Fight against corruption in Kazakhstan announced by President Kasym-Zhomart Tokayev that gained momentum after the January events has failed to pick up the pace and gone downward, according to Dzhamilya Maricheva, founder and editor of Protenge.kz media project.
She said to CABAR.asia that despite the common belief that corruption is a part of mentality of Kazakhstanis, this is rather a myth. If people are given tools and explained how to use them, they will be actively engaged in the fight against corruption.
CABAR.asia: Protenge.kz was created two years ago and you have been studying corruption in Kazakhstan all these two years. Can you describe all your emotions in one sentence?
Dzhamilia Maricheva: In fact, people do care. It must be the key lesson that my project has taught me. Because none media outlet, where I worked, no newspapers or internet resources gave such a speedy feedback.
I think I started the project more for myself, because I was interested in figures and social media. And it suddenly turned out that corruption issue is quite interesting to many people. And it changed my mind about topics that are overwhelming and people try to ignore them instead of solving. This is not true.
Our countries assign a passive role to people – they should unitedly choose the president with proper figures. They should be very responsible. In all other cases, they have a passive role. In other words, they should repress their consciousness at some hyper-responsibility moments and obey everything, and in other moments they say – live your lives, and we will live our lives.
And we have the illusion, which is actively promoted, that corruption is our mentality, that we are passive in such serious decision-making.
But people who read us have made me change my mind. This is not true. People do care, and they are not passive. They want to take an active part. I think people should just understand what they can do in block. How they should express their discontent with the event, how they can affect it directly.
In fact, it’s enough to give people instruments, explain how to use them, and how the instrument can affect their lives. And people are eager to take part in the process.
It’s a delusion that corruption is a part of our mentality. This is a myth. It’s a great myth that Kazakhstanis prefer ignoring corruption, not to fight against it.
Did you have fear to cover the corruption cases when it all began?
There are many social, challenging topics. And if we choose between these social topics and corruption, it’s easier for me to work with corruption cases in professional terms. Here, victims are money and they indirectly affect the final goal. They affect the quality of life of people, sometimes the lives of people, very strongly and seriously. However, this is not health and education – which are very difficult cases in our countries. Therefore, I didn’t have fear, as [corruption] is my subject. I have written about it for many years and I feel comfortable with it.
Everyone knows that there is corruption in our countries, it is always there and at all levels. But probably not all understand its scope. Working with corruption cases, have you changed your mind about how far-reaching corruption is in Kazakhstan?
This is the paradox, but I think that Kazakhstanis know well the scope of corruption. Moreover, they take major issues easier than minor problems. This is the paradox, seriously.
Say, [Kazakhstan-based internet magazine] “Vlast” together with [Kyrgyzstan-based internet outlet] Kloop and OCCRP (Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project – editor’s note) have issued the research of Nursultan Nazarbayev’s funds. And this is seemingly the case of tremendous amounts, tremendous assets. And many people can verify this data because most of them are publicly available. But, even after the January events, it failed to cause some great wave of discussion in social media and it failed to become a story reposted by every other user. This is weird.
I think the story is like: “What did you expect? You better believe it.” Or, when suitcases with cash were found in the house of the then chair of KNB, Karim Massimov, and a recreation room in his house was shown. This piece of news took ninety minutes. At the same time, some minor story about a minor case and little money can provoke the upsurge of indignation followed by tens of thousands of reposts.
I have my personal explanation to this story.
People know very well the scope of corruption at the top level, but they overreact to the corruption that has lower degree and level. In my opinion, they think they can influence it on their level, but cannot influence corruption at the top level. Therefore, they somewhat reject major cases. I think that people know intuitively the scope of corruption at the top level.
Why do you think the Protenge.kz has succeeded? But, in the beginning, as far as I know, few people believed in it.
I think there are two factors. The first one is that the society was interested in it. They did not take to the streets with posters and did not say, “We want Protenge on Instagram.” But, I think, the society was interested in this topic, and it was somehow tired of what was happening in the country, and that this topic was not reported in the media systematically.
