

The prosecution is seeking sentences that account for both mitigating and aggravating factors. For example, prosecutors asked the court to sentence activist Kusheyev to eight years in prison — nearly the minimum for a particularly serious crime, where the range starts at seven years and goes up to 15 years with confiscation.

Tit for Tat?

On the eve of closing arguments, Andrey Belyansky, director of Prestige-DorStroy LLP, addressed the court. He described a years-long dispute with the victim, Bakhtiyar Blayev, stemming from a property-related conflict and explained why he believes the charges against him are baseless. 

Belyansky said he had known Blayev since August 2019. In September, they began working together on landscaping for a residential complex in the Almaly microdistrict. Their relationship was initially professional but quickly deteriorated.

We completed work on the Nurdala residential complex. One contract covered the construction of a spa center, and without a contract we worked on the Metropol residential complex. My team dug the foundation pit. There wasn’t enough money to pay the workers because Blayev asked me to buy materials first to speed up the job. According to him, the Akim came to the site on December 31, and nothing was ready. I left on December 29 with 95% of the work done, plus extra tasks,Belyansky said. 

He said his partner promised to settle up by the end of 2019 per the certificate of completed work — once the client transferred funds.

The problematic 16 million tenge came from Metropol, which we built without a contract. Blayev transferred part of the money to my wife Lyudmila’s account. After the job, I went to his office to sign an official contract and get the remaining sum. Instead, he urged me to write a receipt acknowledging 16 million tenge so he could show it to Metropol’s director as proof of payment. He promised to sign a contract and then send the rest. It seemed strange, so I refused.

According to Belyansky, Blayev’s attitude changed sharply after that, and he stopped answering calls until spring 2020. Later, Blayev allegedly claimed Belyansky had left the site in November 2019 with money paid by the general contractor.

Belyansky said that on March 17, 2020, acquaintances called to rent his company’s heavy equipment. He went to the Nurdala site to retrieve a grader and a roller — but they were gone.

The equipment had been there since December 29, 2019. I hadn’t removed it because of the cold and because I expected another order. When I arrived, it was missing. I called Bakhtiyar; he didn’t answer. I reached his father Kudaibergen, who later told me Bakhtiyar was unhappy with me and had the equipment. My wife and I went to the district police and filed a complaint.

He expected police to investigate vehicle theft or larceny, but the case was closed as a civil dispute, and the parties were told to go to court.

Belyansky suspects Blayev influenced the police.

During a face-to-face interrogation, I saw Blayev strolling into the police department talking on his phone. They took our phones at the entrance, but he talked freely — even during the interrogation. We complained to the investigator. We saw him speaking with police like friends or good neighbors. He even hugged the head of investigations. That’s when I realized he had everything there wrapped up.

Belyansky said they spent years suing each other and filing cross-complaints.

He briefly mentioned that Blayev once sued to recover 17.78 million tenge from his company.

According to the reconciliation statement, the amount stood at 14 million 966 thousand tenge. In addition, I had supporting documents showing purchases of materials worth 21 million tenge. However, the judge ruled in Blayev’s favor — a decision I disagree with. It was Blayev who owed me for the work I had done. Instead, under the court’s ruling, I was ordered to pay him 23 million tenge. My company is small — I never had the same volume of projects or the same connections he did. His company officially listed only two employees — himself and his father — while all the real work was done by us and five other subcontractors.

Later, the Almaly District Court of Almaty found him guilty under two criminal articles.

One was “arbitrariness” (self-redress): Blayev received it for taking Belyansky’s heavy equipment. He served his sentence in Colony-Settlement No. 13.

In court, Blayev claimed a private enforcement officer had seized my equipment. That’s not true. It’s a pity that the Almaly District Court failed to recognize his actions as fraud. He involved so many people in the work, and then, pardon my language, cheated everyone!

Blayev denied the arbitrariness charge and vowed to appeal. He also filed a complaint accusing Belyansky and Aitmukanov of false reporting.

Belyansky countered with examples of cases Blayev had lost.

It seems those 16 million tenge stuck in Blayev’s mind — he can’t let it go. He turned against my company even though we did quality work. For example, the Blayev family found out I was born in Tallinn. What did they do? They transferred 8 million tenge to my wife and then sued her in the Turksib District Court of Almaty, claiming she failed to deliver equipment from Estonia. In 2021, they filed a similar suit against me, alleging I was supposed to bring equipment from Russia. They lost both cases.

According to Belyansky, the j.i.t group, allegedly owned by the Blayev family, owed Prestige-DorStroy a total of 40.2 million tenge. But because he had no formal contract for the Metropol work, he could not prove those expenses later — even though the act of completed work listed 31 million tenge.

A Sting?

Regarding January 22, 2025, Belyansky insists he was unaware of any plans by his acquaintance Kurman­gazy Aitmukanov. He says he did not know lawyers were drafting a mediation agreement under which Bakhtiyar Blayev would drop all claims against the Belyansky and Aitmukanov families, including a large court-ordered debt.

