DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2016.10.20419

Abstract: The subject of this research is the procedural work of magistrates introduced into the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan from the beginning of 2015. The author draws attention to the fact that the scope of authority of the new procedural figure is not sufficient for proper and independent execution of judicial control at the pretrial stage of criminal process. Portion of authority by the new Criminal Procedural Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan was also part of the competency of the court. Based on this fact, the author proposes a comprehensive solution to the issues of improving the work of the magistrate. Among the main conclusions of the conducted research are the proposals for improvements to the work of magistrates, which are not completely verified from  the perspective of scientific substantiation and practical implementation, but have the goal to attempt to examine the benefits and flaws of the new institution to ensure protection of citizens, improvement of the quality of the pretrial investigation, and judicial control at the pretrial stage of the judicial process.  

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2016.10.42997

Abstract: The subject of this research is the procedural work of magistrates introduced into the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan from the beginning of 2015. The author draws attention to the fact that the scope of authority of the new procedural figure is not sufficient for proper and independent execution of judicial control at the pretrial stage of criminal process. Portion of authority by the new Criminal Procedural Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan was also part of the competency of the court. Based on this fact, the author proposes a comprehensive solution to the issues of improving the work of the magistrate. Among the main conclusions of the conducted research are the proposals for improvements to the work of magistrates, which are not completely verified from  the perspective of scientific substantiation and practical implementation, but have the goal to attempt to examine the benefits and flaws of the new institution to ensure protection of citizens, improvement of the quality of the pretrial investigation, and judicial control at the pretrial stage of the judicial process.  

DOI: 10.7256/2409-7136.2016.9.19996

Abstract: The research subject is the legal status of an investigating judge, introduced in criminal procedure in the Republic of Kazakhstan in 2015. The author describes the range of potential problems with the order of service of an investigating judge according to the Criminal Procedure Code of Kazakhstan; gives the examples of court practice of West Kazakhstan region. The author specifies the problems within an investigating judge’s jurisdiction, his competence and authority to consider the cases on a pre-trial stage. The author applies various research methods including the general scientific and the comparative ones. The author offers establishing the period of service of an investigation judge for improving stability and creating the scope of judicial practice. The author emphasizes that the election of an investigating judge by the judges from among their colleagues, instead of the appointment by the court president without regard to the opinion of the judiciary, would be one of the first steps on the road to establishing elective judiciary in the country. 

DOI: 10.7256/1994-1471.2014.4.11134

Abstract: