The Supreme Court closed the case of the former Minister of Defense of Kyrgyzstan Ismail Iskov regarding the events of June 2010 - for lack of evidence of a crime. Not because of the amnesty, not because of the statute of limitations - he was justified. Iskov came out of the trial not only clean, but legally clean. But it's not even about him. He is not a presidential candidate, not a party leader, not an electoral threat. He is like a safe figure from the past - his acquittal does not remove anything from the government - and does not add anything to the opposition. But against the background of, for example, Medumrov, for whom the criminal record blocked the way to the elections, an illusion is created that the court can be different and not selective.

The Supreme Court closed the case of the former Minister of Defense of Kyrgyzstan Ismail Iskov regarding the events of June 2010 - for lack of evidence of a crime. Not because of the amnesty, not because of the statute of limitations - he was justified. Iskov came out of the trial not only clean, but legally clean. But it's not even about him. He is not a presidential candidate, not a party leader, not an electoral threat. He is like a safe figure from the past - his acquittal does not remove anything from the government - and does not add anything to the opposition. But against the background of, for example, Medumrov, for whom the criminal record blocked the way to the elections, an illusion is created that the court can be different and not selective.