The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
7
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
TYPE
Original Research
PAGE NO.
7-9
10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue04-02
OPEN ACCESS
SUBMITED
09 February 2025
ACCEPTED
12 March 2025
PUBLISHED
08 April 2025
VOLUME
Vol.07 Issue04 2025
CITATION
Nazarov Mukhamatali Azimovich. (2025). Legal measures applied for
crimes and administrative offences. The American Journal of Political
Science Law and Criminology, 7(04), 7
–
9.
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue04-02
COPYRIGHT
© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.
Legal measures applied for
crimes and administrative
offences
Nazarov Mukhamatali Azimovich
PhD, Head of the Department of Criminal Law Disciplines of the Higher
School of Judges of the Supreme Judicial Council of the Republic of
Uzbekistan
Abstract:
This article provides a comparative - legal
analysis of measures of legal impact for crimes and
administrative offences. In particular, it shows the
similarity and difference of measures of legal impact in
the form of deprivation of a certain (special) right
applied for violation of traffic safety rules, provided by
the Criminal Code and the Code of Administrative
Responsibility of the Republic of Uzbekistan, points out
the existing contradictions and gaps in the legislation, in
this regard, proposals for their elimination are given.
Keywords:
Measures of legal impact, Criminal Code,
Code
of
Administrative
Responsibility,
crime,
administrative offence, punishment, administrative
penalty, fine, deprivation of a certain right, deprivation
of a special right, deprivation of the right to drive a
vehicle.
Introduction:
Strengthening of the economy of our
state, growth of material well-being of citizens is directly
related to the development of the automobile industry,
increase of motor transport. Therefore, special
attention is paid to road safety issues. President of the
Republic of Uzbekistan Sh. Mirziyoyev at a conference
call on 20 October 2023 once again drew attention of
responsible persons to the need to take appropriate
measures on these issues, pointing out that only
recently 4200 people, mostly young people, have died
as a result of road accidents.
One of the methods of ensuring road safety is strict
observance of the principle of inevitability of
responsibility for committing crimes and offences
related to the violation of traffic rules.
According to the article 20 of the Constitution of the
Rupublic of Uzbekistan, the measures of legal impact on
the individual applied by State bodies must be based on
the principle of proportionality and must be sufficient to
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
8
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
achieve the objectives set out in the law.
Under current legislation, liability for violations of
traffic safety rules or the operation of vehicles is
established, depending on the severity of the socially
dangerous consequences, by the relevant articles of
the Criminal Code and the Code of Administrative
Responsibility of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
The most frequently applied measure of legal action
for violations of traffic safety rules or the operation of
vehicles is the penalty of deprivation of a certain right
under article 45 of the Criminal Code and the
administrative penalty of deprivation of a special right
under article 28 of the Code of Administrative
Responsibility of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
The analysis of these measures of legal impact for
committing identical offences provided for by various
legal acts shows the presence of common features and
properties, although there are certain differences.
The application of punishment in the form of
deprivation of a certain right and administrative
penalty in the form of deprivation of a special right is
mainly aimed at preventing the continuation of
unlawful actions related to driving a vehicle and
preventing the perpetrator from committing new
offences.
Under article 45 of the Criminal Code, the penalty of
deprivation of a certain right is a mixed type of
punishment, i.e. it may be applied as either a basic or
an additional punishment, and both the basic and
additional punishments are identical in their content,
the only difference being the length of the punishment
and the procedure for serving it. A similar rule is set out
in article 24 of the Code of Administrative
Responsibility, according to which an administrative
penalty in the form of deprivation of a special right (the
right to drive vehicles) may be applied as both a main
and an additional administrative penalty.
Under article 81 of the Criminal Code, the penalty of
deprivation of a certain right is not applicable to
persons who have committed offences before reaching
the age of 18. Article 28 of the Administrative Liability
Code restricts the imposition of administrative
penalties on persons who use vehicles because of a
disability, except in the case of certain offences (driving
while intoxicated, running a prohibited traffic signal,
repeated or substantial excessive speeding).
Administrative penalty in the form of deprivation of a
special right shall be appointed for the term from
fifteen days up to three years. Criminal punishment in
the form of deprivation of a certain right as the basic
punishment shall be appointed within the term
established by the sanction of article of the Especial
part of the Criminal Code, but not less than one year and
not more than five years. As an additional punishment
deprivation of a certain right can be appointed by court
irrespective of whether it is specified in the sanction of
the article, for the term from one year up to three years.
