On the results of the consideration of the Prosecutor General protests

25 August 2018 Версия для печатиВерсия для печатиPDFPDF

Ensuring legality, protecting the citizens’ rights is a priority in the prosecution authorities’ work.

In accordance with the Law, the Prosecutor General has the right to make a protest regarding the revision of the judicial acts that have entered into legal force, both on their own initiative and at the petition of the persons, in cassation.

In one month, the Supreme Court granted the General Prosecutor’s 14 protests.

So, by the sentence of the Saryagash district court dated 2016, citizen Raymzhanov was convicted for deliberately false denunciation of police officers (part 2, Article 419 of the Criminal Code) to 1 year of restriction of freedom.

Then the police detained him on suspicion of robbery. After that, he appealed to the prosecutor, informing him that the officers tortured him, demanding admission of guilt. The employees did not establish any guilt, and Raimzhanov was prosecuted for a false denunciation. In the course of the investigation and trial, Raimzhanov tried to prove that he had been tortured, but they did not believe him. Raimzhanov did not appeal the verdict.

Considering that the person conviction who appealed for help contradicts the national legislation and the UN Convention against Torture, to which Kazakhstan is a party, the General Prosecutor introduced a protest.

On August 22, 2018, the Supreme Court satisfied the protest in full, and Raimzhanov was acquitted.

The Prosecutor General also introduces protests aimed at improving the convicted persons situation.

By the verdict of Kostanay City Court No. 2 dated 2017, citizen Martynkevich, was convicted under Art. 191 part 2 of the Criminal Code to 3 years 6 months of imprisonment in a maximum security institution.

At the same time, the court did not take into account that the maximum regime is assigned to repeat offenders, persons who committed particularly grave crimes or who had previously served a sentence of imprisonment (Part 5, Article 46 of the Criminal Code). Martynkevich did not belong to the above-mentioned categories of persons.

Martynkevich did not know about this and the verdict was not appealed against. This fact was revealed in the course of the prosecutor's check.

In view of these circumstances, the Prosecutor General made a supervisory appeal to transfer the convicted person from the maximum security (colony of strict regime) of the correctional institution to a medium security institution (general regime colony).

August 22, 2018 The Supreme Court has satisfied the protest in full.


Press Office of the General Prosecutor’s Office



Add new comment