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

of May 2, 1997 No. 2

About the adjudication

The sentence is the most important act of justice as from its legality, justification, justice respect for constitutional rights and personal freedoms depends. Any citizen cannot be found guilty of crime execution differently as the court verdict which took legal effect decided with observance of all requirements of the law and on the basis of the law. Sentences of courts of the Republic are, generally proved, at the same time continue to take place the inadmissible facts of violations of the penal and criminal procedure legislation that does not promote legality strengthening, improvement of quality and efficiency of administration of law.

Not always the actual facts of the case are determined with necessary completeness and how they took place actually, the separate conclusions of court containing in sentence properly are not based, or are based on assumptions. In defiance of articles 26 and 455 Codes of Criminal Procedure on number of cases only evidence seized on pretrial investigation which was not researched was the basis for sentence or did not receive the confirmation in judicial session.

In confirmation of guilt, often, the materials which do not have to it neither the direct, nor indirect relation, and only confirming the fact of crime execution are given. In defiance of the Constitution and the criminal procedure law the facts when the evidence obtained with violation of the law is provided as confirmation of guilt are assumed.

Quite often instead of adoption of basic and fair decisions, removal justificatory or convictions, cases unreasonably return to additional investigation. Not always courts react to violations of right of defense in stage of pretrial investigation or allow them. Inadmissible cases of ascertaining in sentence of the fact of guilt of person concerning which case by court was not considered are noted.

The facts when in sentence by court it is only stated that actions of the guilty person are qualified correctly are widespread. The qualifying signs do not reveal and are not based. Severe violations continue to take place in case of appointment of criminal penalty as the guilty person of measures. Often the choice of this or that punishment or is not based in sentence at all, or the motivation has formal, unilateral character, without all set of the mitigating and aggravating circumstances and without respect for the principles of humanity and justice.

Considering cases in appeal cassation and supervising procedure courts not always draw due attention to the above-stated and other violations of the law. Cases of unreasonable cancellation or change of sentences are allowed.

For the purpose of strengthening of legality in case of administration of law, due protection of the rights and interests of citizens, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan decides improvement of quality of adjudications:

1. The court verdict - the state act, is taken out on behalf of the Republic of Uzbekistan and is the most important guarantee of strict respect for the principle of presumption of innocence providing legal protection of the personality from insubstantial accusation in crime execution and regulated by article 23 Code of Criminal Procedure.

According to article 26 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guilt of person is established only by the court verdict which took legal effect by public legal proceedings in case of which opportunity for protection is provided to everyone.

The sentence as court resolution establishes guilt (innocence) of person, determines legal treatment of its action (failure to act), type and the amount of punishment.

2. In case of adjudgement courts shall be guided by the general principles of criminal procedure, meaning that any court verdict shall be legal, public, be taken out only on the basis of collective nature (edinolichnost), independence of judges and subordination only to their law, implementation of justice on the basis of equality of citizens before the law and court, respect of honor and advantage of the personality, competitiveness, spontaneity and ustnost of research of proofs and to serve the purpose of establishment of the truth on case. Any departure from these principles by what motives it would not be caused, is the basis for recognition of sentence unreasonable.

3. Draw the attention of courts that according to article 22 Code of Criminal Procedure for establishment of the truth on case only those data which are found, checked and estimated according to the procedure, provided by the law can be used. At the same time it must be kept in mind that based on articles 26 and 455 Codes of Criminal Procedure the sentence can be based only on those proofs which were researched in judicial session and found reflection in the protocol of judicial session. The reference in sentence to testimonies of the defendant, victim, witnesses, the expert opinions and protocols of investigative actions received in case of production of inquiry, pretrial investigation or in other judicial session according to article 443 Code of Criminal Procedure is admissible only in case of announcement and discussion of these proofs by court.

4. The fact of recognition by the defendant of the fault during the investigation or in court can form the basis for removal of conviction only in case of its objective confirmation by other proofs collected on case and researched in court that directly follows from sense of Art. 463 of the Code of Criminal Procedure according to which the conviction cannot be based on assumptions.

According to article 117 Code of Criminal Procedure close relatives of the suspect, the person accused, the defendant are not warned about responsibility for standing mute and therefore in case of their refusal in court of earlier these indications the court has the right to refer to them only if in stage of pretrial investigation the specified requirements of the law were explained to these persons.

5. The verdict can be pronounced only after completion of all gaps found in case papers.

The proofs contradicting conclusions of court about guilt (innocence) of the defendant shall be not only are provided in sentence, but also properly researched with reduction of motives why they are recognized as doubtful and rejected by court.

Referring in sentence to any proofs both exposing, and acquitting the defendant it is necessary to open their content and being.

On case in the relation of several defendants or on case on which the defendant is accused of making of several crimes the court in sentence shall bring and analyze proofs concerning each defendant and on each accusation.

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