Uzbekistan’s investigative authorities are attempting to quickly cover up a major fraud involving the construction company “Glamour Gold“, which has become a symbol of the effective plundering of domestic investors with alleged state involvement.

The company reportedly operated under the direct protection of high-ranking officials and representatives of the security services. For six years, it functioned as a mechanism of large-scale deception, depriving hundreds of investors of their apartments and funds. The absence of these projects from official electronic registries and the lack of oversight by regulatory bodies are presented as evidence of systemic corruption. The hurried closure of the case risks turning the law into an instrument for protecting perpetrators, and state institutions into de facto accomplices in defrauding citizens. As a result, “Glamour Gold” has come to symbolise systemic fraud, impunity, and a threat to public safety.

Since 2024, defrauded investors have repeatedly appealed to state authorities regarding violations of their rights. However, oversight bodies—including the Inspection for Control in the Construction and Housing Sector under the Cabinet of Ministers of Uzbekistan—have reportedly ignored these concerns. Officials assured citizens that there were no violations or deficiencies in “Glamour Gold” projects, despite evidence suggesting otherwise: buildings were allegedly constructed with serious violations, posed safety risks, and formed part of a long-running scheme of mass deception.

An investigation conducted by the Erkin O’zbekiston movement compelled law enforcement to demonstrate some activity, but the results were largely symbolic: criminal liability was imposed only on the company’s executives, while their alleged patrons among high-ranking officials remained untouched. Despite the arrest of five individuals, investigators from the Tashkent City Police Department have not classified the case as organised group crime, which critics interpret as an indication of protection for entrenched corruption networks.

On 1 March 2026, an initiative group of investors secured a personal meeting with the Minister of Internal Affairs of Uzbekistan, Aziz Tashpulatov.

The minister promised to take the matter under personal control and instructed the head of the Tashkent Police Investigation Department, Dilmurod Mirsadikov, to resolve the issue within ten days. In practice, however, subordinates reportedly treated this order formally: on 10 March, Deputy Head of the department, Major Elmurod Mukhamadaliev (the one whose love for gold-covered steak was discussed on social media earlier) limited his response to a standard written reply.

Realising that investigators were effectively misleading them, the investors—after spending the night outside with young children—again secured a meeting with the Minister of Internal Affairs on 29 March.

At this meeting, Aziz Tashpulatov apologised for the incompetence of his subordinates and issued a strict order to his deputy, Colonel Ramazon Ashrapov, head of the Investigation Department under the Ministry of Internal Affairs, to immediately remove the “Glamur Gold” case from the Tashkent police and transfer it to more competent investigators at the national level.

However, Colonel Ashrapov reportedly ignored the minister’s direct order and acted in line with his own career ambitions.

He kept the case within the Tashkent investigative department and prepared it for transfer to court in an incomplete state, effectively undermining the investigation and shielding those allegedly responsible for the scheme.

Ashrapov, who is said to be positioning himself to replace Tashpulatov, demonstrates little interest in an objective investigation of the “Glamour Gold” case. Behind his public image as a “defender of the law”, critics see systemic obstruction: the department under his leadership allegedly delayed the investigation and ensured impunity for those behind the scheme. Instead of meaningful action, defrauded investors received what appears to be another bureaucratic performance—highlighting, in their view, who truly controls the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Uzbekistan.

The “Glamour Gold” case illustrates how state institutions may fail to protect citizens and can themselves become embedded in deeply corrupt systems, allowing construction-related financial schemes to operate with impunity. Restoring public trust and protecting citizens’ rights would require comprehensive reform of law enforcement and the construction sector, transparent investigations into corruption networks, and genuine accountability for officials involved in or protecting such schemes.

Until such changes occur, hundreds of Uzbek citizens remain effectively hostage to bureaucratic inaction and arbitrariness, while social tensions continue to rise. Without decisive action, the situation risks escalating further, potentially leading to broader public unrest and political instability, as similar patterns are reported across the country.