In the trial over the death of paramedic Uldana Myrzuan, the lawyer for the defendant, the head of the condominium association (OSI), has called for the case to be sent back to the prosecutor, citing the findings of a construction and technical expert examination, reports infohub.kz.
At the latest hearing in the Astana court, the defense attorney read out the expert conclusions, according to which the collapse was caused by "a combination of structural defects and violations of the technology for laying external multi-layer brick walls." The report lists numerous violations: the absence of monolithic reinforced belts as specified in the project, improper installation of reinforcing mesh, violation of anchoring of the facing layer, poor filling of masonry joints, hollow joints, gaps between masonry layers, violation of bonding, deviations from verticality, use of broken bricks, and other defects related to design and construction.
The lawyer emphasized that the expert noted cracks in wall junction areas and local damage to the facing layer as early as 2017. Thus, the dangerous process existed long before the defendant was appointed head of the OSI. The report also states that the collapse was not the result of a single local cause but was due to the long-term development of deformations and accumulation of damage. The exact time and sequence of the destruction are not established, and determining the guilty party goes beyond the scope of the construction and technical investigation.
The defense noted that the expert pointed out the need for a legal assessment of the distribution of responsibility among the design organization, technical and author supervision, contractor, operating organization, and other parties. The lawyer stated that the report does not establish a causal link between Zhubaniyazova's inaction and the person's death. For a complete pre-trial investigation, it is necessary to determine how the defendant was supposed to learn about the defect, whether she could have identified it herself, whether it was necessary to involve a specialized organization, whether the OSI had the funds, whether a decision of the general meeting of owners was required, and whether she could have organized the work and prevented the collapse.
In this regard, the lawyer petitioned for an additional construction and technical examination, as well as for the case to be returned to the prosecutor to remedy violations of criminal procedure law and conduct additional investigation. In addition, the defense requested a financial and economic examination of the OSI's activities and the retrieval of building documentation, including documents on the commissioning of the building.