When the trial of the former head of Kyrgyzstan’s State Committee for National Security, Kamchybek Tashiev, ended in July the judge delivered what appeared to be a damning verdict followed by an absurdist reprieve. 

Tashiev – alongside former Speaker of the Zhogorku Kenesh Nurlanbek Turgunbek uulu, former Member of Parliament Kurmankul Zulushev, and five others – was found guilty of a coup attempt under Article 326 (“Violent seizure or retention of power, as well as an attempt to violently change the constitutional order”) of the Kyrgyz criminal code and acquitted of abuse of office charges.

Tashiev and the rest were sentenced to four years in prison – the prosecutors had sought nine. The judge immediately replaced the prison terms with three years of supervised probation. 

Tashiev, technically convicted of a coup attempt, served not a single day in detention.

Both Tashiev’s lawyers and the prosecutors filed appeals, the former seeking complete acquittal and the latter harsher sentencing.

In early September, the Bishkek City Court heard the appeal. Like most of the first trial, the proceedings were held behind closed doors, so what happened next doesn’t have a clear explanation. The court apparently reclassified the charges from a coup attempt under Article 326 to “obstruction of the exercise of electoral rights,” Article 195. 

According to various lawyers representing the defendants, all eight were sentenced to four year prison terms, converted immediately to two years of probation.

Zhoomart Ashirbaev, the lawyer for Zulushev, told RFE/RL’s Kyrgyz Service, Azattyk, that they intended to file a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court. 

“The court’s reclassification of the charge from a serious crime to Article 195 demonstrates that the investigation brought an unfounded and unproven charge. I spoke with Kurmankul Zulushev immediately after the verdict was announced. We will file a cassation appeal to the Supreme Court.”

Latypbek Nuralimov, a lawyer representing Turgunbek uulu, told TASS, “They sentenced him to four years in prison, but they applied probation [for two years] because the crime is less serious.”

Chinara Dzhakupbekova, a lawyer representing Kursan Asanov, a former deputy minister of internal affairs charged in the case, expressed confusion over how Article 195 could even apply to the case. According to 24.kg, she said, “Article 195 can essentially only function when elections are underway. And there weren’t any elections, so this article is irrelevant.”

Kyrgyzstan isn’t due for a presidential election until January 2027.

The original trial, which started in May behind closed doors, before being briefly opened in mid-June and then closed again, centered on what’s become known as the “Letter of 75.” 

The letter – an appeal signed by 75 public figures – circulated in early February and precipitated Tashiev’s sudden ejection from the ruling tandem. The letter urged Kyrgyz President Sadyr Japarov to call for an early presidential election and framed Tashiev favorably, highlighting that many of the Japarov administration’s greatest successes were initiatives spearheaded by the security chief. 

During the brief period in which the trial was open, witnesses were questioned about the reception of the letter by members of parliament. The trial was closed again at the request of the defendants after Tashiev engaged in a verbal clash with a witness that included mention of the witness’s father’s 2005 murder. 

Precisely how the letter constituted, or indicated, a coup attempt is not an argument the prosecutors have made clearly in public. And now the charge has been changed entirely, from coup plot to electoral obstruction – it’s not clear why or how or who made that change. The ultimate sentences shrunk from three years probation to two.

Tashiev’s lawyer, Ikramidin Aitkulov, was rather direct with his comments to the media after the result of the appeal was announced: “Well, this is a stupid decision, frankly. Completely illegal and unfounded. Of course, we will appeal.”