The editorial board of FBRK has learned of the high-profile case of a resident of Uralsk, Ruslan Satibaldin, who has been trying to achieve justice for almost two years after being drawn into someone else's criminal case due to a bank error. Despite a court ruling, an acknowledgement of violations by the prosecutor's office, and confirmation from the Prosecutor General's Office, the guilty officials have not been punished, and the courts are refusing to hear his claim on its merits.
HOW IT ALL BEGAN
In the autumn of 2023, a fraud case was being investigated in the Kostanay region. A resident of the Fedorovka district, Anatoly Kovshikov, fell victim to telephone scammers who, posing as bank employees, took out a loan in his name from Home Credit Bank for 1.5 million tenge.
On 28 November 2023, investigator Bekmukhambetov requested account statements for the victim from the bank. Home Credit Bank sent a response but made a critical error: due to an employee's carelessness, the letter included a statement for the account of a completely unrelated person – Ruslan Satibaldin from Uralsk, who works at an international airport and had no connection to the case whatsoever.
THE ERROR WAS CORRECTED, BUT THE INVESTIGATION CONTINUED
The bank employee, upon discovering the mistake, contacted the investigator via WhatsApp that same day. The investigator himself asked, "what does Satibaldin have to do with this?" The bank worker admitted the error and promised to send the correct data by three o'clock in the afternoon, which was done.
It seemed the misunderstanding was resolved. However, on 5 December 2023, Bekmukhambetov sent an instruction to the Abai District Police Department of Uralsk to interrogate Satibaldin as a witness with the right to defence. This status implies possible involvement in the crime. On 4 January 2024, Ruslan was summoned to the police and questioned.
For a person working at a strategic site subject to regular checks by the KNB (National Security Committee) and police, this was a serious blow. The victim, Kovshikov, upon seeing Satibaldin's phone number in the case file, began calling him and demanding the return of the money.
FIRST COMPLAINTS AND REFUSALS
On 18 April 2024, Ruslan filed a complaint with the Fedorovka District Prosecutor's Office via the e-Otinish system. Prosecutor Telemisov dismissed it, citing data on Satibaldin's Qiwi wallet. The correction of the error on the same day was not mentioned.
On 2 May, Ruslan appealed to the head of the investigative department. However, in the system, the investigator Bekmukhambetov himself was assigned to handle the complaint – a direct violation of Article 104 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (CPC RK). The head of the department, Lieutenant Colonel Zhakupov, also refused.
Meanwhile, on 17 April, Ruslan filed a lawsuit against Home Credit Bank in the Medeu District Court of Almaty. The bank's representative acknowledged the error and attached screenshots of the WhatsApp correspondence. On 5 July 2024, the court ordered the bank to pay 300,000 tenge in compensation for moral damages.
THE REGIONAL PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE ACKNOWLEDGED VIOLATIONS
On 20 June, armed with the court decision, Ruslan approached the Kostanay Region Prosecutor's Office. On 10 July, the deputy regional prosecutor, Omar Sutbaev, issued a fundamentally different conclusion: the instruction to interrogate Satibaldin and the interrogation record were recognised as unlawful and inadmissible as evidence. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against officials of the Fedorovka District Police Department. Later, by a prosecutor's resolution, Ruslan was removed from the case file.
Justice, it seemed, had prevailed. But it was not to be.
On 30 July, Ruslan appealed to the Internal Security Department of the Police Department. On 14 August, the response came: no violations were found. On 23 September, he appealed to the Internal Security Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan (MIA RK) – he received a formal dismissal.
On 20 December 2024, the Committee for Legal Statistics of the Prosecutor General's Office confirmed procedural violations and sent an information letter to the MIA RK.
DEADLINES EXPIRED DUE TO DELAYS
On 1 March 2025, Ruslan again approached the Police Department demanding that those responsible be held accountable. On 12 March, a response came from the Deputy Head of the Department, Yerlan Seralin: a violation of Article 105 of the CPC RK was established in the actions of investigator Bekmukhambetov and Lieutenant Colonel Zhakupov.
The violation was acknowledged. But then came the fateful "however": more than six months had passed since the commission of the misconduct, and according to the Law "On Law Enforcement Service," the time limits for imposing disciplinary liability had expired.
Why had they expired? Because the very bodies that should have conducted the investigation dragged their feet for months and ignored the obvious facts.
COURTS REFUSED TO HEAR THE CLAIM
On 9 April 2025, Ruslan filed an administrative claim with the Specialised Inter-District Administrative Court of the Kostanay Region, seeking to declare unlawful the inaction of the Police Department: failure to forward the complaint to the MIA RK in time, incomplete consideration of complaints, lack of information about the right to appeal, failure to conduct a hearing – violations of Articles 70, 73, 91, and 104 of the Administrative Procedural Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (APC RK).
On 22 April, Judge Zhaaurova issued a ruling to return the claim. The reasoning: the subject of the dispute concerns actions within the framework of the criminal process, and the demands to bring individuals to disciplinary liability arise from labour relations.
On 5 June, the Kostanay Regional Court fully upheld this decision, stating that violations of internal procedures for handling complaints cannot be the subject of separate claims.
So, a state body can violate the law to its heart's content when dealing with citizens' appeals, and this is beyond judicial review?
On 2 July 2025, Ruslan filed a cassation appeal, pointing out that his claim challenged violations of administrative procedures – a public-law relationship governed by the APC RK. As of October, the appeal is pending before the Court of Cassation for Administrative Cases.
THE CIRCLE IS CLOSED
In almost two years, Ruslan Satibaldin has exhausted all possible avenues. The bank acknowledged its error and paid compensation. The regional prosecutor's office twice confirmed the illegality of the investigator's actions. The Committee for Legal Statistics of the Prosecutor General's Office documented procedural violations. Acts of prosecutorial supervision were issued.
But the reality is this: the investigator and his boss remain unpunished due to the expiry of time limits, the courts refuse to hear the claim, and his reputation has suffered. At every stage, the system's self-protection mechanisms were activated: formal checks, delays, passing the buck, expiring deadlines, and refusals on procedural grounds.
CONCLUSION
The story of Ruslan Satibaldin exposes a systemic problem: the lack of real accountability for civil servants who violate citizens' rights. Even when the facts are proven, acknowledged by the prosecutor's office, and confirmed in court, the internal mechanisms of protection operate in such a way that the guilty remain unpunished.
If the prosecutor's office has acknowledged violations, if supervisory acts exist, if the facts are documented – why are the courts refusing to consider this? Does administrative justice exist only on paper, while in practice a citizen cannot protect their rights from the arbitrariness of state bodies?
The decision of the court of cassation will show whether the judicial system is capable of protecting a citizen, or whether Ruslan Satibaldin's story will remain just another example of running in circles, where every body finds a new reason not to address the issue on its merits.