Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
38
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
38-43
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
ABSTRACT
This article analyzes issues related to the theoretical foundations of sentencing for multiple offenses. The article also
examines the unique aspects of sentencing, including the application of principles that exist simultaneously in various
areas of law. Specifically, the article highlights the application of general legal principles (legality, equality before the
law), criminal law principles (justice, humanism, democracy, culpability, etc.), as well as special principles of criminal
procedural law (administration of justice exclusively by the court, implementation of justice based on equality of
citizens before the law and the court, respect for the honor and dignity of individuals, etc.) in the sentencing process.
KEYWORDS
Multiple, punishment, liability, crime, sentencing, judicial law, committed act, criterion, state coercive measure, legal
assessment.
INTRODUCTION
It should be noted that judicial and legal reforms are
the most significant and important among the reforms
being implemented to ensure human rights in our
country. In this process, the amendments made to the
Constitution and criminal law of the Republic of
Uzbekistan in the criminal law sphere, the liberalization
of criminal penalties, and the implementation of laws
with consideration for human dignity and interests
serve as clear evidence.
The punishment imposed on a person who has
committed a crime is one of the main forms of
Research Article
THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS OF SENTENCING FOR MULTIPLE
OFFENSES
Submission Date:
October 18, 2024,
Accepted Date:
October 23, 2024,
Published Date:
October 28, 2024
Crossref doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/ijlc/Volume04Issue10-06
Israilov Dilshod Shavkatovich
Deputy Director of the Higher School of Judges under the Supreme Council of Judges of the Republic of
Uzbekistan, Doctor of Philosophy in Law, Associate Professor, Uzbekistan
Journal
Website:
https://theusajournals.
com/index.php/ijlc
Copyright:
Original
content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons
attributes
4.0 licence.
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
39
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
38-43
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
implementing criminal liability. When imposing
punishment on an individual, the court provides a legal
assessment of their actions by qualifying them under
the relevant article of criminal law, and evaluates the
actions taken by law enforcement agencies to expose
this act.
For this very reason, the institution of sentencing holds
great importance in criminal law theory. Sentencing is
considered one of the institutions of criminal law, and
the significance of this institution lies in the fact that
courts typically assign the most appropriate type and
amount of punishment established by criminal law for
the commission of a specific crime.
The peculiarity of sentencing is that it adheres to
principles that exist simultaneously in several areas of
law. Specifically, in sentencing, principles of general
law (legality, equality of all before the law), criminal
law (justice, humanism, democracy, responsibility for
guilt, etc.), and special criminal procedural law (justice
is carried out only by the court, justice is administered
on the basis of equality of citizens before the law and
the court, respect for the honor and dignity of the
individual, and others) are applied.
When analyzing the criterion of "sentencing" in
criminal law, it is appropriate to focus on the fact that
the term "punishment" forms its core essence. An
analysis of current legislation reveals that the concept
of "punishment" is approached in various ways.
Numerous theoretical perspectives on the concept of
punishment have been presented by both national and
foreign legal scholars. Moreover, the current Criminal
Code also provides a definition for the concept of
punishment. Specifically, according to Article 42 of the
Criminal Code, punishment is a coercive measure
applied by a court verdict on behalf of the state against
a person found guilty of committing a crime, which
consists of depriving or restricting the convicted
person of certain rights and freedoms as provided for
by law.
In this context, G. Botirov argued as early as 2006 that
the concept of "punishment" was inappropriately used
in the current criminal law, and in his opinion, using the
concept of "criminal law measures" instead of
"punishment" would be logically correct, as he
concluded that the term "punishment" is an integral
part of criminal law measures.
Another national legal scholar, M. Nazarov, after
analyzing the theoretical views of other scholars on
punishment, defines this concept as a coercive
measure based on the principles of the Criminal Code.
