High-profile abduction of Uzbek banker in Paris was likely staged, investigation shows

In the summer of 2025, Uzbek banker Kakhramonjon Olimov claimed he had been kidnapped and tortured in France, saying the attackers’ goal was to extract a $10 million ransom. His account — relayed by the banker and his representative — was reported by Le Monde and subsequently picked up by media outlets around the world, especially in Uzbekistan. However, a joint investigation by the French magazine L’Express and The Insider has uncovered numerous contradictions in Olimov’s story.

Main cast

The banker said the crime had been carried out by a certain “M. — a trusted associate of B. R., a figure close to the Uzbek authorities,” and the newspaper did not disclose any names other than that of the purported victim. But The Insider has identified the individuals whom Olimov accuses of kidnapping and extortion, and has also found clear indications that the alleged abduction was staged.

B. R. is Batyr Rakhimov, a once-prominent Uzbek oligarch and a former employer of Kakhramonjon Olimov. According to The Insider’s sources, Olimov’s rise to riches was facilitated by Rakhimov, who left Uzbekistan for Turkey in 2016 shortly after the death of Uzbek president Islam Karimov.

M. is a Russian national who works as Rakhimov’s business partner in Turkey. The Insider is withholding the young man’s name because access to a significant body of information was granted on that condition. However, the editorial office has his full details.

The Insider directed questions to “the kidnapper” M. through his lawyer, and also to Batyr Rakhimov via his office. L’Express journalists spoke with a source close to the “victim,” Kakhramonjon Olimov.

The Insider has in its possession correspondence between Olimov and his alleged kidnapper, as well as travel, financial, legal, and other documents that shed light on the case.

Kakhramonjon Olimov’s version

According to the “injured” banker’s account in Le Monde, at around noon on June 22 he was forcibly put into a van in central Paris and taken to an unknown location, where M. tortured him and demanded $10 million for his release. Olimov was then moved to a villa near Nice, where the torture and extortion continued. M. reportedly staged a mock execution and forced Olimov to denounce the current Uzbek authorities on video. After the banker agreed to write an IOU for $5 million and pay part of the ransom — $200,000 — he was evidently freed one day after being taken. He then went to the police.

Facts established by the joint investigation of The Insider and L’Express

Conversations between Olimov and M., along with correspondence between them that is in The Insider’s possession, show no sign of a conflict, let alone of a criminal-victim dynamic. On the contrary, Olimov and M. were on civil, even friendly terms.

The villa in the commune of Roquefort-les-Pins, where Olimov was allegedly held against his will, was rented through a travel-services intermediary and paid for in cryptocurrency. Initially, a passport belonging to Shuhrat Ziaviddinov, a French citizen of Uzbek origin and a close associate of Olimov’s, was sent to the intermediary as the renter’s ID. The passport was later not used, as the renter requested anonymity “so his wife wouldn’t find out.”

Again, Olimov says he was kidnapped on June 22 and freed on June 23. Documents reviewed by The Insider show that a first-class ticket to Paris for Olimov after his “release” was paid for using M.’s personal driver’s bank card, and M. then sent a copy of the ticket to Olimov via Telegram from his official number.

After returning to Paris on June 24, Olimov filed a police report claiming he had been kidnapped. According to the report, his police interview lasted from 3:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. Telegram correspondence between Olimov and M. shows that the two communicated cordially from June 23–26, 2025, particularly actively on June 24. Moreover, while giving testimony as the purported victim of a crime, Olimov was simultaneously discussing with M. via Telegram the transfer of “part of the debt amounting to $200,000.” The money was wired at around 7:00 p.m. — during the police interview.

The correspondence between Olimov and M. continued through June 26, 2025. Olimov’s last message to M. read: “They’re taking me to the police urgently. I’m going offline.” M. replied, “Why are they taking you? Did they realize this was staged?” The question went unanswered.

Communication between the “kidnapper” and the “victim” resumed on June 28, when M. wrote to Olimov from a new number: “On one hand, you filed a report, on the other, you warned about the police. I’m trying to understand: are you still my friend or not?” Olimov replied: “There is no enmity between us, so I wrote to you. The situation has started to take its own course. I don’t control it.” He then added: “Praise be to Allah that you weren’t caught. You are loved by the Almighty. I don’t think you should write to me now. I think you understand me.”

Finally, the medical examination of Olimov, who had allegedly been subjected to hours of torture, was conducted eight days later, on June 30, and revealed only minor bruises and abrasions of unknown origin (the report is also in The Insider’s possession).

