Topical Problems of Lawmaking and Law Enforcement Pertinent to the Imposition of Criminal Punishment in the Republic of Kazakhstan
Abstract
The article deals with the legal theoretical and practical concerns associated with the imposition of punishment. The imposition of punishment as a legal category has been widely studied in the literature by national and foreign scientists – experts in the field of criminal law. However, despite the importance of the principle of justice not only for the convicted person, but for the whole society, this institution of criminal law is still one of the most problematic. The problems existing in this area are affecting the law enforcement activity as a whole, evoking a negative reaction in the society. Therefore, they have reasonably attracted heightened attention of criminologists, experts in the field of criminal law and process. The objective of this article is to search for opportunities to resolve the most pressing problems associated with the imposition of punishment. The author believes that the courts of the Republic of Kazakhstan make a huge number of errors in the imposition of punishment primarily because this process has not been adequately regulated in the national legislation and the dispositions and sanctions of certain legal norms have not been accurately defined both technically and legally. The courts’ difficulties with the imposition of punishment are believed to result from the lack of understanding of the principles and criteria for the imposition of punishment. All this is believed to entail a violation of the principle of justice enshrined in Article 52, Part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The article discusses regulations, scientists’ opinions and the law enforcement practice. A clear and detailed normative regulation of the principles and criteria for the imposition of punishment to significantly limit the judicial discretion has been proposed as one of the ways to solve the problems concerned.
References
[2] Artemenko, N. 2010. Tekhnologhii naznacheniya ugolovnogo nakazaniya: teoreticheskiye i pravoprimenitelnye problemy [Technology of Imposing Criminal Punishment: Theoretical and Law Enforcement Issues]. Criminal law, 3: 4.
[3] Borchashvili, I.Sh., and Nurtaev, R.T. 2013. Aktualnye problemy ugolovnoy otvetstvennosti i nakazaniya v sovremennom prave Respubliki Kazakhstan [Hot Issues of Criminal Liability in the Modern Criminal Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan]. Lex russica, 9: 1018-1029.
[4] Dulatbekov, M.O. 2009. Obychnoe pravo kazakhov. Tekst doklada na Mezhdunarodnoy nauchnoy konferentsii ‘Kazakhskiy sud biev – unikal'naya sudebnaya sistema’, Almaty, 22-23 maya 2008 g. [The Common Law of the Kazakhs. Full Report for the International Scientific Conference ‘Kazakh Court of Biys – a Unique Judicial System’, Almaty, May 22-23, 2008]. History of State and Law, 10.
[5] Dyadkin, D.S. 2009. Teoretiko-metodologhicheskiye osnovy naznacheniya ugolovnogo nakazaniya: avtoref. dis. doktora yurid. nauk [Theoretical and Methodological Fundamentals of Imposing Criminal Punishment (Doctoral Thesis Abstract)]. Akadamiya of the Department of MIA of Russia. Moscow.
[6] Inshakov, S.M., and Kazakova, V.A. 2016. Metodologhicheskie podkhody k nakazuemosti prestupleniy v rakurse sovremennoy ugolovnoy politiki [Methodological Approaches to Crime Punishability from the Perspective of Modern Criminal Practice]. Criminal law, 1: 84-92.
[7] Grebenkin, F. 2006. Obshchestvennaya opasnost' prestupleniya i ee kharakteristiki [Social Danger of the Offence and Its Characteristics]. Criminal law, 1: 22.
[8] Kant, I. 1994. Metafizika nravov [Metaphysics of Morals]. In I. Kant, Sochineniya [Tractates] (Vol.6). Moscow: Choro.
[9] Kvashis, V.E. 2011. Kuda idet smertnaya kazn'. Mirovye tendentsii, problemy i perspektivy [Where the Capital Punishment is Going. Global Trends, Issues and Prospects]. Saint Petersburg: Yuridicheskiy tsentr ‘Press’.
[10] Mikhal, O. 2004. Sudeyskoe usmotrenie pri naznachenii nakazaniya [Judicial Discretion when Imposing Punishment]. Criminal law, 4: 36.
[11] Orlov, V.N. 2006. K voprosu o structure lichnosti prestupnika: kriminologicheskiy vzglyad [To the Issue of the Criminal’s Personality Structure: Criminological Perspective]. Russian justice, 1: 28.
[12] Roberts, J.V., and Cole, D.P. 1999. Making Sense of Sentencing. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
[13] Sakenova, A.B. 2015. Istoriya razvitiya ugolovnogo zakonodatelstva instituta naznacheniya nakazaniya. [The History of Development of Criminal Law of the Punishment Imposing Institution]. Vestnik Evraziyskogo natsional'nogo universiteta im. L.N.Gumileva, 4: 490-494.
[14] Shahidullan, S.M. 2012. Comparative Criminal Justice Systems: Global and Local Perspectives. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Learning
[15] Suleymanova, S.T. 2013. Naznacheniye nakazaniya v ugolovnom prave Kanady [Imposing Punishment in the Criminal Law of Canada]. Lex russica, 10: 1134-1145.
[16] Tashchilin M.T. 2014. Problemy ucheta sudom obshchikh nachal naznacheniya nakazaniya [Issues of Considering the General Principles of Imposing Punishment by the Court]. Russian justice, 2: 29-33.
[17] Tolkachenko, A. 2010. Predely sudebnogo usmotreniya [Margin of Judicial Discretion when Imposing Criminal Punishment]. Criminal law, 4: 58-62.
[18] Zimanov, S.Z. 1989. Problemy kazakhskogo obychnogo prava [Issues of the Common Law of Kazakhstan]. Almaty: Science of the Kazakh SSR.
*** Ugolovnyy kodeks Respubliki Kazakhstan ot 3 iyulya 2014 goda No. 226-V (s izmeneniyami i dopolneniyami po sostoyaniyu na 26.07.2016) [Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 226-V (as amended on July 26, 2016)]. (2014, July 3). Retrieved November 15, 2016, from online.zakon.kz.
*** Ugolovno-protsessual'nyy kodeks Respubliki Kazakhstan ot 4 iyulya 2014 goda No. 231-V (s izmeneniyami i dopolneniyami po sostoyaniyu na 26.07.2016) [Criminal Procedural Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No.231-V (as amended on July 26, 2016)]. 2014, July 4. Available at: http://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=31575852. (accessed November 15, 2016)
The Copyright Transfer Form to ASERS Publishing (The Publisher)
This form refers to the manuscript, which an author(s) was accepted for publication and was signed by all the authors.
The undersigned Author(s) of the above-mentioned Paper here transfer any and all copyright-rights in and to The Paper to The Publisher. The Author(s) warrants that The Paper is based on their original work and that the undersigned has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment. It is the author's responsibility to obtain written permission to quote material that has been previously published in any form. The Publisher recognizes the retained rights noted below and grants to the above authors and employers for whom the work performed royalty-free permission to reuse their materials below. Authors may reuse all or portions of the above Paper in other works, excepting the publication of the paper in the same form. Authors may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the above Paper for the Author's personal use or for internal company use, provided that the source and The Publisher copyright notice are mentioned, that the copies are not used in any way that implies The Publisher endorsement of a product or service of an employer, and that the copies are not offered for sale as such. Authors are permitted to grant third party requests for reprinting, republishing or other types of reuse. The Authors may make limited distribution of all or portions of the above Paper prior to publication if they inform The Publisher of the nature and extent of such limited distribution prior there to. Authors retain all proprietary rights in any process, procedure, or article of manufacture described in The Paper. This agreement becomes null and void if and only if the above paper is not accepted and published by The Publisher, or is with drawn by the author(s) before acceptance by the Publisher.