“There was political interference and this decision was made.”  Kamoliddin Rabbimov says about “The case of Ulugmuradov”

Yesterday, on July 28, we reported that the sentence imposed on the student Jahangir Ulugurmurodov, who was imprisoned for spreading nashid, was reduced, and the sentence of three years’ imprisonment was replaced by restriction of liberty.  This situation attracted the attention of public activists.  In particular, political scientist Kamoliddin Rabbimov did not evaluate the change of sentence against Ulugmurodov as a positive situation like many others.

Rabbimov noted that Ulugmurodov’s case was resolved not in the legal framework, but through political intervention.

“The case of Jahongir Ulugmurodov found a relative solution not in a systematic and legal framework, but in a mechanical and political way.  There was no change in the legal system.  Such cases, unknown to the public, continue to be solved in the previous form – in the form of repressive imprisonment.  The minds of the youth, their level of understanding of nasheeds and the real threat these nasheeds pose to society’s security have been and continue to be neglected.  There was no legal president.  Legislation and judicial practice have not changed in legal form.  Only there was political intervention in the matter and such a decision was made.  Moreover, this political intervention was too late.  “There was an intervention after certain tension and protest in society,” he wrote on his Telegram channel.

The political analyst emphasized that it is better if the legislative initiative and politically responsible institutions provide a systematic and legal solution to this issue.

“There will be many such cases in the future.  If there is no calm, cool-headed and legal solution, this will have a very negative effect on the situation,” added Rabbimov.

We remind you that yesterday, on July 28, the Supreme Court’s cassation trial panel on criminal cases changed the court decisions issued against Jahangir Ulugmurodov, stating that he was young, a student, had no prior convictions, and was positively described by his place of study.  Took into account such circumstances as his family situation, remorse for his actions, as well as his behavior after committing the crime, and applied Article 57 of this Code (imposing a lighter sentence) with Clause “g” of Article 244-1, Part 3 of the Criminal Code  imposed a sentence of restriction of freedom for a period of 3 years.