Last week I got another Google alert mailing. And this is the article, that has catched my attention.
Mukhtar Ablyazov, a former chairman of Kazakhstan’s biggest bank who now lives in France, has attacked current president of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev via social networks. So now Kazakhstan outlaws exiled banker’s political movement. Ther article is taken from Reuters.
Reuters, the news and media division of Thomson Reuters, is the world’s largest international multimedia news provider reaching more than one billion people every day. Reuters provides trusted business, financial, national, and international news to professionals via Thomson Reuters desktops, the world’s media organizations, and directly to consumers at Reuters.com and via Reuters TV.
The article says that Kazakhstani court considered that Ablyazov’s political movement Democratic Choice of Kazakhstan (DVK) is extremist. The movement says it has a membership of around 80,000, predominantly inside Kazakhstan.
In Kazakhstan, Mukhtar Ablyazov is accused of multi-billion plunders from BTA Bank, which he managed until February 2009. Ablyazov left for London after the bank came under the control of the government of Kazakhstan. Ablyazov denies the charges. In June 2017, Ablyazov was sentenced in absentia to 20 years in prison. He said that he does not care what decisions the Kazakh court takes.
So now Ablyazov is exiled and his political movement is proclaimed extremist and he is accused on attack via Facebook and other networks.
Analyzing the article, I found that it is not understandable what he is being accused of, how did he attack Nazarbayev via facebook and what the court decided to do with him. But if people are reading news about him and are awared of that, the article is written in understandable and easy language. The style is also structured.
The article was important for me because for 1 or 2 weeks everyday in the evening we had our telegrams [messenger] blocked. Some people said that it is because of Ablyazov’s movement. It can be because of him or not, but anyway blocking social networks, especially networks that are used to connect people, is againist not only freedom of choice and speech, but generally personal freedom.