From Buryatia, Zorigto Arabzhaev was mobilized and opted to obtain a counterfeit death certificate to avoid returning to the zone of the special military operation. The Ulan-Ude garrison military court later sentenced him to five years in a maximum-security penal colony for desertion. The note on the case comes from court records observed by authorities and reported through local channels.
The events trace back to a mobilization in November of one year. After finishing a leave period at the end of March, he did not report back to the military unit and spent time at relatives’ residences. In May, military police detained him. The defendant cited pressure from his wife, who allegedly threatened self-harm out of fear for his life, as a factor in his decision not to return after leave. This sequence of claims has been echoed in the court’s official statements.
According to the court, Arabzhaev purchased a fraudulent death certificate from an unidentified intermediary to hinder any efforts by his commander to locate him. The motive, as described in the filing, centered on avoiding further deployment and potential assignment within the operation zone.
Similar cases have surfaced in other cities. In Novosibirsk, a prisoner case drew attention when a 25-year-old individual named Vladimir Konstantinov took action just before a planned assignment to a special operation area. He was found guilty of desertion on the eve of his deployment. This line of cases reflects a broader pattern of desertion tied to the stresses and uncertainties surrounding mobilization campaigns.
Earlier, in Ulyanovsk, two individuals faced penalties after their actions against superiors. They received prison terms of six years and five and a half years, respectively, for assaulting communicating officers and commanders. These incidents illustrate a spectrum of offenses connected to resistance during mobilization and operational preparation phases.
In Odintsovo Garrison, a separate mobilization-related case resulted in a sentence of up to five and a half years in a maximum-security colony for assaulting an officer. The outcomes across these jurisdictions paint a consistent legal response to actions perceived as direct challenges to military authority in the context of extended or intensified mobilization efforts.
Experts note that courts handling desertion and related offenses often stress the need for discipline, the maintenance of chain of command, and the safeguarding of collective security in high-pressure environments. The reported sentences seek to balance accountability with considerations of personal circumstances presented during the proceedings. The public record continues to document how individuals navigate the tension between mandatory service and personal risk factors in times of rapid mobilization.