Skip to main content

A civil servant received a reprimand for tactless communication with journalists.

Submitted by Вера Александрова on

After our appeal to the Agency for Civil Service Affairs, officials of the Zhetysu region were brought to disciplinary responsibility. The chief specialist of the Land Cadastre Department of the Land Relations Directorate, Samat Zhumataev, received a reprimand.

Not long ago, the editorial team of FBRK needed to contact the Land Relations Directorate of the Zhetysu region. After calling the contact numbers for officials listed on the agency's official website, we had a most unpleasant conversation.

Subsequently, we sent an appeal to the Agency for Civil Service Affairs asking them to assess the behaviour of officials in the Zhetysu region during their communication with journalists and to clarify whether they were violating the standards of official ethics set out in the Code of Ethics for Civil Servants of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Later, the chief specialist of the Land Cadastre Department, Samat Zhumataev, contacted us. He tried in every way to justify himself, claiming that the number we called “had been disconnected for a year already”. Meanwhile, our appeal was being processed by the supervisory authority.

According to the investigation by the Department for Civil Service Affairs, the contact phone number previously published on the state agency's website still belonged to Samat Zhumataev. Officials also confirmed that after our conversation, the specialists' phone numbers were removed from public access.

“Thus, the arguments set out in your appeal have been confirmed. <…>

On 25 January 2024, the Department sent a proposal to the head of the Directorate, Y. Apekov, to consider disciplinary responsibility for the staff of the department.

As a result of its review, by order of the head of the Directorate No. 3-ж/қ-т dated 25 January 2024, the chief specialist of the department, Zhumataev S., was brought to disciplinary responsibility in the form of a 'reprimand',” the agency concluded.

Ultimately, a conflict that could have been avoided resulted in publicity for the directorate's staff and intervention by the supervisory authority. We hope that other civil servants will be able to draw the right conclusions from this.