Belgian Court of Appeal Confirms Politically Motivated Nature of Kazakhstan’s Mutual Legal Assistance Request in the Jardemalie Case
On 16 December 2025, the Indictments Chamber of the Brussels Court of Appeal delivered a landmark ruling in the case of Ms Botagoz Jardemalie, a Kazakh political refugee and lawyer. The Court concluded that the request for Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) submitted by the Republic of Kazakhstan was politically motivated, recognising that it formed part of a broader pattern of transnational repression directed at Ms Jardemalie by the Kazakh authorities.
Ms Jardemalie’s case began on 1 October 2019, when Belgian authorities executed a search of her home on behalf of Kazakh authorities, with Kazakh agents present during the operation. Despite her recognised refugee status and evidence of persecution, the MLA request was pursued through Belgian judicial cooperation mechanisms, raising serious concerns about the misuse of international legal assistance channels to target dissidents abroad.
In its ruling, the Indictments Chamber recalled a series of key facts, including the torture of Ms Jardemalie’s brotherduring the Kazakh investigation with which Belgium was asked to cooperate, her status as a lawyer at risk, and the massive and indiscriminate seizures carried out for the benefit of Kazakhstan. The Court concluded:
The elements submitted to the court (…) appear sufficient to consider that, in the specific circumstances of the present case, Ms Jardemalie was or is an established political opponent of the Kazakh regime and could be subjected to reprisals (…) All these elements (…) converge to demonstrate to a sufficient degree that the contested seizure was carried out in execution of a request for mutual legal assistance that appears contrary to legal requirements and dictated by the political opinions of Ms Botagoz Jardemalie
This ruling represents a significant step in addressing the abuse of international mutual legal assistance mechanisms for political purposes. Fair Trials has long raised concerns about the misuse of MLA, and other cross-border cooperation tools, which can be instrumentalised by authoritarian states to harass political opponents, human rights defenders and refugees abroad. States must not use criminal justice mechanisms to suppress dissent, nor should they contribute to human rights violations by cooperating with requests that are politically motivated.
The Court’s decision reinforces the necessity that states uphold their human rights obligations when assessing and executing MLA requests, ensuring that cooperation does not facilitate human rights violations or enable foreign regimes to extend repression across borders.
By recognising the political character of Kazakhstan’s request, the Belgian courts have reaffirmed the need for robust human rights safeguards in international cooperation and the obligation to refuse assistance where there is a real risk of persecution or abuse.
This outcome is a meaningful affirmation of the rule of law and a clear reminder that mutual legal assistance should be grounded in respect for fundamental rights not used as a tool of repression.
You can read the press release (in French) issued by Ms. Jardemalie’s legal counsel here.
