Officer’s shifting statements raise doubts over fairness of trial in abuse case by Fergana police chief

In Fergana region, the trial of the head of the Furqat district police department and his deputy continues under restricted media access. During the 24 October hearing, operational officer Yusufbek Yoqubov’s courtroom testimony differed sharply from the statement he had given during the investigation. The court’s decision to close the hearing to the press under the pretext of “state secrecy” raises doubts about the transparency and fairness of the trial.

On 24 October, a hearing was held in the case of Furqat district police officials accused of misconduct involving a woman who was allegedly forced to undress during an “operation”. During this session, operational officer Yusufbek Yoqubov – one of the participants in the incident – gave his testimony, which was recorded by a Kun.uz correspondent.

Yoqubov’s statements in court significantly contradicted the testimony he had provided during the investigation. Below is a summary of what he said at the 24 October hearing:

“On 17 April 2025, we received information that the head of the district tax inspection had taken a schoolgirl into his office. I did not record this report officially. We quickly went to the scene. We entered through the gate, not by jumping over the wall. As soon as we entered, we went up to the second floor. There we saw the head of the tax inspection and the school principal completely naked. The informant told us that a young girl in school uniform had entered the official’s house, but it turned out to be the school principal, not a student. Then deputy chief Jasur Rasulov told us that everything was fine and we could go downstairs.”

However, Yoqubov’s investigative testimony paints a very different picture. Below is an excerpt from the statement he gave during the investigation:

“On 17 April 2025, I did not provide any information to Jasur Rasulov or any other person that would justify conducting an urgent operational-search measure at the official residence of district tax chief Qurbonali Abdurahmonov. I had no knowledge of anyone, including a minor female, entering his residence.”

He continued:

“Around 3:30 p.m., while my colleague Tohir Bashirov and I were preparing to conduct a planned operation in Tomosha village against illegal currency exchange, Bashirov received a call from senior officer Ghayrat Otaqulov. After the call, Bashirov said that Otaqulov told him to come quickly to the district center because another operation was about to take place. We arrived in my service car – a white Nexia-2 (license plate 40 M 831 SA). Otaqulov then instructed us to meet him in front of the district prosecutor’s office, from where he directed us to the official residence assigned to the district police chief.”

Yoqubov described how several officers gathered near the residence, including deputy chief Rasulov, senior officers Otaqulov, S. Nazarov, and preventive inspectors Mamajonov and Hamidjonov.

“When we asked Otaqulov what was going on, he said there might be some illegal activity at the residence of the district tax chief, and that we needed to go in and verify the situation. When Bashirov asked whether we had any grounds for entering, Otaqulov said he didn’t know, that he too had just been called, and that we needed to go in quickly to find out what was happening – perhaps gambling or something else.”

According to Yoqubov’s investigative testimony, the officers entered the house through the main door, not by force. They first checked the first floor, then went upstairs after hearing voices.

“When we opened the door, tax chief Qurbonali Abdurahmonov was standing naked, and on the sofa was a naked woman – later identified as School No. 29 principal Gulirano Qosimova. Seeing us, she quickly covered herself with a red sheet and shouted, ‘Who are you?’ At that moment, Rasulov and Otaqulov also entered and told them to calm down and get dressed. I recorded the scene on my Samsung A33 phone but later deleted the video after sending it via Telegram to Rasulov the same day. I have since sold that phone.”

Key differences between his two statements are striking. In his investigative testimony, Yoqubov clearly stated that:

·        he had received no information about a minor girl entering the tax chief’s residence;

·        he was called to the scene by colleagues, not through any formal report;

·        and that the decision to enter the residence was made without any legal basis or warrant.

Moreover, Yoqubov’s statement in court – that “the informant said a young girl in school uniform had entered the house” – contradicts the official police document filed under the “102” emergency report. That report notes that “an anonymous caller reported that an employee of the district tax office brought a woman to one of the cottages on Mustaqillik Street for sexual intercourse.”

In other words, the original report referred to “a woman,” not “a schoolgirl.” Notably, the victim, Gulirano Qosimova, has said that this part of the story was fabricated.

When comparing the investigative and courtroom testimonies, it becomes clear that the police officers are attempting to obscure the true circumstances, discredit the tax office chief and Qosimova, and mislead the court.

The court’s decision to bar most media outlets from the “open” hearing – allowing only Kun.uz to attend – as well as the judge’s demand that the victim, Qosimova, sign a nondisclosure statement about her testimony, casts further doubt on the transparency and fairness of the proceedings.

It should be recalled that after the case became public, the Senate Committee on Defense and Security Issues stated that it would not tolerate any form of law violation and had taken the case under its supervision. Malika Qodirkhonova, a senator working on women’s issues, also stressed the importance of transparency and impartiality in the investigation and trial, as well as the need to fully restore the victim’s rights.

It would be appropriate for the Supreme Court to examine the objectivity of Kuva District Court Chair Avazbek Rahimov’s decision to restrict media participation (specifically that of the Kun.uz reporter) in the proceedings.

After all, as the saying goes, “A crow doesn't pick out another crow’s eyes.”