RESOLUTION OF THE PLENUM OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN

of February 3, 2006 No. 1

About practice of appointment of criminal penalty as courts

The correct appointment of criminal penalty as courts is the most important guarantee of implementation of justice.

Purpose of just punishment promotes efficiency of achievement of its purposes - corrections of convicts, preventions of making of new crimes, as condemned, and other persons.

Studying of court practice shows that in case of assignment of punishment by courts in general the provisions of the law are correctly applied. At the same time, courts not always deeply understand essence of the liberalization of criminal penalties constituting important part of judicial and legal reform owing to what mistakes in case of determination of type and the amount of punishments on separate criminal cases take place.

For the purpose of ensuring the correct use of the provisions of the law regulating assignment of punishment, being guided by article 17 of the Law "About Courts", the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan decides to make to courts the following explanations:

On application of the general beginnings of assignment of punishment

1. Draw the attention of courts to strict observance of the principles of legality, humanity, justice and inevitability of responsibility in case of assignment of punishment for crimes.

2. Explain to courts that the principle of inevitability of responsibility, stipulated in Article 10 UK, does not mean obligation of application of punishment in all cases.

With respect thereto, courts shall discuss question of discharge or the punishments of persons who for the first time committed crimes, which are not constituting big public danger, or less serious crimes which were actively repentant and actively promoting disclosure of the crimes which smoothed down damage suffered according to Articles 65, of 66, of 70, 71 UK.

3. In sense of Articles 8, 54 Criminal codes, punishment shall be fair - to be appointed in each case individually, to correspond to nature and degree of public danger of crime, the identity of the guilty person, and also the circumstances commuting and aggravating penalty.

Nature of public danger of crime depends on subject to encroachment (life and health of the person, property, public safety, etc.), form of fault and reference by the law of criminal action to the corresponding category of crimes (article 15 UK).

Degree of public danger of crime is determined by circumstances of deeds (degree and stages of implementation of criminal intent, crime execution method, the extent of harm or weight of the come effects, role of the defendant in case of crime execution in partnership, etc.).

4. The law connects type and the amount of the imposed penalty with the objective and social factors characterizing the identity of the guilty person in this connection in case of trial of criminal case courts shall establish these circumstances.

Age, sex, pregnancy condition, to social - criminal record availability at the guilty person, his behavior in family, society, occupation, the state or social standing, etc. belong to objective factors, in particular.

5. Courts should use all opportunities for assignment of punishment given by the law, not connected with imprisonment, to persons guilty of making of the crimes which are not constituting big public danger and also less heavy whose correction is possible without isolation from society.

In the presence in sanctions of the provision of the law of alternative punishments, discussion of question of need application of the punishment connected with imprisonment in sentence is obligatory.

6. According to requirements of part one of article 467 Code of Criminal Procedure in sentence it is necessary to specify the circumstances commuting and aggravating penalty.

7. The law (article 55 UK) does not limit the list of the circumstances commuting penalty. Therefore in case of assignment of punishment can be considered as the mitigating and other circumstances which are not provided by this Article (for example, making for the first time of the crime constituting small public danger, availability at the defendant of the juvenile child, crime execution for motive of compassion, rendering medical and other care by the guilty person to the victim directly after crime execution and т.п). Recognition of such circumstance commuting penalty shall be motivated in sentence.

In case of the solution of question of whether such attenuating circumstance as the statement about guilty took place, courts need to check whether the application submitted to bodies of investigation, or the message (in any form) about crime made to the official of body of investigation, voluntary was and whether it is connected with the fact that person confirmed the participation in crime execution after detention as suspected (person accused) or the announcement of the resolution on attraction to participation in case in quality of suspected (person accused).

If on the proceedings initiated upon the committed crime, person which made it it is not established, the voluntary statement or the message of person on deeds shall be considered by it as surrender. As surrender it is necessary to consider also the application of person brought to trial for other crimes not known to bodies of investigation committed by it.

When making two or more crimes on some of which surrender took place, it as the circumstance commuting penalty it shall be considered in case of assignment of punishment only for those crimes in connection with which such application is submitted.

8. The list of the circumstances aggravating punishment (article 56 UK) is exhaustive and cannot be expanded court. However, depending on nature of crime the court has the right not to recognize aggravating any of these circumstances, motivating it in sentence.

Cannot be considered as the circumstances aggravating punishment specified in part one of article 56 UK if they are the qualifying actus reus sign.

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