The USA Journals Volume 03 Issue 06-2021
74
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
Published:
June 30, 2021 |
Pages:
74-76
Doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume03Issue06-11
I
MPACT
F
ACTOR
2021:
5.
952
‘
ABSTRACT
The relevance of the institute of immunity in criminal procedure and the need for further improving
this process is analyzed in the article.
KEYWORDS
Immunity, inviolability, investigator, prosecutor, judge, lawyer, criminal prosecution, arrest.
INTRODUCTION
Immunity – (lat. immunitas) means to get rid
of something, to be free
1
.
We all know that
the term immunity is widely used not only in
medicine but also in law. If in medicine
immunity is interpreted as a protective
reaction against various diseases, in law this
term is understood as a special right and
1
Explanatory dictionary of the Uzbek language:
More than 8,000 words and phrases. J. Sh II. E-M /
Editorial Board: T. Mirzayev and others; the
Republic of Uzbekistan. Language and Literature
Institute. – T.: “National Encyclopedia of
Uzbekistan” State Scientific Publishing House,
2006. – P. 202.
privilege granted to certain persons. In turn, in
criminal and criminal-procedural relations, the
institute of immunity is considered as a system
of legal guarantees, consisting of protection
of persons with special status from unlawful
interference in their professional activities and
ensuring
that
they
are
not
held
administratively, criminally, or otherwise.
Prospects For Improving The Institute Of Immunity In
Criminal Procedural Relations
Khaydarov Begzod Shukhratovich
Judge For Criminal Cases Of Fergana Regional Court, Uzbekistan
Journal
Website:
http://theamericanjour
nals.com/index.php/taj
pslc
Copyright:
Original
content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons
attributes
4.0 licence.
The USA Journals Volume 03 Issue 06-2021
75
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
Published:
June 30, 2021 |
Pages:
74-76
Doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume03Issue06-11
I
MPACT
F
ACTOR
2021:
5.
952
The emergence of immunity as a legal institute
stems from Roman law
2
.
Initially, immunity
was recognized as an exemption from taxes
or state duties, a special right granted to an
individual, category, or part of society by the
Senate or the emperor. Over time, however,
immunity was understood as the right to
inviolability, depending on the social status of
the offender and the victim, which prevented
them from being prosecuted illegally.
In recent years, large-scale activities have
been carried out in the country to further
democratize and liberalize the judicial system,
strengthen measures to reliably protect the
rights and legitimate interests of citizens,
increase the efficiency of the judiciary, law
enforcement and oversight bodies, increase
public confidence in justice, and strengthen
the rule of law. At the same time, excessive
bureaucratic barriers in judicial practice, the
existence of conflicts between the law and by-
laws, and several other shortcomings require
a revision of the current Criminal Procedure
Code
3
under modern requirements and
international standards.
At the same time, the emergence of negative
conditions in our society, such as preventing
persons with immunity from carrying out their
activities independently and fairly, or abusing
the immunities granted to them by these
individuals, indicates the need for full
regulation of immunity-related relations.
Indeed,
today’s
reality
requires
the
development of new approaches to the
2
Koryakin, I.P. Immunity in criminal proceedings
(genesis and epistemology): Textbook / I.P.
Koryakin. - Almaty: Daneker, 2004.- p.7.
3
Hereinafter referred to as CPC in the text
concept, content and meaning of procedural
immunity, reflecting immunity as a separate
institution in criminal proceedings, clearly
defining the types of benefits, the scope and
conditions of their application.
It is noteworthy that although Articles 4, 223,
239 and 596 of the current CPC contain norms
on persons with immunity, they are not
sufficient to fully regulate all disputes arising
in judicial practice.
Thus, according to the CPC
4
, although the
prosecutor
and
his
investigator
have
immunity, the issues related to the fact that
the investigator of the prosecutor’s office
does not have the right to immunity during
the detention, as well as that some of the
privileges available to the investigator of the
prosecutor’s office are not available to
investigators of other bodies, lawyer and
auditors of the Accounts Chamber do not
have immunity at all, withdrawal for crimes
committed by persons with immunity, failure
to establish a special procedure for search,
dismissal and other investigative actions, as
well as coercive procedural measures, the
ombudsman has no rights to the inviolability
of testimony
, the right to immunity of
persons with the right to immunity, even after
their dismissal, for the activity in this position,
the right to immunity can be used not only in
the performance of official duties, but also in
other private life, are not fully reflected in our
legislation.
Following the relevant laws governing the
activities of courts, advocacy and the
4
Articles 223 and 239 of the CPC.
Note: In this case, the right not to give
instructions on the circumstances known in
connection with the exercise of powers.
The USA Journals Volume 03 Issue 06-2021
76
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
Published:
June 30, 2021 |
Pages:
74-76
Doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume03Issue06-11
I
MPACT
F
ACTOR
2021:
5.
952
prosecutor’s office, criminal proceedings
against a judge may be instituted by the
Prosecutor General, initiation of a criminal
case against a lawyer by the Prosecutor
General, the Prosecutor of Karakalpakstan,
the prosecutors of the regions, the city of
Tashkent, initiation of a criminal case against
the prosecutor, his investigator and the
inquiry officer by the Prosecutor’s Office.
The law on courts also stipulates that criminal
cases against judges of inter-district, district
(city) courts, and territorial military courts
belong to higher courts, and judges of other
courts to the Supreme Court of the Republic
of Uzbekistan.
However, it is noteworthy that the norms on
the
right
to
immunity
or
immunity
enumerated in the above laws are not fully
reflected in the CPC of the Republic of
Uzbekistan. Following the requirements of
Article 1 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the
procedure
for
conducting
criminal
proceedings in the territory of Uzbekistan is
determined by the Code of Criminal
Procedure.
This indicates that the current CPC should be
supplemented with a new chapter entitled
“Proceedings related to persons with
immunity or privileges”,
which defines the
initiation of criminal proceedings against
individuals with immunity, the application of
coercive procedural measures, the special
procedure
and
specifics
of
certain
investigative actions.
We believe that the proposed new institution
will be reflected in our current legislation, will
create all the conditions for the full
implementation
of
the
responsibilities
assigned to it by persons with immunity in our
society within the law.
REFERENCES
1.
Explanatory dictionary of the Uzbek
language: More than 8,000 words and
phrases. J. Sh II. E-M / Editorial Board: T.
Mirzayev and others; the Republic of
Uzbekistan. Language and Literature
Institute. – T.: “National Encyclopedia of
Uzbekistan” State Scientific Publishing
House, 2006. – P. 202.
2.
Koryakin, I.P. Immunity in criminal
proceedings (genesis and epistemology):
Textbook / I.P. Koryakin. - Almaty:
Daneker, 2004.- p.7.
3.
Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic
of Uzbekistan. September 22, 1994,
No.2013—II.
4.
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On
Courts”. December 14, 2000, No.162-II.
5.
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On
Advocacy”. December 27, 1996, No. 349-I.
6.
Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On
the Prosecutor’s Office”. Tashkent city,
August 29, 2001, No. 257-II.