This measure is applied on behalf of the state to a
person found guilty of committing a crime according to
a court verdict. It deprives and limits the convicted
person of certain rights and freedoms established by
law, without aiming at physical torture or humiliating
human dignity. The purpose of this measure is to stop
the criminal's unlawful activity and prevent the
commission of new crimes by both the convicted
person and others.
Analyzing these views of legal scholars, it is worth
emphasizing that we fully agree with the approach that
punishment can only be imposed by the court. Indeed,
Article 54 of the current Criminal Code clearly stipulates
that punishment for committing a crime, as outlined in
the Special Part of the Criminal Code, is exclusively
imposed by the court. In the works of other national
scholars, we may encounter different approaches to
defining the concept of sentencing.
For example, some scholars point out that the concept
of sentencing refers to the application of punishment
(coercive measure) provided for in the sanction of the
Article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code against
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
40
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
38-43
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
a person found guilty of committing a crime in
accordance with the procedure established by law.
Regarding the concept of sentencing, lawyer R.A.
Ragimov defines it as the final stage of criminal
proceedings in the court of first instance, during which
a person is recognized as guilty, the criminal
composition of their act is qualified in accordance with
criminal law, and, if necessary, primary and additional
punitive measures are imposed on this person .
At the same time, E.V. Blagov concludes that it is
advisable to define the concept of sentencing as
follows: sentencing refers to the process in which it is
advisable to impose punishment based on the relevant
circumstances and formalize its amount and form in
the form of a decision .
As we have seen, there is no consensus among
domestic and foreign legal scholars regarding the
concept of punishment.
In turn, to define the concept of punishment, it is
advisable to analyze the main characteristics inherent
in it.
Criminal punishment is a state coercive measure
Criminal punishment is imposed only by the court.
Punishment is imposed only in relation to a person
found guilty of committing a crime. Deprivation of
special rights and freedoms shall be specified only in
criminal law.
On behalf of the state, it is carried out by its bodies.
The basis for the imposition of punishment is the
commission of a criminal act. Punishment is expressed
in the restriction of a person from certain rights and
freedoms for a certain period of time.
Causes a state of conviction.
Despite the fact that there has been constant debate
among scientists and practitioners about the criminal
punishment imposed on individuals accused of
committing crimes, various opinions have been
expressed, and numerous studies have been
conducted, two important aspects should always be
given importance, namely why to punish and how to
punish. What is the exact amount of punishment that
is necessary and sufficient to correct and prevent the
commission of a new crime?
After gaining independence, Uzbekistan adopted a
program for the phased implementation of the
transition to a market economy, the establishment of a
legal democratic state, and the transition from a strong
state to a strong civil society. In the first decade of
Uzbekistan's independence, due to the sharp focus on
combating crime, courts tended to apply more severe
punishments. In connection with Uzbekistan's
significant progress in the implementation of reforms,
a program of liberalization and deepening the process
of reforms in the political, economic and spiritual
spheres of our society was adopted in June 2000. In
accordance with the program, the issue of
liberalization of the judicial system was discussed, and
criminal punishments were liberalized. The sanctions
for a number of serious crimes have been changed and
transferred from the category of very serious crimes to
the category of serious crimes, from the category of
serious crimes to the category of less serious crimes,
from the category of less serious crimes to the
category
of socially less dangerous crimes.
Furthermore, the institutions of exemption from
criminal liability have been expanded, and in
connection with their reconciliation, the institution of
exemption from criminal liability has been introduced,
and several articles have introduced norms that do not
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
41
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
38-43
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
apply the punishment of imprisonment in the event of
compensation for material damage.
The most important function inherent only in criminal
law is the function of warning with punishment,
protecting public relations, and applying punishment
to individuals who have committed crimes.
I believe that punishment is a measure to prevent
crime to a certain extent through warnings, to prevent
the convicted person from committing a new
crime.Turning to the part of sentencing for multiple
crimes, it is known that the commission of multiple
crimes by one person has existed at any time in human
history and is characterized by its high social risk. The
basis for imposing punishment for multiple crimes is
the commission by one person of two or more crimes.