The second moment is our tone, how we speak about corruption. We do not say: “It’s all over, we’re going to die, we were robbed!” We say, “We were robbed. Now we are going to tell you about it!” We are going to tell you about it. And we need to do something to these people. Let’s find out what we should do in this situation to prevent it from recurring, or to take preventive measures not to spend the money, or, we’ll teach you to see the corruption schemes.” We offer some constructive schemes. So, the pessimistic story turns into “See, the problem is like that, let’s resolve it somehow.”
I think this approach and explanation that we do solve something and there are available instruments, it has changed the people’s view a little.
Do you think it has an educational element in it to make people who follow you and take an active part not to pay bribes?
It was one of the reasons why I want to study corruption and why I have written about it for so many years. We do not take corruption as something shameful. It is like the gold fever and Klondike: he became the akim and now look he’s got an SUV, he or she has sent their daughter to study abroad, his wife wears diamonds. He’s got all the goodies. But the fact that we paid for that is ignored.
Even if a person was caught [for bribery], even if he got a probation, or retired [from office], he still is handshakeable. And then he is given offices in the public sector. In other words, there is no option of abolishment of corrupt officials in the country.
But I believe in the TikTok generation. This generation checks whether some company tests its products on animals or does not. And their choice will depend on this check. It is important to understand for the new generation now (and there are studies that confirm it) from whom and what you are buying, with whom you are interacting, and with whom you have social bonds.
I would like to have this situation in our environment, in terms of corruption. And here social media is fine in terms of correct dissemination of information about corruption and it is not an honour to be a son or a daughter of a corrupt official, but it is rather shameful. However, I don’t see that they are ashamed of it on their social media accounts.
But I think we need to lay the first bricks into the foundation and set the trend. This option is very important for us: to make it a shame to be a corrupt official, to make everyone laugh at you, to make everyone say that you are a bad person, that you have damaged your country, you know? For that matter, social media is a perfect tool to shape this culture. I don’t think it is well shaped now, but we do want to contribute to this culture.
Have you ever paid bribes?
No, but I’ve had a good case. I’ve had a case when I was at a loss. First, at the university you should lay the table for examiners during the exam. I remember that in 2005 we paid 500 tenges each (3.84 dollars at the average rate of 2005) for the exam. It was a big amount for me as a student. We bought strawberry and black cherry to our examiners. That was something unaffordable to me as a student in the north of the country in May. And I, despite all of my A’s, failed the exam and scored B.
I cannot be absolutely positive, but those students who did not know the subject received A. And it was a kind of facing the reality in the last year of study, though I had worked for two years by that time. And I gave a promise to myself: “No one will force me to buy strawberry or black cherry to anyone!”
And the second case was when I was offered to pay a bribe. I’ve never paid bribes. I think if you have violated anything, you should be held liable. I punish myself for such situations. If you are in a bad situation, take a lawyer, if you are fined, go and pay the fine. Moreover, the state gives an opportunity to pay 50 per cent only. And thus you will learn the lesson.
There was a case when I was offered to pay the bribe and I got the point only 30 minutes later, when the man got tired of asking. It was in April or March 2020 during the lockdown, when rules changed very fast. We went to see our friends and came out about 10:15 pm, took a taxi and headed home. And it turned to be the curfew. So, two highway police officers shouted at us saying we were shameless, reckless, and so on. They were doing this for ten minutes, and I felt myself reckless for not having read the Telegram, etc.
They took us [to the police station] and started to say how wrong we are and that they would fine us and detain us. I said, “Okay. We violated the rules and we will be held liable for the violation.” They were telling us what would happen to us for thirty minutes, and then they got tired because my friend and I agreed with them in everything they said.
