On 9 April, the trial of Temirlan Ensebek, the author of the satirical page QazNews24, began at the Nauryzbai District Court in Almaty. The young man is accused of inciting ethnic hatred through publications on social media.
It will be recalled that 28-year-old Temirlan Ensebek was arrested in January after publishing material about the possible renaming of Petropavlovsk to Kyzylzhar. His page, QazNews24, created in April 2021, was positioned as an "information agency for satirical news" and quickly attracted the attention of more than 5,000 subscribers, with publications being viewed more than a million times.
The hearing began at 11:00 under Judge Beinegul Kaisina. The defendant himself participated via video link from the detention centre, which has already become a point of contention. Since Ensebek's detention, hearings have been repeatedly postponed. Initially, the case was being heard at the Almaly Court, but at the request of state prosecutor Ainash Zhuaspaeva, the proceedings were moved to the Nauryzbai District — the location of the "crime".
However, the behaviour of the defendant himself deserves particular attention. According to witness accounts and published video footage, Ensebek deemed it appropriate to smoke during the court hearing. Such a gesture is difficult to interpret as anything other than a demonstrative disrespect not only for the court but also for the state, its laws, and society as a whole.
His possible manipulation of the language issue also raises questions. Ensebek personally insisted that the hearing be conducted in Russian, yet later publicly claimed that his father was allegedly not allowed to speak in Kazakh. Anyone familiar with court procedure understands that matters of the language of proceedings and the use of an interpreter are discussed and arranged in advance. Speculation on such a sensitive issue for Kazakhstani society is unacceptable, especially from someone who claims to be a public figure.
Temirlan submitted three motions to the court. He asked to be allowed to attend in person, citing the need for communication with his lawyer and problems with audibility (the connection did indeed frequently break down). He also petitioned for all media and international observers to be admitted, insisting that his prosecution was politically motivated. The judge rejected these requests, noting that the media were already present and the court was "sufficiently open".
Another motion concerned changing the pre-trial measures, but prosecutor Didar Kapayev objected, emphasising the seriousness of the charge. The judge agreed with the prosecution's position.
It is important to understand that beyond the surface of the proceedings lies a serious accusation. Ensebek's publication, containing a song that insulted members of another nationality, went far beyond the bounds of acceptable satire. In Kazakhstan, where dozens of different ethnic groups live in peace and harmony, such provocations are felt particularly keenly.
The law provides for strict measures against any attempts to create division along ethnic lines — and this is not censorship but a necessary protection of public stability. Global experience shows that social peace becomes fragile where the boundaries of what is acceptable are blurred under the guise of 'humour'.
Satire is undoubtedly an important genre of journalism. It can be sharp and even painful. But there is a fine line between satire and provocation which a responsible author must not cross. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from responsibility for one's statements. Least of all does it imply the right to show disrespect for the court and society.
The next court hearing is scheduled for 10 April. Due to limited time, it was not possible to question the expert and two witnesses called by the prosecution.
This trial will undoubtedly set a precedent for defining the acceptable limits of satire in Kazakhstan's information space. It once again highlights the need for a responsible approach when covering ethnic issues. After all, the excuse of "I was just joking" does not work when those jokes become a tool for social division.