Based on this, first and foremost, within the
framework of our research, we need to consider the
concept of several crimes, their types, and
characteristics. This requires a detailed analysis of
Chapter VIII of the Criminal Code of our country on the
commission of several crimes. It should be noted that
a number of domestic and foreign scholars have
studied the cases of several crimes and put forward
specific views and opinions.
Punishment for committing multiple crimes (Article 59
of the Criminal Code) refers to the form of committing
multiple crimes - a combination of crimes.
The rules for assigning punishment for a set of crimes
provided for by the Criminal Code are applied in the
following cases: (Article 59 of the Criminal Code) when
the act is qualified by various articles of the criminal
law;
when the act is qualified by several parts of one article
of the Special Part of the Criminal Code, provided that
these parts provide for liability for various crimes;
when a person has committed several acts, one of
which is committed as a completed crime, and others
are committed in preparation, assassination or
participation in a crime;
after the verdict of the case, the convicted person is
found guilty of another crime before the verdict of the
first case;
when a guilty verdict is announced against a person in
the case and the person commits another crime
without the entry of this verdict into legal force.
The imposition of punishment for a combination of
crimes is when the court, in accordance with the rules
provided for in Article 54 of the Criminal Code, assigns
a separate punishment for each crime, then sets a final
punishment by replacing the lighter punishment with a
heavier one, or by fully or partially adding the
sentences. That is, the court assigns a separate
punishment for each of the crimes committed, then
definitively assigns one type of punishment by fully or
partially adding these types of punishment (according
to the provisions of Article 61 of the Criminal Code) or
replacing the lighter type of punishment with the
heavier.
The addition of punishments refers to the
transformation of different types of punishments into
the same type of punishment and the addition of their
terms. In this case, when the types of punishment are
added, the rules of Article 61 of the Criminal Code must
be strictly adhered to.
In other words, according to the provisions of Article
61 of the Criminal Code, the punishment of correctional
labor, restriction of service, restriction of freedom and
transfer to the disciplinary unit, compulsory
community service are not combined with each other,
but these types of punishment can only be added to
the punishment of imprisonment.
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
42
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
38-43
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
Compensation for punishments refers to the
imposition of punishment in a sufficient amount for
other crimes, without changing the term of the
heaviest of the various types of punishment imposed
for committed crimes.
This rule can only be implemented when the crimes
committed constitute crimes of minor and less serious
social danger, depending on the degree of their social
danger, or when a sentence of life imprisonment or
long-term imprisonment is imposed for one of the
crimes committed.
In addition to the main punishment imposed for a set
of crimes, the court may also add additional
punishments imposed for certain crimes. Here:
If additional punishments imposed for individual
crimes are of the same type, the court, within the
maximum period established for this additional type of
punishment, will definitely impose a punishment by
replacing their lighter with a heavier one or by the rule
of their complete or partial addition.
In other words, the punishment of deprivation of a
certain right is imposed as an additional punishment
for several crimes, and when they are combined, the
term of punishment as a combination of crimes should
not exceed three years.
In this case, the penalty of deprivation of a certain right
is applied to the term of the main punishment
(deprivation of liberty, transfer to a disciplinary unit),
which is definitely imposed for a set of crimes, and the
term appointed by the court.
If the additional punishment for crimes is different,
they are executed separately.
If, after the verdict in the case, the convicted person is
found guilty of another crime committed before the
verdict in the same case, the punishment is imposed in
the order of the totality of crimes. In this case, the term
of punishment imposed by the court for a set of crimes
shall be added to the unexpired part of the punishment
imposed by the first sentence, and the term of the final
punishment shall not be less than the term of the
punishment imposed by the first sentence. In this case,
the term of punishment served by the person is also
applied to the term of punishment definitively imposed
for both crimes (for example: the person was
sentenced to 5 years of imprisonment for the crime of
theft committed, and it was also found that after
serving 3 years of this sentence, he committed a
robbery before committing the crime of theft.
