First open court hearing on the case of Otabek Sattoriy held in appellate instance

Reportedly, the chairman of the court, judge of the Samarkand regional court I. Khamidov announced the court composition, explained to the participants in the court their rights and obligations. After that, the question was asked whether the parties have any complaints or requests regarding the disqualification of the composition of the judicial collegium. Defendant O. Sattoriy lodged a protest against the prosecutor and the composition of the judicial board. After examining the views of the parties, his protest was dismissed.

Also, the defendant O. Sattoriy and his lawyer Sh. Kholmurodov submitted a petition to the court to allow the participation of A. Sattoriy, the defendant’s father, as a defender. This petition was resolved in accordance with Article 423 of the Criminal Procedural Code (the procedure for issuing a ruling at a court hearing), and A. Sattoriy was involved in the case as a defener. He was explained the rights and obligations under Article 53 of the Criminal Procedural Code (rights and obligations of a defender).

It is noted that in the preparatory part of the judicial discussion, a petition to postpone the judicial discussion in connection with the deterioration of the health of the defender of the victims T. Shopulatov and U. Turdiyev S. Mamatkulova was considered. Also, the defendant’s lawyer Sh. Kholmurodov wanted to get familiarized with the documents of the criminal case in connection with the fact that he recently started work and requested some more time to be prepared for the trial. The petitions were taken into account, and the next court hearing was postponed to June 30, 2021, 10:00.

In view of the consideration of the case in an open court hearing, no one obstructed the access of media representatives, journalists and bloggers or other persons to the court session.

It should be recalled that according to the verdict of the Muzrabat district court on criminal proceedings of May 10, 2021, O. Sattoriy was found guilty of committing the crimes provided for in paragraphs “a”, “d” of Article 139-3 (libel) and paragraph “a” of Article 165-3 (extortion) of the Criminal Code. With the application of Article 57 of the Criminal Code (the appointment of a lighter sentence), he was sentenced to 6 years and 6 months in prison.