At 10 a.m. Kurmangazy called and suggested meeting at our lawyers’ office about a Supreme Court matter. My wife and I went to this ill-fated legal consultation. Kurmangazy, his ex-wife, our lawyers, and two other people were already there. He said Kudaibergen Blayev and his lawyer Dinara might come to talk. Soon the Blayevs arrived — the father and two sons. Bakhtiyar immediately said he forgave everything and had no claims against us.

Belyansky says it was Blayev who proposed a settlement and even asked which additional clauses to include.

Belyansky reminded him that 2.966 million tenge had been withdrawn from his company’s account in November 2022 to pay taxes, and he wanted that money back.

Blayev said a private enforcement officer withdrew the funds but he was ready to return them in cash. I didn’t care about the payment method. I also raised the issue of my heavy equipment worth 30 million tenge. We recovered it in December 2024 under a court ruling and moved it to a specialized service station. It had been left outdoors for four years and deteriorated. For example, when we picked up the roller, its brake lines and batteries were gone. We needed two cranes and two lowboys to move the equipment — not cheap. I told Blayev all this.

Blayev allegedly agreed to reimburse half the repair costs. Belyansky called his staff to price out the work; they settled on 3 million tenge.

We managed to repair part of the faulty equipment, but some of it is still out of order because we had to wait for spare parts from China. The machinery was made back in 2011 and manufactured in the PRC.
 

He says he didn’t interfere with drafting the mediation agreement, trusting the lawyers.

During that time, Blayev kept talking about some video and demanded that Belyansky and Aitmukanov withdraw their Supreme Court petition seeking review of his conviction.

I still don’t understand why I’m charged with extortion. The initiative came from Blayev. He asked if I knew bloggers Kusheyev and Karimov or watched their videos. I said no. I don’t have social media, so I don’t follow bloggers. I now know they’re civic activists. Neither Aitmukanov nor Kusheyev and Karimov sent me any video.

Belyansky told the court that he and Aitmukanov were dissatisfied with the sentence against brothers Daniyar and Bakhtiyar Blayev, believing it was too lenient, so they sought review in the Supreme Court.

He thinks Blayev feared a harsher outcome and set a trap.

Under the influence of Blayev and his lawyer Vera Semenovna, a provocation was staged, and my wife and I became its hostages. I think the Blayevs came to the legal office to take revenge on Aitmukanov but didn’t expect to see us. Bakhtiyar decided to get all of us at once. He was convicted based on our complaints to the Almaty Economic Investigations Department.

Belyansky shared additional suspicions.

While the mediators were drafting the agreement, I stepped outside. Blayev offered what I later saw as another setup: ‘Let me bring the money to your car so you don’t wait inside.’ I refused — something felt off… I committed no crime. I didn’t extort anything. We were discussing civil-law issues. I thought we understood each other, but he deceived me again.

He says the mediation text ran seven pages.

He had signed only the first page when operatives from the Organized Crime Unit and special forces burst into the office.

They lined everyone face to the wall, not on the floor, but even that sent my blood pressure soaring to 220/120. Police called an ambulance, and I was hospitalized at City Hospital No. 12. I saw them search Kurmangazy; they pulled 5,000-tenge notes from his jacket pocket.

Belyansky reminded jurors that a mediator had previously testified the January 22, 2025, agreement was invalid — it was between legal entities.

Still, Belyansky did not have the company seal or documents, so the contract had no force.

I was going to meet lawyers, not to conclude a mediation deal with Blayev — so I didn’t bring the seal or documents. By the way, in autumn 2024 Kudaibergen Blayev twice proposed a settlement; I refused then but later reconsidered. When you haven’t worked for four years and someone offers help repairing broken equipment and promises to repay debts — who would refuse?

On January 23, police summoned Belyansky as a witness. On April 14, he was questioned as a witness with defense rights.

On May 15, he became a suspect, and on July 8, he was detained and placed in a pre-trial detention facility under the Ministry of Internal Affairs’ Penal Enforcement System 

A Supreme Court hearing in our case against the Blayevs was set for May 16, 2025. My wife and I had already bought tickets. The Blayevs likely learned of this. To avoid punishment, Bakhtiyar filed a police complaint at 4 a.m. on January 22, 2025, accusing us of extortion.

According to Belyansky, the Supreme Court held two hearings. He and the Blayevs’ lawyers appeared in person; the Blayev brothers connected online.

The prosecutor told the Supreme Court he would send the Blayev case materials back for additional investigation. And you, Vera Semenovna, had previously complained that I wasn’t being recognized as a suspect in the extortion case. Daniyar Blayev had already called us extortionists — and the judge, for some reason, believed him, Belyansky said, addressing Blayev’s counsel.

A Brief Q&A Between the Defense Lawyer and His Client in Court

Andrey Nikolaevich, how is your health? Are you under medical supervision?

—  I feel okay now. I’m monitored by a therapist and a cardiologist. In 2023, I underwent heart surgery. After being placed in a detention center, I spent three weeks in the medical unit due to health issues. Lately, I often have arrhythmia.

How would you characterize the complainant, Blayev?

—  I would describe Bakhtiyar Blayev as a pathological liar who refuses to pay the people who worked for him. I believe his conviction was fair. He cheated us out of money and even went after government funds allocated for housing construction.

