Aslan Yemkuzhev, the father of student Kazbek Yemkuzhev, convicted of terrorism after his abduction in Nalchik, addressed a video message to the head of the Investigative Committee, Alexander Bastrykin, and Prosecutor General Alexander Gutsan.

The elder Yemkuzhev briefly outlined the circumstances of the abduction: Kazbek was forcibly seized near his home, forced into a car, subjected to electric shock, and then "discovered" in the investigator's office.

Aslan reported a previously unknown fact: the kidnappers had blackmailed the young man. They showed Kazbek CCTV footage of his mother and girlfriend walking down the street, unaware of what was happening, and threatened to arrest them unless he confessed.

According to his father, despite numerous complaints, investigators have acknowledged Kazbek's abduction, but are refusing to open a criminal case against the kidnappers, citing the impossibility of identifying their faces and vehicle registration plates.

19-year-old Kazbek Emkuzhev is accused of participating in a terrorist organization. His lawyer, Ramzan Uzuyev, claims the case is completely fabricated, citing numerous violations and questionable evidence.

In addition to Emkuzhev, the case, opened in April 2024, also includes seven other individuals: Mansur Kamolov, Aslan Makoyev, Ibragim Albogachiyev, Mukhamed Shomakhov, Tamirlan Chipchikov, Ratmir Murachayev, and Temirkan Balkarov. All are connected by their shared residence and frequenting the same computer club. According to investigators, Chipchikov and Kamolov, alleged adherents of the Islamic State ideology, created a terrorist group to attack security forces and government facilities. Chipchikov and Murachayev were "liquidated" during a "counterterrorist operation" without an investigation.

According to Memorial, Yemkuzhev reported being kidnapped and tortured along with the dead men, after which he claimed he was held in an unknown location until being handed over to investigators. The trial, which began in January 2025, was repeatedly postponed. During questioning, prosecution witnesses gave contradictory testimony and alleged pressure, but the court ignored this.