Authorities have sent an administrative case against actress and blogger Nilufar Hamidova to court under petty hooliganism provisions after her latest video, filmed in a public place, drew public outrage, a police department spokesman said.

The video, shot on a street and near a bus stop, prompted sharp criticism from residents and visitors to the city. Law enforcement agencies opened an inquiry and made a legal assessment of her actions.

The case file was sent to the district court for criminal cases so that action can be taken under the relevant articles of the Code of Administrative Liability, the spokesman said.

During a meeting with internal affairs officials, Hamidova apologized to the public.

“I apologize to my Uzbek people. I won’t post this kind of content again,” she said, adding that her future content would be better and nobody would have anything to say.

Hamidova had been officially warned before over her social media activity. The state institution Uzbekkonsert had objected that she failed to meet the terms of the official license for her concert and performance activity.

In April 2026, she apologized to the public for a controversial song and for inappropriate social media content. She said then that the relevant organizations had held explanatory talks with her and that she had paid a fine. She nevertheless continued to publish videos that sparked public debate.

The petty hooliganism charge appears to be a poor fit for the conduct at issue. Officials have not said which specific act in the video amounted to hooliganism, and the case rests largely on the public reaction, not on any described disturbance, abusive language or threat to others. The classification looks stretched, as if the conduct was fitted to the closest available provision rather than one that clearly describes it.

Conservative sections of Uzbek society disapprove of such behavior in public, seeing it as at odds with traditional norms of modesty and decency, and that sentiment helps explain the strength of the backlash. But disapproval of this kind is a matter of social norms, not law. Nothing in the case as described shows that the video breached a specific regulation, which leaves a gap between what many consider unacceptable and what is clearly prohibited.