Court Delivers Verdict in Almaty Hostel Fire Case, But Questions Remain

On July 9, the Almaly District Court of Almaty announced the verdict in the case of the Almaty Hostel fire that killed 13 people. The court found Adilbek Mukhamedyarov guilty and sentenced him to five years in prison.

Time already served in pretrial detention will be credited at a rate of two days for each day spent. The second defendant, Aleksandr Pekelnik, was sentenced to four years in prison.

The fire occurred early in the morning on November 30, 2023. Victims, including students and workers, were staying in rooms illegally located in the basement.

According to the court, evacuation was hindered by mattresses in the corridor and a locked emergency exit.

Almost 10 Months

The case investigation lasted about 10 months, and the trial began in October 2023. Despite the scale of the tragedy, media coverage was limited during much of the trial. Journalists were restricted from reporting details after a witness referred to a media article during testimony.

This restriction lasted for nearly three months.

Evgeniya Kolesnikova, the mother of one of the victims, noted that the investigation team was inconsistently represented in court, with only one investigator called to testify.

One investigator started the case, then it was handed over to a young woman. Although in my understanding, such cases, and here there are 13 dead, should be handled by a seasoned employee with a lot of experience. When the time came for questioning, only the first investigator was invited to court. And the woman to whom the case was handed over was not questioned. 

The court lifted the reporting ban before the testimony of Yerkin Tanzharykov, a key witness who was serving time for theft at another hostel.

Mukhamedyarov's defense suggested Tanzharykov was responsible for the fire, and some of the victims filed requests to designate him as a defendant, which was denied.

The Sergek camera, installed near the hostel, recorded that Tanzharykov walked around it for about four hours. At the same time, he did not pay for his stay that day. But shortly before the fire, he entered the hostel, and when the fire started, he was the first to leave, and with his back to it. And here's what's strange: this recording was requested from Sergek only a month and a half later, and then at the request of Mukhamedyarov's lawyers. Although, it would seem, it should have been requested by investigators, and right after the fire,said Kolesnikova.

She also questioned why prosecutors asked Tanzharykov only a few questions, compared to the more detailed questioning by the defense.

I had the impression that they were trying to divert Tanzharykov away. But neither I nor the other victims could understand why. Because he is not the kind of person who could have, let's say, a roof (reference to protection via connections - Ed.) over his head. But after digging around on the Internet, I began to assume that the issue could be in the insurance. Because there are such types of fire insurance, when insurance payments are not provided for intentional arson, and the damage must be recovered from the person found guilty. Of course, these are my guesses, but at least such options exist. 

Translation issues during his testimony, given in Kazakh, a constitutional right, complicated matters, as not all people knew the language, and the translators conveyed his statements poorly. The judge periodically had to translate for them.

There were also foreigners among the victims.

I had the impression that they were trying to divert Tanzharykov... I began to assume that the issue could be in the insurance... there are such types of fire insurance, when insurance payments are not provided for intentional arson..

According to Kolesnikova, the court gave little attention to the testimonies of firefighters, which detailed the challenges victims faced in trying to escape.

They noted that one dead person was lying in the hallway and trying to save himself, but he was stopped by mattresses that were standing against the wall; that when they opened one of the rooms, there was multiple bodies and it was clear that some of the dead were half-dressed, and some had flashlights on their phones. That is, they were fighting for their lives. And only some of the bodies were found in their beds. But for some reason, the volume where this was mentioned was skimmed very quickly during the trial. 

The Second Defendant

The second defendant, Aleksandr Pekelnik, originally a witness in the case, was later charged with violating fire safety regulations. He denied responsibility, stating he only signed paperwork and did not supervise the alarm installation.

And when the judge asked whether the defendants understood what they were accused of, Pekelnik replied: 

Eventually, the prosecutor reclassified the charge to “provision of services not meeting safety requirements.”

I believe that this is not motivated by anything. Because the pre-trial investigation, the trial under Article 306 of the Criminal Code were not conducted. There were no examinations that would have revealed the requirements that Pekelnik violated when providing his services,
said his lawyer Karina Seitkozhanova.

The property where the hostel operated belonged to Kusa Halyk, a subsidiary of Halyk Bank. The company managed the property and leased it out, but was involved in the case only as a witness.

That is, they saw all of this and did nothing. But, forgive me, if there had been another violation of the law - for example, selling drugs - they would have immediately kicked out the tenant. I would like to compare the situation with the terrorist attack in Crocus in Russia. There, those who rented out housing to terrorists were found to be implicated. Although they did not even know about the terrorist attack being prepared. But here they knew, but they have not been punished in any way, Kolesnikova commented.

The court ruled that Kusa Halyk employees were not responsible for the fire, and civil suits against the company and Tanzharykov were rejected because they were not defendants.

Original Author: Igor Ulitin