She figured the situation out very fast. And I thought they worried about us, and wanted to teach us, but it was a whole manipulation. And I did not know that. They told us about the fine and I said, “Ok, I will pay the fine, I will.” And then I thought it would be too expensive for me, but I would be smarter next time. Moreover, I worked with money then, and I knew that the fine would go to the budget, and then would be spent to repair roads, to pay salaries to teachers. I take such things easily.
And finally he said to us straight, “Do you have 10 thousand or no?” I was so surprised and I felt abashed. I was thinking how bad I am for 30 minutes and why I did not read the rules; that rules must not be broken; if they knew I were a journalist, I would be a shame. And then they wanted me to pay them a bribe of 10 thousand tenges.
These guys are great psychologists. I felt like I must pay to them and I said, “I can’t do this. Because of Kazakhstan-2030 (the programme for development of Kazakhstan until 2030 – editor’s note), “Rukhani zhangyru” (the programme for national revival of Kazakhstan – editor’s note)”. They laughed at me and told us to leave.
Therefore I don’t pay bribes, I am principal in this point – bribes must not be paid. There are many ways to avoid them.
Recently I have talked to a driver in Shymkent and he said, “Previously, when you were fined in Kazakhstan, it took you three days to get the driving license back. It was easier to pay the bribe to a traffic police officer. And now you just pay 50 per cent of the fine to Kaspi account and you are free.” Therefore, it is easier to pay fines than feed [traffic police officers]. It was their choice of job and they agreed to a certain salary being in sound mind. So we don’t have to pay other than for the violation.
You have touched upon the strategy of development of Kazakhstan. Kasym-Zhomart Tokayev declared war against corruption as one of the key problems tackled by the state. How effective is it and does the strategy containing fight against corruption work?
He declared it in winter and it seemed to be effective in spring. But I didn’t see it in summer and this autumn. I have a feeling that it declined and the theme of corruption has been withdrawn from the agenda. I didn’t see it gaining a good pace. I call this fight against corruption after the January events as giving a bad ending to a good start. It was a good start, and then it all collapsed.
There are two criteria for me. I can say that we have positive changes once I see changes in two directions: the first one is the presidential executive office, and the second one is the foreign ministry. These are two significant markers for me. I’ll explain them.
The presidential executive office does not have transparent budget, does not account for the budget, does not save money, does not provide information about their expenditures. One of the recent cases happened after the January events, and the presidential executive office could fabulously demonstrate how seriously they take budget money.
In 2019, at the initiative of the first president Nazarbayev, they began to build a diplomatic campus for 28 billion tenges (nearly 59.67 million dollars). We filed a request: “For whom?” They said, “For diplomats only, they will be free of charge.” I thought it was too generous to provide the diplomatic campus to diplomats free of charge. I thought it was too much.
When we published it, our readers wrote, “Don’t worry, the residents here are not diplomats, but our Kazakhs.” And they sent us a video when a famous blogger came to that diplomatic campus and said, “Who lives here? Very rich Asians!”
We wrote to the presidential executive office, “Guys, you said it was meant for diplomats, but very rich Asians, namely Kazakhs, live there.” And they did not answer the question, but said, “You have no right to ask such questions, you have no legal mandate to ask these questions.” And another point is that there is a kindergarten located there and its name is ‘Mazhorik’ (Rich kid).
Very speaking name.
Yes, this is the situation. Please, respond to it properly. But we don’t get proper reaction.
The second point is very important. Our second president is diplomat, isn’t he? And I think he treats foreign affairs service with much warmth and love, right? So, this service must be even more accountable for their deeds. You know, favourite agencies must be held liable even more.
And after the January events we found out by means of the Finland court that the embassy of Kazakhstan took a villa on lease in Finland for 12 thousand euros for a long time. We filed a request to the ministry of foreign affairs to find out if it was a normal price and asked for information about lease expenses in other countries of the European Union. And we failed to obtain information regarding our request.
Why do we need this openness? Not because I took offence at their failure to reply. I’ve been doing this for 20 years, many people replied to me, and many people didn’t. But the fact how people react to journalistic requests indicates how susceptible they are to the topic. And transparency is the key enemy to corruption. That’s why we care about transparency and try to reach everyone and make public as much budget expenditure data as possible. And it will give them a hard time.
