The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) expresses serious concern at the civil proceedings initiated by the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan seeking the revocation of the licence of lawyer Adam Murat. The organization is concerned that the revocation proceedings seek to impose the most severe professional sanction on a practising lawyer for his legitimate conduct, which, in fact, was an integral part of his representation of a client facing criminal proceedings. Licence revocation permanently deprives lawyers of their authorization to practise their profession and constitutes an exceptional measure. The basis and context of these proceedings raise serious concerns under international human rights law and standards relating to the independence of the legal profession.
“International human rights law and standards require that lawyers be able to exercise their profession independently and to speak freely on matters concerning the administration of justice, without fear of retaliation. Proceedings that seek to remove a lawyer from practice on the basis of public statements made in the course of defence work risk restricting freedom of expression and undermining the ability of lawyers to carry out their professional functions in accordance with international standards,” Temur Shakirov, Director of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme, said.
On 29 December 2025, the Ministry of Justice filed a civil claim before the Bostandyk District Court of Almaty seeking revocation of Murat’s licence to practise law based on a submission of the Ministry of Internal Affairs dated 23 December 2025 alleging that Murat committed “gross or repeated violations” of legislation and professional ethics. The Ministry of Justice’s claim against Murat arose from criminal proceedings against journalist Gulnara Bazhkenova, editor-in-chief of Orda.kz, who is reportedly under investigation under Article 274 of the Criminal Code in connection with the dissemination of knowingly false information.
The claim against Murat refers to searches conducted on 1 December 2025 at the Orda.kz office and at Bazhkenova’s home, and to public statements Murat made in connection with those events. The claim describes alleged violations of legislation and professional ethics as consisting primarily of Murat’s public statements and publications on social media platforms, made in connection with his representation of Bazhkenova in the context of her facing criminal proceedings, in which he criticised investigative measures and raised concerns regarding procedural safeguards and judicial oversight. The complaint characterises Murat’s statements as “inaccurate information” and asserts that they “discredit the pre-trial investigation and the courts.” The claim further refers to a court decision of 10 December 2025 rejecting a complaint that Murat lodged in his capacity as Bazhkenova’s defence counsel challenging the lawfulness of certain investigative actions; the court dismissed the complaint, finding that the investigative actions challenged by the defence had been lawful.
In January 2026, the Commission for the Protection of Professional Rights of Lawyers of the Republican Bar Association of Kazakhstan concluded, following its review of the case materials, that the claim does not identify concrete instances of “gross” or “repeated” violations of the Law on Advocacy or the Code of Professional Ethics, and that it is based primarily on Murat’s public criticism of investigative actions undertaken in the course of legitimate work as a criminal defence lawyer.
In light of this, the ICJ notes that the complaint’s factual basis pertains to public statements Murat made in the context and in his capacity as defence counsel representing Bazhkenova, a journalist who is facing a criminal investigation in a case involving the application of criminal law to journalistic activity.
The ICJ recalls that, under international human rights law and standards, lawyers must be able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment, or improper interference. Lawyers must not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes, nor subjected to sanctions or other measures as a result of legitimate actions taken in accordance with recognised professional duties and ethics.
The ICJ further recalls that lawyers, like all persons, enjoy the right to freedom of expression. This right has particular importance where lawyers speak on matters of public interest concerning the administration of justice, including alleged procedural shortcomings affecting their clients. While lawyers are required to act in accordance with professional standards, any restriction on their expression must be clearly prescribed by law and must meet strict requirements of necessity and proportionality.
The ICJ is also concerned by the broader implications of the licence revocation proceedings against Murat for the independence of the legal profession. The complaint against him has been initiated by executive authorities and is expressly based on a submission from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, which is directly involved in the very criminal proceedings criticised by Murat. With respect to this, the ICJ is concerned that investigative authorities may trigger licence revocation proceedings against criminal defence lawyers who challenge their conduct solely in their capacity as criminal defence counsel representing individuals who are under investigation. This, in turn, risks undermining the equality of arms principle and the independence of the legal profession. International human rights law and standards require that questions of professional responsibility and discipline be addressed through mechanisms that are independent and free from undue influence, including by the executive or prosecutorial authorities.
In this regard, the ICJ notes that the Commission for the Protection of Professional Rights of Lawyers and the Scientific and Consultative Council of the Republican Bar Association of Kazakhstan have expressed concern regarding the use by law-enforcement bodies of criminal-procedure measures under Article 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code. These Bar Association bodies have stressed that such practice risks transferring criminal-procedure mechanisms into the sphere of professional discipline and bar membership, thereby enabling interference by investigative authorities with the work of defence lawyers and undermining the independence and self-regulation of the legal profession.
The ICJ urges the authorities of Kazakhstan to ensure that any proceedings affecting the professional status of lawyers fully comply with international human rights law and standards. In particular, the authorities must ensure that lawyers are not subjected to punitive measures for the legitimate discharge of their professional duties, that any restriction on their right to freedom of expression meets the strict requirements of legality, necessity, and proportionality, and that the independence of the legal profession be respected in law and in practice.
Background
Lawyer Adam Murat Adamuly practises within the Almaty City Bar Association and holds the licence issued on 22 January 2019.
In April 2025, the Scientific and Consultative Council of the Republican Bar Association adopted a formal legal position, “On the admissibility of applying Article 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code to lawyers and the need for constitutional clarification of the provision”, in which it found the expansive and discretionary use of Article 200 in relation to defence lawyers to be incompatible with the principles of adversarial proceedings, equality of arms, and the institutional independence of the legal profession.
Article 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code empowers investigative bodies, in the context of criminal proceedings, to issue procedural submissions requiring measures to address circumstances that, in their view, facilitated the commission of a criminal offence or other violations of law.
In Murat’s case, the licence revocation proceedings are based on a submission issued by the Ministry of Internal Affairs under Article 200 following his public criticism of investigative actions undertaken in the criminal proceedings against his client. Bar Association bodies have emphasised that Article 200 does not regulate the legal profession, does not identify lawyers as subjects of such measures, and does not provide procedural safeguards or avenues of appeal for lawyers affected by its use. They have therefore warned that reliance on Article 200 in relation to defence lawyers risks enabling indirect pressure on the defence by investigative authorities acting as procedural opponents.
Applicable international law and standards
Under the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (1990), governments must ensure that lawyers are able to perform all of their professional functions “without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference” and that they “shall not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognised professional duties, standards and ethics” (Principle 16). The Basic Principles further affirm that lawyers have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law and the administration of justice, without suffering professional restrictions for lawful action (Principle 23).
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Kazakhstan is a party, guarantees the right of anyone charged with a criminal offence to defend themselves through legal assistance of their own choosing (Article 14(3)(d)) and protects freedom of expression, subject only to restrictions that are provided by law and are necessary for legitimate aims (Article 19).e necessary for legitimate aims (Article 19).
