(11 February 2026 | Source: FBRC)
The criminal case regarding a schoolgirl's attempted suicide at Almaty International School has been closed due to the absence of a criminal offence. The investigation did not confirm the version of bullying, but after the publications, the girl's father began receiving messages from other parents — accusing teachers and complaining about the administration's inaction.
Recall that recently the FBRC editorial team reported on the tragedy at QSI Almaty International School and the accusations made by Kanat Amirkhin against the school's leadership. At that time, the issue was the alleged harassment of his daughter and the complete inaction of the administration.
The investigation is complete, but alongside the formal closure of the case, details have emerged that make one think not about the specific incident, but about how life is generally organised inside expensive private schools and why their leadership can remain deaf to complaints.
WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE INCIDENT
A teenage girl ended up in intensive care after a suicide attempt on school grounds. The child's father, Kanat Amirkhin, claimed that he had approached the school's leadership repeatedly, asking them to look into the conflict — but there was no response. On the day of the tragedy, he sent a letter to the administration, and a few hours later his daughter was hospitalised.
The investigation did not confirm the fact of bullying. The prosecutor's office, however, did not clarify what specific evidence or expert opinions formed the basis for this conclusion.
Amirkhin publicly stated that he is not accusing other children — all his grievances are directed at the adults responsible for safety at the school.
After the story became public, other parents began writing to the father. They talked not only about conflicts between students, but also about more serious matters: about harassment by teachers.
For example, among the reports, "Mr Zhumanov", a history teacher of Kazakhstan at the same school, appears. According to those who came forward, he allegedly invited girls to his office after lessons, made advances towards them, and if refused, sent pornographic content.
It is impossible to verify these accusations independently, but the very fact of the reports indicates that trust in the school's internal mechanisms can be considered undermined, and the need for transparent actions and oversight is obvious.
THE SCHOOL AS A CORPORATION WITH INTERNATIONAL IMMUNITY
QSI Almaty International School has been operating in Kazakhstan since 1993. It is part of the global network Quality Schools International, founded by the American fund Quality Schools International Foundation Limited.
The first director is listed as Jonathan Root. In 2024 alone, the school paid more than 1 billion tenge in taxes, and in 2025 — over 959 million tenge. This is a large, financially stable player in the elite education market.
Staff recruitment at QSI is structured in such a way that it inevitably creates internal corporate solidarity. The administration (directors, their deputies, programme coordinators) are often hired for specific schools, but all undergo training within the QSI network, which fosters a unified management culture.
Foreign teachers are provided with a full relocation package: visa support, housing, insurance, flights. This is not just a job — it is a comprehensive integration into a system that requires loyalty. When an employee understands that their stay in the country depends on the employer, their critical perception of internal problems can quite easily be diminished.
Court practice shows that the school administration is prepared to insist on its decisions, even if their legality raises questions.
In 2024, the Civil Judicial Panel of the Almaty City Court declared unlawful an order for disciplinary action against a school teacher who simultaneously headed the primary trade union organisation.
The school issued her a reprimand for failing to attend a meeting without first obtaining a reasoned opinion from the higher trade union body, although by law this is a mandatory requirement for bringing elected union members to account.
The administration knew of the teacher's status but ignored the procedure. The court awarded compensation for moral damages, but the fact itself seems highly telling.
A PRECEDENT THAT TAUGHT NOTHING
The story with QSI is not unique. In 2019, a scandal erupted in Kazakhstan around another elite school — Haileybury Astana, a British branch of a prestigious educational institution.
Its former director, Jonathan Ulmer, was banned from teaching in the UK after allegations of grooming a minor came to light.
The allegations concerned crimes that, according to the victim, allegedly took place between 1989 and 2002 in Essex. A former student of Ulmer claimed that the sexual contact began when he was 13 years old and continued for three years. At age 16, he stated, the teacher raped him.
The accusations were made in 2018, immediately after the young man recorded a conversation with the teacher using a dictaphone.
Ulmer led Haileybury Astana from summer 2017 to the end of 2018. The school's leadership stated that at the time of hiring, they had no information about his past — he had passed all checks.
And this could very well be true: if the information about the suspicions was not public at the time of employment, standard procedures would not have uncovered it. But the question is different: is it enough for an elite school, which promises parents the safety of their children, to limit itself to formal checks? And what does the administration do when information about an employee's questionable past does come to light — conduct its own investigation or turn a blind eye to avoid damaging its reputation?
WHY DO THEY PROTECT 'THEIR OWN'?
The impression is that private international schools in Kazakhstan exist in a special legal space. They cater to wealthy parents who pay for prestige, Western programme accreditation, and the opportunity to gain admission to foreign universities.
Judging by the tragedy at QSI, conflicts in such schools, it seems, are typically resolved internally, to avoid washing dirty linen in public. Parents who encounter a problem often remain silent because a public scandal would harm their child, their reputation among peers, and their prospects at the same school.
The administration protects its employees not out of altruism, but out of pragmatism. A scandal is more costly than a dismissal. A foreign teacher, hired with a full relocation package, is difficult and expensive to replace.
The swift closure of the case regarding the suicide attempt at QSI Almaty and the story with Haileybury Astana show that the prestige of private education in Kazakhstan seems to have become a form of inviolability.
The question is not whether the QSI administration is specifically guilty. The question is why a school that pays a billion tenge in taxes and promises a world-class education can fail to respond to warnings for a long time, and only responds when a child ends up in intensive care.
The FBRC editorial team has contacted the relevant authorities with inquiries to clarify the grounds for such a prompt closure of the case.