And these two markers have not changed, you know? The situation was the same last year, until January, and this year it is the same. Arrests of family members [of Nursultan Nazarbayev], which took place, do not seem like the systemic fight against corruption. They seem like a precision fight against corruption, which took place before. Moreover, I believe these people are linked to the January events because we have a minimum information about it.
So, I don’t see any systemic fight against corruption so far.
The most frequent question they ask us: does anyone threaten you? No one threatens, we work quietly. Maybe, because our stories are evidence-based. I can always put myself in other’s place, and I understand that the war is taking place, our neighbour is not a pleasant one, mildly speaking, and our border with it is the longest in the world; the sanctions that indirectly affect us as we have strong economic dependency, we have social problems inside the country. I know they have a range of top priority tasks that need to be solved immediately.
As to the transparency, openness of data, it costs zero tenge and draws minimum of attention. The task is to have them say ‘yes, guys, the previous administration placed very rich Asians there, and now we have ejected them and will set it right in the diplomatic campus’. Or the case when a villa was taken on rent for 12 thousand Euros, which is a crazy amount. If there wasn’t a conflict between the guys from the embassy, who took it on rent, and the owner, who reached the Finnish court, we would never know about it. How many cases are there, which we do not know?
I mean we don’t see their will to say that we are open, we want you to see how we work. And when the presidential executive office, the ministry of foreign affairs, which are the favourite agencies of our president, I believe, say such words, I’ll say that changes are obvious. So far, the situation is the same, both in 2018, and in 2022.
Do you mean that the fight against corruption among oligarchs, returns of shares, money are for show?
What oligarchs are you talking about? There is only one very rich nephew, and another very rich in-law, as far as I know, of the first president’s family. So, there are two people plus the National Security Committee.
Of course, they are very rich people, with huge assets, including national companies. But this is not a systemic fight, it is rather a precision fight. What do they have in common? They are all close to the first president’s family. So far, this is not a systemic fight against corruption.
Do you think it is possible to cooperate with the authorities on corruption struggle, or it is the exclusive right of the media, NGOs, activists and so on?
That’s a really good question. We have a public association of Didar Smagulov. He worked in the anticor (Anti-corruption Agency – editor’s note) and now he established his own public association. So, they interact with the anticor and other law enforcement bodies. He reveals cases of inefficient spending of budgetary funds and speak about them, writes about them, works with state bodies to either punish the perpetrators or to prevent inefficient spending of budgetary money. And I am happy that we have such guys.
People call me, write in WhatsApp. I try to minimise these calls and conversations. And people understand that it is useless. I honestly tell them what I want to get: any information to make them more open, or, as was in Aktau, to terminate the contract with the company, which underperforms, to put it mildly. In other words, we can achieve the result when we communicate officially.
I have had a few attempts when they asked me to delete materials from our platforms. They asked, not threatened. And you feel yourself a bad person. But, in fact, those people who ask to delete the material should think about who’s doing wrong. Therefore, I don’t like personal contacts because people usually exploit the situation.
Do you mean that the authorities are unwilling to make some steps towards fighting the corruption?
Actually, it depends. That’s why I focused on the presidential executive office and the foreign ministry. They apply old methods, which were relevant 10 years ago. And guys from the regions respond easier. There are some national companies that respond adequately to public requests. But every case is different.
In general, is there an end to the fight against corruption?
There is no end. Even in such high income countries as Denmark or other Scandinavian countries, there is the corruption. Moreover, it mutates like a virus, changes, adapts to new realities. There are studies that confirm it. The same is true about our countries, unfortunately. We have no proper studies, which we could use. And I would like to get more people involved in this process.
Does it mean that we can only minimise, not eradicate it?
Yes, we can restructure our institutions. We can create barriers, which will prevent it from thriving, and minimise its impact on the quality of our living.