On a soft winter morning in Almaty, with the mountains still heavy with snow and the streets barely stirring, a quiet unease lingered beneath the city’s modern skyline. The death of financier Bakhyt Ibrahim, whose body was discovered alone in his apartment, barely made the international press. Officially, it was ruled a suicide. But for those following the tangled fortunes of Kazakhstan’s post-Soviet elite, the timing raised more questions than condolences. Just the day before, Ibrahim had reportedly been interrogated by the country’s Financial Monitoring Agency. His name was linked to Qazaq Banki—a now-defunct financial institution, and one of the many puzzle pieces in a broader picture that revolves, again and again, around the same elusive figure: Dinmukhamet Idrisov.
In the Byzantine architecture of post-independence Kazakhstan’s economy, Idrisov’s name appears frequently. Sometimes in court rulings, sometimes in obscure offshore filings, sometimes in whispered conversations among those who still recall the “wild nineties.” A businessman of enormous wealth and limited visibility, Idrisov has become an emblem of a deeper contradiction in modern Kazakhstan: a country that promises the rule of law, foreign investment, and international standards, but which remains curiously incapable—or perhaps unwilling—to hold its most powerful citizens accountable.
In public, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev speaks the language of reform. Since taking power in 2019 after the long reign of Nursultan Nazarbayev, Tokayev has tried to distinguish himself from his predecessor. His speeches routinely reference “justice,” “modern governance,” and “transparency.” He has criticized the inequalities of the Nazarbayev era, promised to rein in oligarchs, and even launched high-profile asset recovery initiatives. The overarching message is clear: Kazakhstan is open for business—but not the kind that launders money through London real estate or Turkish shell companies.
And yet, the story of Dinmukhamet Idrisov—who reportedly defaulted on massive loans backed by public funds while quietly channeling assets into overseas entities—casts a long shadow over these ambitions. A recent search of his name in English on Google reveals that nearly two-thirds of the top results now relate to reports and articles questioning the legality and ethics of his foreign investments, particularly in Singapore and Turkey. Until just months ago, such inquiries were virtually absent from public discourse.
What changed? Not the facts, which have been sitting in court documents and financial statements for years. What changed was visibility—and the growing impatience of a new generation of Kazakh civil society actors, journalists, and foreign observers unwilling to let the state’s promises of reform remain rhetorical.
So who is Dinmukhamet Idrisov? To call him an oligarch, while not inaccurate, is perhaps too generic. A better description might be “legacy operator”—a man whose rise, fortunes, and survival map closely to the transformations of Kazakhstan itself. He began as many did in the 1990s, capitalizing on privatization, confusion, and the sudden vacuum left by Soviet collapse. Over time, his name became associated with dozens of companies: construction, oil services, transportation, banking. At one point, he was reportedly involved in over 40 firms. His influence was diffuse, his strategy opaque.
Most notably, Idrisov was a key figure behind Qazaq Banki. When the bank collapsed in 2018 under the weight of bad loans and dubious accounting, the state stepped in to cover the fallout. Yet no criminal charges were brought against its former executives. And Idrisov? He simply receded further from view.
This is not to say he disappeared. Quite the opposite. Reports now indicate that while domestic creditors were left unpaid, Idrisov and his affiliates began quietly transferring assets abroad—through a network of offshore shell companies registered in Singapore, Cyprus, Turkey, and other jurisdictions. The amounts are difficult to trace precisely. But legal analysts reviewing the court filings note a pattern that’s all too familiar: funnel public money into private ventures, declare bankruptcy, shift remaining assets abroad, and await the next Opportunity.
It’s a pattern that has played out in other post-Soviet republics. But Kazakhstan is at an inflection point—and President Tokayev seems aware of it. As he prepares for the final stretch of his presidency, speculation is growing that he harbors ambitions for a high-level international post, possibly within the United Nations. If so, questions about transparency and rule of law at home become more than a domestic concern. They become a matter of global Reputation.
Which brings us back to the central question: Why hasn’t the Kazakh government moved against Idrisov?
There are many theories. Some point to lingering networks of loyalty and protection from the Nazarbayev era. Others suggest that while Tokayev may be sincere in his reformist rhetoric, the state apparatus itself is fragmented and slow-moving. A more cynical view is that prosecuting Idrisov would open a floodgate of scrutiny—dragging in too many powerful figures and undermining the carefully curated narrative of a “New Kazakhstan.”
But there is also the simpler, and perhaps more uncomfortable, explanation: that accountability is still selectively applied. That despite all the language of modernization, Kazakhstan remains a country where proximity to power still determines the reach of the law. For international investors, this ambiguity is not just academic. Kazakhstan has spent the last decade trying to position itself as a regional hub—a place where Chinese, European, and Gulf capital can find stable, secure returns. Astana has hosted summits, offered special economic zones, and enacted English-language arbitration courts. But as long as figures like Idrisov remain unexamined, the specter of political protectionism lingers.
There is a final irony in all this. If Kazakhstan were a smaller country, or a less strategic one, perhaps none of this would matter beyond its borders. But with vast energy reserves, a key location between China and Russia, and growing attention from Western policymakers in a post-Ukraine world, Kazakhstan is increasingly seen as a bellwether for the region.
And so, as President Tokayev tours international conferences and meets with UN officials, the image of Dinmukhamet Idrisov haunts the margins. His presence is felt not in headlines, but in questions whispered in diplomatic corridors: Can Kazakhstan really change? Can it be trusted to enforce its own laws when money and power collide?
Perhaps Tokayev still has time to answer these questions—boldly, publicly, and with real consequences. The alternative is silence. And silence, in Kazakhstan, has a long history of protecting the wrong people.
| [donate]
| Help keep news FREE for our readersSupporting your local community newspaper/online news outlet is crucial now more than ever. If you believe in independent journalism,then consider making a valuable contribution by making a one-time or monthly donation. We operate in rural areas where providing unbiased news can be challenging. |
