Former Namangan Mayor Sentenced to 11 Years; Family and Lawyers Allege Fabricated Case and State Security Role

A court in Fergana region has sentenced former Namangan city mayor Anvar Otaхojaev to 11 years in prison after finding him guilty on multiple criminal counts, a ruling that has prompted strong denials from his defence team and accusations from his family of a politically motivated and fabricated case. The verdict was handed down on August 7 by the Farg‘ona regional criminal court that tried the matter, according to reporting by Ozodlik (Radio Ozodlik).

The judgment lists numerous provisions of the Uzbek Criminal Code as the basis for the conviction. The court found the defendant guilty under the following provisions: "Ўзбекистон Республикаси Жиноят кодекси 167-моддаси учинчи қисми «а» банди, 168-моддаси учинчи қисми «в» банди, 205-моддаси иккинчи қисми «а» банди, 206-моддаси иккинчи қисми «а» банди, 207-моддаси биринчи қисми, 209-моддаси иккинчи қисми «а» банди ва 210-моддаси учинчи қисми «а» бандида назарда тутилган жиноятларни содир этганликда айбли деб топилган."

The State Security Service (known in Uzbek as ДХХ) had earlier reported the arrest in a Telegram post on September 2, 2025, describing a staged sting operation alleging a $60,000 bribery demand connected to construction permissions. The post said: “Наманган шаҳар ҳокими ва пойабзал ишлаб чиқарувчи масъулияти чекланган жамият раҳбари ўзаро тил бириктириб, қурилиш соҳасида тадбиркорлик фаолияти билан шуғулланмоқчи бўлган фуқародан шаҳар ҳудудидаги 35 сотих ер майдонида жойлашган маънан эскирган турар-жой бинолари ўрнига кўп қаватли уй барпо этиш ҳуқуқини олиб бериш ва молиялаштириш эвазига 60 минг АҚШ доллари талаб қилишади. Ўтказилган тезкор тадбирда дастлаб МЧЖ раҳбари ушбу сўралган пул маблағини олган вақтида ашёвий далиллар билан ушланди.

Шундан сўнг тезкор тадбир давом эттирилиб, шаҳар ҳокими ўзининг яна бир ишончли одами бўлган – ҳокимликнинг девонхона мудири орқали МЧЖ раҳбаридан 60 минг АҚШ долларини олган вақтида унинг ноқонуний ҳаракатларига чек қўйилди”.

Otaxojaev’s lawyers and relatives reject the official account, saying the criminal case was fabricated and that the State Security Service played a central role in orchestrating the operation against him. They contend that a man named Jorabek Baykhanov, a convicted recidivist who — according to defence lawyers — has been used repeatedly as a “victim” in many investigations, was employed as a staged complainant. Defence lawyers say Baykhanov had previously appeared as a victim in as many as 18 criminal cases and that he was recruited to participate in the Namangan operation.

Family members and the former mayor’s lawyers allege that the motive for targeting Otaxojaev was his refusal to participate in or facilitate illegal construction schemes. In a complaint to the Office of the Prosecutor General, Otaxojaev’s father, Hojaxon Otaxojaev, accused a network of officials and businesspeople of orchestrating the former mayor’s downfall and named former DHH regional chief General Gayratilla Yoziev among those allegedly involved. The father’s filing included an extended account asserting that certain figures had grown powerful in Namangan’s construction sector; Ozodlik reports it has been unable to independently verify these claims.

The defence also detailed courtroom claims that the main “victim” took part in hearings only online and was unable to answer basic questions about his finances and how he could afford the construction projects at the heart of the sting. Lawyers told the court that investigators had at one point tried to drop the bribery charge after they could not substantiate it and sought to secure a plea to other charges, a proposal the defence rejected. According to the former mayor’s brother, Usmon Otaxojaev, who spoke to Ozodlik, none of the prosecution allegations won proof during more than three months of proceedings.

Attempts by Ozodlik to obtain comment from Namangan regional governor Shavkatjon Abdurazzoqov went unanswered; calls repeatedly placed to the governor’s phone were not returned, and a regional information service employee who answered initial inquiries disconnected the call after hearing questions about Otaxojaev. Ozodlik also reports that Gayratilla Yoziev himself could not be reached because he is reportedly detained in connection with a separate criminal case.

The case has drawn scrutiny because it combines allegations of corruption with claims of procedural manipulation and possible involvement by security services in targeting a regional official. Defence assertions that investigators used repeat participants in staged operations as “victims,” the reported online-only participation of the principal complainant, and the family’s accusations of higher-level direction of the operation raise questions about due process and the independence of law-enforcement actions. Ozodlik’s reporting makes clear it was not able to independently confirm the family’s allegations that DHH leadership ordered the operation. The conviction and lengthy sentence will likely deepen debate in Uzbekistan about the use of security agencies in criminal investigations and the safeguards needed to ensure fair trials and accountability.