Pavlodar officials annul illegal 140-hectare land award

September 18, 2026 at 11:26 PM2 min

This digest was compiled by AI from multiple sources — links to the originals are below.

Three officials in Uspensky district, Pavlodar region, illegally awarded nearly 140 hectares of farmland to a non-resident farmer. A court annulled the competition commission's decision after a rival entrepreneur challenged the result. The officials were found to have discredited state service by the Ethics Council.

Key Facts

The deputy akim of Uspensky district, the head of the land relations department, and the akim of a rural district illegally awarded almost 140 hectares to a farmer who did not reside in the locality.
The Land Code requires a land lease applicant to have lived in the relevant settlement for at least five years, a condition the winning farmer did not meet.
Prosecutor Alikhan Ibraev stated that commission chairman Beshenbaev, department head Aidarkhan, and rural akim Baimoldinov deliberately added ten points to the farm's score and voted for it.
A court annulled the competition commission's decision after a rival entrepreneur challenged the result.
The Ethics Council concluded that the officials' actions discredited state service and that they do not correspond to their positions.

Illegal Land Allocation

In Uspensky district, Pavlodar region, three officials — the deputy akim, the head of the land relations department, and a rural akim — decided in favor of one farmer. The entrepreneur, who does not live in the settlement, received almost 140 hectares of land. The Land Code requires a lease applicant to have resided in the relevant settlement for at least five years, but the winning farmer did not meet this requirement.

Prosecutor's Findings

Prosecutor of Uspensky district Alikhan Ibraev said that a video recording showed commission chairman Beshenbaev, department head Aidarkhan, and rural akim Baimoldinov decided to illegally add ten points to the farm's score. During the open vote, they deliberately voted for that farm.

Court and Ethics Review

A rival entrepreneur challenged the competition result in court. The court found violations by the officials and annulled the competition commission's decision. The Ethics Council then reviewed the officials' actions and concluded that their conduct discredited state service and that they do not correspond to their positions.