Past dealings

Having identified clear signs that the kidnapping was staged, L’Express and The Insider investigated the background of the key players and found the following: in 2016, Uzbek oligarch Batyr Rakhimov purchased a hotel on the Aegean coast and relocated to Turkey, leaving Olimov to manage Kapitalbank, which Rakhimov effectively owned, and dozens of his other entities. In 2017, Olimov persuaded Rakhimov that the business empire was under threat and could be seized by “powerful people.” To prevent this, Olimov proposed selling all the assets “for whatever money could be had,” thereby saving the holdings from takeover and ruin while also protecting Rakhimov’s numerous employees from criminal prosecution.

Positioning himself as an intermediary in the deal, Olimov proposed that Rakhimov transfer a dozen companies to him in exchange for $13.5 million. Among the assets were Rakhimov’s largest private bank, a construction firm, and an insurance company. Rakhimov, stunned by such an unfavorable offer, initially refused. To persuade him, Olimov promised to pay Rakhimov an additional $10 million within a year, along with certain undistributed dividends. After much consideration, Rakhimov agreed.

M., Rakhimov’s business partner in Turkey, to whom Rakhimov had financial obligations under a joint project, also took part in these negotiations. As a result, Olimov, Rakhimov, and M. agreed that Olimov would pay the $10 million directly to M. as part of M.’s settlements with Rakhimov.

The deal was completed: Rakhimov received $13.5 million for his business empire (a sum which he estimated to be roughly 5% of the assets’ real value), while M. received nothing.

After that, M. made various attempts to collect the debt from Olimov, meeting him in Europe in 2019 and then repeatedly in Moscow. However, Olimov avoided paying the promised $10 million, citing his high-ranking patrons.

As for Batyr Rakhimov, upon returning to Uzbekistan he launched an investigation and discovered that Olimov was not merely an “intermediary,” and that the majority of the assets Rakhimov was forced to sell had in fact gone to Olimov. It turned out that shortly after the deal with Rakhimov, Olimov began making expensive purchases — for example, of a hotel in Germany — and a year later founded a bank of his own. Olimov himself has been telling French journalists that he now manages over $1 billion. Olimov also became a participant in a major energy consortium involving Siemens and the French company EDF, implementing a CHP construction project in Uzbekistan.

As a result, Batyr Rakhimov returned to Uzbekistan with nothing, while his former subordinate and trusted associate became an oligarch.

Outraged, Rakhimov began seeking to overturn the 2018 deal, hiring lawyers and demanding that Olimov pay more than $200 million in compensation.

It was against this backdrop that news of Olimov’s “kidnapping” in France emerged.

Conclusion

As a result of Olimov's staged kidnapping, his opponent Rakhimov was put at a disadvantage. Had the alleged crime indeed been carried out by Rakhimov’s close associate M., Rakhimov himself could be portrayed as the organizer.

As for M., he received $200,000 from Olimov for the “kidnapping,” as well as an IOU stating that Olimov would repay his old debt. Olimov claims he signed the document under duress; however, the content of the IOU suggests otherwise: Olimov obtained a 50% discount (the IOU was for $5 million instead of $10 million) and a payment scheme involving a two-year installment plan.

However, Olimov evidently has no intention of settling with M. even on these terms, since the staged abduction has turned into a criminal case against M. that involves charges of kidnapping and extortion. M. now finds himself named on an international wanted notice.

The sole beneficiary of the scheme was Olimov himself. He simultaneously neutralized two of his creditors and fashioned for himself the image of a victim in need of protection from both French and Uzbek authorities.

Notably, in France, Olimov is deliberately putting a political spin on his purely economic conflict with Rakhimov, labeling him “a figure close to the Uzbek authorities.” Portraying himself as a victim of political persecution could serve Olimov in the event that Rakhimov succeeds in proving the illegality of the 2018 deal.

In addition, Olimov’s Anorbank is facing headwinds: hundreds of clients discovered that their accounts had been emptied and reported the matter to law enforcement, prompting a criminal investigation. The probe revealed that Anorbank was funneling money into online casinos, which is illegal under Uzbek law. Meanwhile, Olimov’s close associate, Bakhtiyor Amzaev, was detained in connection with a criminal case involving the large-scale embezzlement of funds from shared-construction investors.

Under these circumstances, the option of presenting himself as a victim of a man “close to the Uzbek government” may be especially valuable for Olimov, potentially enabling him to seek political asylum in Europe.