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: 10.7256/1994-1471.2014.4.11134

Abstract:

DOI: 10.7256/2305-9699.2013.9.9555

Abstract: In this article the author analyzes the draft of the new Criminal Procedural Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, which is currently being discussed by the public, in part of introduction of the institution of investigating judge into the criminal judicial procedure of the state. The author points out specific topical issues due to the formulae used in some of norms of the draft and describes positions of legal scholars and legal practitioners on these innovations.  Much attention is paid to the fact that the power to sanction the secret investigation actions remained with the prosecutor. Taking the CIS state as an example (such as Ukraine, Moldova, and Russia), the author expresses an opinion on the need to transfer these powers to the investigating judges, since they touch upon constitutional rights and freedoms of the people.  The legislative draft shall be viewed by the Parliament of the state before the end of 2013. Keywords: draft Criminal Procedural Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, investigating judge, court, prosecution, criminal process, sanction, operative judicial control, powers, secret investigative activities.