Alibek Kalbay arrived at his military unit on 18 April 2022. Four days later, he was dead. He had not yet taken the military oath. For his family, explaining why their son died so early in his service meant looking beyond the punishment of one fellow conscript.
22 April: a death in the first days of service
Kalbay collapsed during morning formation at the Gvardeysky garrison in Zhambyl Region. He could not be saved at the military hospital. KTK reported that the 18-year-old had not yet taken the military oath.
In early May, the Chief Military Prosecutor’s Office announced the detention of a fellow conscript from the same intake. It cited witness testimony and forensic findings of a violent death. The investigation concerned a breach of regulations governing relations between service members that resulted in death.
Nine years in prison; the appeal left the sentence unchanged
On 10 April 2023, the Almaty Garrison Military Court sentenced Aibolat Amanzholov to nine years in prison. He was the sole defendant. Azattyq also reported that the defence disputed the prosecution’s case.
On 1 June 2023, the conviction and sentence were upheld on appeal, according to Kursiv. This is the court outcome established by those reports. It determines the convicted soldier’s responsibility, but cannot by itself answer every question about events in the unit.
The family’s questions extended to commanders
Azattyq’s report on the verdict described relatives objecting to only one person standing trial and seeking accountability from sergeants and officers. That was the family’s position, not a court finding of guilt against others.
Before the verdict, relatives had also said they were not receiving explanations about the investigation into officials. NewTimes, citing KTK, published a response from the Chief Military Prosecutor’s Office: the unit commander and training company commander had been removed, and two other senior officers had received severe reprimands. These were disciplinary measures; the statement did not report criminal convictions of commanders.
Questions beyond the published verdict
The reviewed reports do not establish how the investigation into officials mentioned by the relatives ended. Nor do they set out its findings on how new recruits were supervised during those four days.
Understanding this case requires specific answers: which command duties were examined, what decisions followed, and whether the family received documents explaining them. The absence of answers in these reports does not prove that no investigation took place.
In the case of Marat Barkulov, the family disputed the classification of the killing and the severity of the sentence. Families facing the death of a service member now can consult our guide to initial enquiries and documents.
Documents not yet available
The latest court decision verified for this article is the appeal of 1 June 2023. QAZ.ARMY does not hold the full case file or documents establishing the outcome of a separate investigation into military officials.