The successfully developing Freedom Holding Corp. has become the object of intense scrutiny due to two unrelated cases involving former employees of the company, which have been erroneously conflated in some media publications. The editorial board of FBRK decided to examine the essence of what happened and clearly demonstrate why it is important to separate the personal actions of individuals from the activities of the company.
As is known, Freedom Holding Corp. demonstrates sustained growth across all areas of its activity. In February 2025, Freedom Bank ranked second in deposit growth among all banks in Kazakhstan, increasing the volume of deposits by 26.3 billion tenge. Such successes make the company a notable player in the market, but increased attention sometimes leads to distortion of information about its activities.
TWO SEPARATE CASES
We previously wrote about the case of Vitaliy Svetovoy, a former employee of JSC "Freedom Finance". As a reminder, following a complaint from client G. Isayeva, the company conducted an internal investigation, which revealed that Svetovoy was collecting money from private individuals bypassing official procedures, promising high returns.
Now it is important to understand the second case, which has been linked unjustifiably to the first in a number of publications. This concerns Timur Bekov, a former investment consultant of the company, who, after his dismissal, continued cooperating with client Zh. Kaparova on a private basis. She voluntarily gave him the login and password for her brokerage account registered in Belize.
After the investments made by Bekov turned out to be loss-making, Kaparova began filing complaints – first against Bekov, then against the company. An inspection showed that all transactions occurred outside the "Freedom Finance" system, and at the time the trades were made, Bekov was no longer an employee of the company.
FINANCIAL LITERACY AS A PROTECTION
Both cases point to the problem of insufficient financial literacy among the population. Handing over money in person, transferring funds to employees' personal cards, sharing account logins and passwords – these are potentially dangerous actions.
Banks, brokers, and regulators regularly warn about such risks. Nevertheless, insufficient client awareness continues to create a breeding ground for abuse.
In both cases, the victims themselves acknowledge the fact of transferring money or account access directly to individuals, bypassing the company's official channels.
COMPANY ACTIONS AND DISTORTIONS IN PUBLICATIONS
Freedom Holding Corp. acts openly and within the law. The company independently identified the violations, conducted investigations, and submitted the information to law enforcement authorities.
Nevertheless, in a number of publications, information about the two separate cases has been mixed, and facts have been distorted. Svetovoy and Bekov are incorrectly referred to as "top managers", although both were mid-level employees. The headlines contain unfounded accusations against Timur Turlov, the founder of Freedom Holding, who has no connection to these cases.
It is reported that the company has sent pre-trial claims to a number of publications demanding the removal of false information and the publication of an official apology, emphasising that the right to freedom of speech is not the right to disseminate defamation.
CONCLUSION
The story of the two cases surrounding "Freedom Finance" underscores the importance of critical thinking when consuming financial information. Clients of financial organisations should strictly observe safety rules: not transfer money bypassing official channels, not share access to their accounts, and carefully study documentation before concluding transactions.
The media, for their part, bear responsibility for the accuracy of the information they publish, especially when it concerns the financial sector, where any distortion can undermine not only the reputation of a single company but also trust in the financial system as a whole.
Alongside this, the transparency of Freedom Holding's actions in both described cases demonstrates the maturity of the business and its readiness to operate within the legal framework, even under conditions of information pressure.