He issued fake invoices, enriched himself illegally, and got the sentence he deserved.

Why do you think you were recognized as a suspect, given that you initially had the status of a witness?

— After reviewing the case materials, I realized there was a setup targeting Aitmukanov and Kusheyev. When the officers from the Department for Combating Organized Crime burst into the law office, they positioned us in different corners.

Aitmukanov was searched immediately, but I didn’t see who actually had the envelope with the money, as I had already been hospitalized by then. I was later named a suspect and then an accused — apparently because they needed a backup defendant. I was kept as a reserve option.

You mentioned additional work done at the sites. Could you explain to the court and the jury what kind of work that was?

— At Blayev’s request, my team redid the tiling during the construction of a residential complex in Remizovka. That cost 1.7 million tenge. Later, they repaved the asphalt at the Almaly site. Blayev transferred payment for the completed work to my wife Lyudmila’s personal account, instead of signing a contract with our company. He explained that these were small payments, so there was no need to bother with formal paperwork.

The victim’s representative then asked a series of questions, many of which Belyansky declined to answer — a right he exercised to avoid self-incrimination.

Among them:

• Why did you prepare only a defect report for the equipment, not an expert conclusion?
• If you considered the specialized economic court’s ruling unfair, why didn’t you appeal?
• If you had invoices for materials and witnesses from your company, why didn’t you file a lawsuit to recover the multimillion-tenge debt from Blayev?
• Why didn’t you complain to the prosecutor’s office about alleged pressure in court? Do you have proof that Blayev influenced courts or law enforcement?

Asked why he delayed filing complaints against Blayev if money was owed, Belyansky said he hoped for good faith — that his former partner would eventually recognize the debt and repay it. When that did not happen, he tried to petition the Supreme Court, but his application was rejected for missing the deadline.

Then the representative of the complainant asked the defendant to comment on the episode involving compensation to Blayev for moral damages.

In 2021, we recorded a collective video saying Blayev wasn’t paying contractors. I was among those who complained. He sued to defend his honor and dignity — and won. The court ordered me to pay 30,000 tenge.

Then the complainant’s lawyer informed jurors that the Supreme Court ultimately upheld the first-instance ruling in the arbitrariness case; it did not increase the sentence as the plaintiffs (now defendants) had requested. 

The Prosecution’s Q&A

Belyansky, please explain why you did not attempt to appeal the decision of the Specialized Interdistrict Economic Court in favor of the company owned by Blayev?

— I was in such a state that I honestly don’t remember why I didn’t do it at the time. No one wants to hear the truth from us anywhere!

You said that Blayev took the initiative during the meeting at the law office. Then how do you explain the judicial psychological and linguistic expert report dated July 15, 2025, which concluded the opposite — that he acted as the party assuming certain obligations, while you were the one prompting him to take specific actions?

— Ask the expert why he came to that conclusion.

Didn’t it seem strange to you that Blayev suddenly wanted to sign a mediation agreement with you and forgive the debts after so many years of litigation?

— I was shocked myself. Honestly, I never believed I owed him anything.

You tried to convince the court that Blayev has patrons within Almaty’s law enforcement agencies. How do you explain, then, that despite such alleged connections, he was prosecuted by the Department of Economic Investigations and convicted by a district court?

— That question is not for me.

The final question from the lead prosecutor concerned psychological pressure during the investigation.

Earlier, defendant Damir Kusheyev claimed that police had pressured his relatives, friends, sponsors, and other defendants, allegedly demanding that they testify against him.

Belyansky, were you pressured to give testimony against the other defendants?

— No, I was not.

Postponed

On October 14th, the court was set to announce the jury’s verdict.

The hearing began later than planned, possibly because it coincided with the start of the appeal hearing in the Arman Dzhumageldiev case, which is also taking place in the same building.

In the morning, Judge Bakirbayev read out the questions for the jury, who then retired for deliberation. Although such discussions typically last up to two hours, the process stretched throughout the day. Supporters of the defendants debated whether the delay indicated pressure on the jury or a potential acquittal.

By the afternoon, rumors spread that only the jury’s verdict would be announced that day, and the judge’s sentencing would be postponed.

Around 16:00, the defendants were brought back into the courtroom — this time in handcuffs.

“Put them on so we don’t ‘cut ourselves,’ " Kusheyev joked before adding more seriously, “It’s tense — I heard an ambulance was called for one of the jurors.”

However, it was not for a jury member.

About 30 minutes later, the court secretary announced:

We apologize. The judge is unwell, and an ambulance has been called. The verdict announcement is postponed until tomorrow at 12:00.

The courtroom reacted with audible frustration, with one attendee remarking, “We should’ve left at 11 already.”

The trial of Kusheyev, Karimov, Belyansky, and Aitmykanov began in early September. They are accused of extorting businessman Blayev and demanding that he withdraw claims against Aitmykanov’s ex-wife. 

According to investigators, in exchange, Kusheyev allegedly promised to delete a compromising video involving Blayev.

The defendants deny the accusations, calling the case an act of revenge by Blayev against Aitmykanov.

Original Author: Zhanar Kusanova