Kun.uz correspondent asked Muslim Mirzajonov, the editor-in-chief of the site at the time of the court proceedings and the director of “Komil Unsur” LLC, several questions about the court proceedings.

- There is a dispute between the Sof.uz website, of which you are the editor-in-chief, and Anorbank, and the court proceedings are ongoing. Until then, several court hearings have passed and the fine imposed on the site remains in force. So what’s happening now? 

- Now another person has become the editor-in-chief of the Sof.uz site. I am participating in the courts because I am the founder of “Komil Unsur” LLC. Also, the material related to Anorbank was prepared by other journalists.

When the issue of reconciliation was raised, I didn’t disagree. But we did not agree to their demands because they asked us to plead guilty. That material was based on information provided by the applicant. The first hearing was supposed to be held in the civil court, but it was upgraded to the economic court. Anorbank appealed the decision. And there it was determined that we will pay a fine of more than 3 billion 700 million soums. We appealed this decision to the Supreme Court, but they did not change the fine either. We have filed a repeated complaint now.

- Is it possible for the site to pay the said amount, or if the court decision does not change, will we say goodbye to one more mass media?

— Sof.uz is a new site. It has few employees, and its financial capabilities are not high. In the circumstances, the court’s decision is also ridiculous. According to their claim, they have signed an agreement with several sites to restore the damaged reputation, and the alleged amount is based on this. The question arises: did the bank not allocate money for advertising before the release of the material on Sof.uz? Why does it want to charge the money for its advertising from the site’s account? It is a mistake to calculate self-inflicted damage with advertising money. The situation is funny and sad. Customers were to be accounted for as an impairment of assets.

During the last trial, I filed a motion asking to adjourn the trial to another day, saying that our lawyer was sick, the appeal to the Supreme Court was not answered. But they did not take it into account, they did not get acquainted with the process. They simply ordered us to pay the money.

- Was that video material criticizing the activities of Anorbank related to the activities of Kompromatuzb?

- It’s not like that. The work with Anorbank has nothing to do with Khurshid Daliyev. The editor also showed me that material when it came out, and I gave my advice. Such materials have been released before. They are trying to contact Khurshid Daliyev. Maybe these cases are influencing the court’s decision. Naturally, we were partners with Khurshid Daliyev.

- You said that you were in favor of an agreement with Anorbank. But the management of the bank also said that you were in favor of an agreement at the beginning of the work. What is the possibility of agreement after that?

- As I mentioned, I was a supporter of the agreement both in court and in other situations. I also said that if they refuse, we will pay them. But in the court, they said that they will give up the moral damage related to the refusal, and only recover the economic damage. True, they also offered an agreement, but the demands they made to us were not correct, as I said above. We have not given any false information.

- In recent times, cases of journalists being brought to court by state agencies and officials are increasing. What do you think this situation means?

- This is a sad situation. It can be assessed as a threat to freedom of speech. In the international experience, from the point of view of principle, very little money is determined in courts, that is, the main goal is to justify. In our country, they try to break the journalist and close the editorial office completely. As a journalist, I do believe so.