Court proceedings in construction company’s lawsuit against journalist Vadim Boreiko resume in Almaty

The Bostandyk District Court of Almaty has resumed consideration of a lawsuit filed by construction company Etude-Ybyrai LLP against journalist Vadim Boreiko over the protection of its business reputation and recovery of damages.

The journalist’s defence disagreed with the findings of the linguistic and economic expert examinations conducted as part of the case.

As previously reported, the company accuses Boreiko of disseminating false information which, it claims, damaged its business reputation and caused financial losses. The plaintiff initially claimed damages of 71 million tenge. Following the economic examination, the company’s actual expenses were assessed at 43 million tenge. However, as the journalist’s lawyers note, the court has yet to determine whether there is a causal link between these expenses and Boreiko’s publications.

The defence also questioned the findings of the linguistic examination. According to the lawyers, the expert analysed wording that was not the subject of the questions submitted for examination and did not review video recordings containing statements by representatives of government bodies and local residents. The defence asked the court to admit these materials into evidence.

Vadim Boreiko had reported on the controversy surrounding the construction of the Premier residential complex in Almaty, which had prompted complaints from local residents. Seven reports about the development were published on his Giperborey YouTube channel.

The court proceedings were suspended while the expert examinations were being carried out and resumed nearly five months later.

In April, after the lawsuit was filed, restrictions were imposed on Boreiko’s bank accounts and deposits, including his pension account. The journalist’s pension card was unblocked three days later.

The International Foundation for Protection of Freedom of Speech “Adil Soz” views lawsuits against journalists arising from their professional activities and reporting on matters of public interest as a potential tool of pressure on independent media. Such proceedings should not become a means of restricting investigative journalism or the public’s right to receive information.