Authorization
Войти как пользователь
Вы можете войти на сайт, если вы зарегистрированы на одном из этих сервисов:
Sign in with:
12:58

The Matayev's verdict - will we blow out one more candle?

05.10.2016 Almaty. October 5. KazTAG - All of us have been shocked with the verdict to the father and the son of Matayev family - Seitkazy Beisengaziyevich and Aset.
Our friends and colleagues have been accused of several crimes and had no chance for full-fledged legal investigation.
In the mid of events, when the investigation refused to accept the restored account books of the National press-club and KazTAG, any person aware of our realities realized, the situation turned to be exclusively criminative and only direct involvement of big figures could save the situation.
When the judge promoted the answers to the prosecuting witnesses, when the evidences of the prosecution materialized from the bag of the investigator, and when the witness without education admitted having blood relationship with the member of investigation group, even the most dedicated optimists realized how the process would end. With the guilty verdict.
There was only one hope that the term would be suspended, and confiscation would not be so significant.
However, S. Matayev, aged 61 ( he will turn 62 on October 31) and his son, who followed his father's steps in journalism, have been sentenced 6 years imprisonment for the father and 5 years for the son.
We have been working in mass media for dozens of years. We have been working in KazTAG since the moment of its opening in September 2008. It is hard to surprise us with anything, many of us went through non less desperate moments: we suffocated from circumstances and had no air.
However, the guilty verdict delivered to our friend is quite uneasy. The question is not only in the clearing of the media field: S. Matayev has always warned us about that when he was defending his colleagues all these years. The question is in tendencies of the public movement.
Let's think of the role of Seitkazy Beisengaziyevich in the society. We are far from the idea to position our friend as the last chance of the state. Although the situation itself directly indicates this: S. Matayev has always been not just an individual, but a bridge between different worlds. Between different parts into which our society tends to be splitting these days.  He has always been a bridge, a neutral territory, where irreconcilable rivals met, where they found common language under active mediation of S. Matayev.
There is more violence nowadays in Kazakhstan and everything is resolved through the violence. S. Matayev has always been against the violence. Even in his speech before the verdict he said he was not going to take revenge on anybody.
We all realize that such significant violations in the time of investigation and the trial point out someone's powerful will and deeply personal motives.  Onece again the society has seen that the power and ties are important, but not the law and legal procedures.
Now our society lacks not only of justice, but the common sense. Which public threat did the Matayev pose for which they were isolated from the society?
It will be naively saying that " the power feared Matayev".
Vise versa, the state bodies are losing the initiative, they are losing communication with the society and they do not understand the natural requests of Kazakhstani people. With his work, with his mission S. Matayev helped the society understand the power, and he helped the power to realize the gaps in the activity.
With his hands, and often risking with his reputation, S. Matayev reconciled those who could not reach an agreement.
Now those who dictated their will to Kazakhstani justice are destructing one more bridge between the society and the government. Do they hope to take the place of S. Matayev and become a moral authority like S. Matayev?
Let's think of what will happen when the society separates into those who are for and against the Matayev. When we let destruct all the bridges between people and the Government. How will the contradictions be resolved, if the only natural tool of this communication will be the frightening cruel judicial verdicts? Where, if not on the public field, through an open dialogue, should the serious problems be resolved in the state? Not in the cruel fights between the protesters and police, but face to face at the meeting table, listening to the arguments and taking weighted decisions.
S.Matayev with his uneasy character, with his powerful enemies and numerous friends, gives light to the surrounding. This wabbling light slightly shows us where we are going.
The light of Matayev, the light of journalism, the light of what we do every day, - is a light of a candle. Sometimes it is incorrect and swings, but it always gives the real proportions, it even throws away the shades, which we fear ourselves.
But we are the flame of the candle, which is burning down, trying to give light to the society on their way. Sometimes we stumble and the light goes off, but other people catch the light from our hands. We are holding this candle, burning our hands, and with flaming eyes we look into the deep darkness.
Will this verdict blow out another bright candle? There are less and less journalists who want to help the society, but not just to earn money.
Will the verdict blow out the candle of journalist Matayev, and we will get one step closer to the deep darkness?
And even with its verdict S. Matayev shows us the further direction, where our society is going to, and we fear this direction.

Partners