Deprivation of a certain right as a basic punishment is
not interchangeable, i.e. the law does not provide for its
replacement by another, stricter type of basic
punishment in the case of evasion from serving the
sentence. At the same time, being a stricter type of
punishment in relation to a fine, it may be replaced by a
fine by the court on the basis of article 57 of the Criminal
Code. According to Article 33 of the Code on
Administrative Responsibility, an administrative penalty
in the form of deprivation of a special right may be
imposed below the lowest limit established by the
sanction of the article or instead of this type of
administrative penalty to apply another, more lenient
penalty, which this article does not provide for.
A person sentenced to deprivation of the right to drive
a motor vehicle as an additional penalty may be
released on parole from serving his sentence under
article 74 of the Criminal Code and article 164,
paragraph 4, of the Penal Enforcement Code. The law
does not provide for conditional early release from
serving the sentence of a person sentenced to
deprivation of a certain right as a basic sentence.
A person deprived of a special right may have the period
of administrative punishment reduced in accordance
with Article 343 of the Code of Administrative
Responsibility.
The penalty of deprivation of a certain right is not
specific. The law does not establish a specific position or
a specific activity that is prohibited, referring this to the
competence of the court. Article 28 of the Code of
Administrative Responsibility as an administrative
penalty in the form of deprivation of a special right
specifically defines deprivation of a special right as
deprivation of the right to drive vehicles.
Article 45 of the Criminal Code does not provide for legal
consequences for evasion of serving a sentence of
deprivation of a certain right.
However, the effectiveness of achieving the goals of
punishment is directly related to the liability for evasion
or repeated commission of identical offences.
Thus, V. Malkov notes that administrative prejudice and
repeated
offences
are
important
means
of
criminalisation and decriminalisation of acts, allowing a
flexible response to changes in the public danger of
certain actions.
Article 135, paragraph 3, of the Code of Administrative
Responsibility provides for liability for driving vehicles
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
9
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
by persons deprived of this right. Administrative
liability under this article arises irrespective of whether
the deprivation of the right to drive a vehicle has been
imposed on a person as a criminal penalty or as an
administrative penalty.
Article 2612 of the Criminal Code provides for
administrative prejudice in the form of criminal liability
for the driving of a vehicle by a person deprived of the
right to drive, committed after the imposition of an
administrative penalty for the same act.
These circumstances indicate the presence of common
features and attributes of criminal punishment and
administrative offence in the form of deprivation of a
certain right.
At the same time, the presence of common features of
these measures of legal influence can create certain
difficulties in addressing issues related to the
execution of administrative penalty and criminal
punishment. Thus, the law does not provide for the
procedure for imposition of final punishment to a
person sentenced to punishment in the form of
deprivation of the right to drive a vehicle in the
presence of an unexecuted administrative penalty in
the form of deprivation of the right to drive a vehicle.
Obviously,
under
such
circumstances,
an
administrative penalty imposed for committing an
administrative offence may remain unexecuted.
The same is the case in cases of committing an
administrative offence by a person who has not served
the punishment imposed on him by a court sentence in
the form of deprivation of the right to drive a vehicle.
If the court comes to the conclusion that it is necessary
to impose on him an administrative penalty in the form
of deprivation of the right to drive a vehicle, it will not
be able to determine to him the procedure for
calculating the period of the imposed administrative
penalty. Since the law does not provide rules for
combining identical measures of legal impact
established by the Criminal Code and the Code on
Administrative Responsibility, one of the measures of
legal impact may remain unexecuted.
At the same time, article 138 of the Constitution
stipulates that the acts of the judiciary are binding on
all State bodies and other organisations, officials and
citizens.
A court decision on an administrative offence is a
judicial act and, in accordance with article 138 of the
Constitution, is subject to compulsory enforcement. In
this connection, we believe that it is necessary to make
appropriate amendments to the legislative acts
establishing the procedure for combining identical
measures of legal effect provided for in the Criminal
Code and the Code of Administrative Responsibility of
the Republic of Uzbekistan.
REFERENCES
Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan. National
Legal Information Center "Adolat". Tashkent, 2023.
Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan. National
Legal Information Center "Adolat". Tashkent, 2025.
Code of Administrative Responsibility of the Republic of
Uzbekistan. National Legal Information Center "Adolat".
Tashkent, 2025.
Malkov V.P. Repeated offence and administrative
prejudice
as
means
of
criminalisation
and
decriminalisation of an offence in Russian criminal law.
https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/neodnokratnost-
pravonarusheniya-i-administrativnaya-preyuditsiya-
kak-sredstva-kriminalizatsii-i-dekriminalizatsii-
sodeyannogo-v
