Document from CIS Legislation database © 2003-2021 SojuzPravoInform LLC

Name of the Kyrgyz Republic

DECISION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHAMBER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC

of January 13, 2021

On the case of check of constitutionality of parts 2, the 5th Article 259 of the Code of penal procedure of the Kyrgyz Republic in connection with Lesnichenko Vladimir Aleksandrovich, Kasymov Sukhrab Shavkatovich, and also Borov Islam's addresses of Sultanovich representing the interests of the Kyrgyz-Russian Limited liability company "AKIF" ("AKIF").

The constitutional chamber of the Supreme Court of the Kyrgyz Republic in structure:

the chairman - Duysheev K. A., judges Bobukeeva M. R., Zhumabayev L. P., Kasymaliyeva M. Sh., Kydyrbayev К.Дж., Oskonbayeva E. Zh., Saalayeva Zh. I., Sharshenaliyeva Zh. A., in case of Lobanova Zh. A. secretary.,

with participation:

the defendant party - Moldobayev Almazbek Tavaldyevich, Rasulova Ayzhan, representatives of Jogorku Kenesh of the Kyrgyz Republic by proxy,

other persons - Childebayev Tashtemir Abazovich, the representative of the Office of the President of the Kyrgyz Republic by proxy, Iskakov Erkin Bakburovich, the representative of the Supreme Court of the Kyrgyz Republic by proxy, Alchiyev Rysbek Karagulovich, the representative of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Kyrgyz Republic by proxy, Toktorov Eldar Mayrambekovich, the representative of the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic by proxy, the Kurmanbayevy Aida of Maratovna, the representative of the Ministry of Justice of the Kyrgyz Republic by proxy,

being guided by parts 1, of the 6th article 97 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic, Articles 4, of 18, of 19, of 37, 42 constitutional Laws "About the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Kyrgyz Republic",

considered in proceeding in open court case on check of constitutionality of parts 2, of the 5th Article 259 of the Code of penal procedure of the Kyrgyz Republic.

Reason for consideration of the case were Lesnichenko V. A. petitions., Kasymova S. Sh., and also Borov I. S., the Kyrgyz-Russian Limited liability company "AKIF" ("AKIF") representing the interests.

The basis to consideration of the case was the found uncertainty in question of whether there correspond Constitutions of the Kyrgyz Republic of part 2, of the 5th Article 259 of the Code of penal procedure of the Kyrgyz Republic.

Having heard information of the judge-speaker Kydyrbayev К.Дж., the case which was carrying out preparation for judicial session, and having researched the provided materials, the Constitutional chamber of the Supreme Court of the Kyrgyz Republic

ESTABLISHED:

In the Constitutional chamber of the Supreme Court of the Kyrgyz Republic Lesnichenko V. A. petition arrived on February 3, 2020. and Kasymova S. Sh. about check of compliance of parts 2, the 5th Article 259 of the Code of penal procedure of the Kyrgyz Republic of part 3 Articles 6, to Items 3, 8 parts 5 of Article 20, to parts 1, 2 Articles 40, to parts 3, the 5th article 99 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic.

Lesnichenko V. A. and Kasymov S. Sh. in the petition note that by part 2 of Article 259 of the Code of penal procedure of the Kyrgyz Republic (further - the Code of penal procedure) it is determined that the resolution of person performing pre-judicial production on initiation of the petition for property attachment is subject to consideration by the investigative judge in judicial session with participation of the prosecutor at the venue of pre-judicial production within 24 hours from the moment of intake of materials in court. The suspect, the defender and the specialist determining property value has the right to participate in judicial session. Absence of participants of process in case of their timely notice by court about the place and time of judicial session does not interfere with carrying out judicial session. Part 5 of the same Article determines that the resolution of the investigative judge on refusal in satisfaction of the petition for property attachment can be appealed by the prosecutor or the suspect, the defender, the victim, his representative in appeal procedure within 5 days.

According to applicants, in the disputed regulations there is no specifying on opportunity and procedure for appeal of the resolution of the investigative judge on satisfaction of the petition for property attachment.

Warning!!!

This is not a full text of document! Document shown in Demo mode!

If you have active License, please Login, or get License for Full Access.

With Full access you can get: full text of document, original text of document in Russian, attachments (if exist) and see History and Statistics of your work.

Get License for Full Access Now

Disclaimer! This text was translated by AI translator and is not a valid juridical document. No warranty. No claim. More info

Effectively work with search system

Database include more 50000 documents. You can find needed documents using search system. For effective work you can mix any on documents parameters: country, documents type, date range, teams or tags.
More about search system

Get help

If you cannot find the required document, or you do not know where to begin, go to Help section.

In this section, we’ve tried to describe in detail the features and capabilities of the system, as well as the most effective techniques for working with the database.

You also may open the section Frequently asked questions. This section provides answers to questions set by users.

Search engine created by SojuzPravoInform LLC. UI/UX design by Intelliants.