In this case, the court also imposes a sentence of
imprisonment for 5 years for the crime of robbery, and
based on the provisions of Article 59 of the Criminal
Code, by partial addition of the punishments, the
person is definitively sentenced to 7 years of
imprisonment. In this case, the person is considered to
have served 3 years of this sentence and only has to
serve the remaining 4 years).
If the crimes constituting a set of crimes constitute
crimes provided for in different parts of one article of
the Special Part of the Criminal Code, the rules for
imposing punishment provided for in Article 59 of the
Criminal Code shall not apply when imposing
punishment for these crimes. Sentencing in this case
the guilty person is held liable under the most severe
part of the article of the Special Part of the Criminal
Code, the actions of which are qualified, and is
assigned within the time limits provided for by one of
the types of punishment provided for by the sanction
of that part (Article 33 of the Criminal Code).
When imposing a sentence as a combination of crimes,
the maximum term of imprisonment cannot exceed
twenty years.
Volume 04 Issue 10-2024
43
International Journal Of Law And Criminology
(ISSN
–
2771-2214)
VOLUME
04
ISSUE
10
P
AGES
:
38-43
OCLC
–
1121105677
Publisher:
Oscar Publishing Services
Servi
There are concepts of "several crimes" and "several
crimes" in criminal law, and let's focus on them.
Because the object of study of the dissertation
research is directly related to these concepts.
The current Criminal Code does not provide clear direct
definitions of these concepts, and although these
concepts appear to have the same meaning as each
other, they are independent concepts. Because, if we
focus on the legal meaning of the concept of "several
crimes," it is a narrow concept in relation to the
concept of "several" crimes, and if the commission of
a number of crimes encompasses repeated crimes, a
combination of crimes and recidivist crimes, according
to the content of Article 59 of the Criminal Code,
"committing by a person two or more crimes provided
for in various articles of the Special Part of the Criminal
Code, without convicting a person for any of them" is
recognized as the commission of several crimes.
Because repeat offenses encompass crimes provided
for by different articles, punishment is imposed for
multiple offenses.
REFERENCES
1.
Ғ
.
Ботиров
.
Ўзбекистон
Республикасида
жиноят
қ
онунчилигини
либераллаштиришнинг
асоси
сифатида
инсонпарварлик
принципининг
амалга
оширилиши
. 12.00.08
–
жиноят
ҳ
у
қ
у
қ
и
ва
криминология
;
жиноятижроия
ҳ
у
қ
у
қ
и
йўналиши
бўйича
юридик
фанлар
номзоди
илмий
даражасини олиш учун ёзилган диссертация. –
Тошкент, 2006 й. –
9 б.
2.
М.Назаров Назначение наказания в уголовном
праве Республики Узбекистан. Диссертация на
соискание ученой степени доктора философии
PhD по направлению 12.00.08 –
Уголовное право
и
криминология,
уголовно
-
исполнительное
право. –
Ташкент, 2020 г. –
С. 23.
3.
Рагимов Р. А. Проблемы назначения наказания
(по материалам Республики Дагестан): автореф.
дисс. … канд. юрид. наук: 12.00.08. –
Махачкала,
2002.
–
С. 9–
10.
4.
Благов Е. В. Применение уголовного права
(теория и практика).–СПб.: Юрид. Центр Пресс,
2004.
–
С. 302.
5.
Jinoyat huquqi (Umumiy qism).
–
T: TDYU
nashriyoti. 2021.
–
178 b; Очилов Х.Р., Хайдаров
Ш.Д., Шамсиддинов З.З. Жиноят
ҳ
у
қ
у
қ
и
.
(
Умумий
қ
исм
).
Ў
қ
ув
қ
ўлланма
.
–
Т
.:
ТДЮУ
нашриёти
.
2021 й, –
111-
119 б.
