PECULIAR FEATURES OF EVIDENCE AT THE TERMINATION OF A CRIMINAL CASE

This article analyzes the importance of proof and its features at the stage of termination of a criminal case based on the norms of criminal and criminal procedure legislation at the implementation stage of judicial reform. The article studies this institution‘s scope through the views scientists expressed on proving when closing a criminal case. Based on the views and ideas put forward by scientists, the issue of proof in the termination of a criminal case is analyzed through scientific, theoretical, practical, and legal norms.The article analyzes the grounds for terminating a criminal case through a comparative analysis of the opinions of scientists on the issue of proving when terminating a criminal case. Based on the analysis results, conclusions, proposals, and recommendations aimed at improving the evidence in the termination of a criminal case have been developed.

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.51788/tsul.lr.4.3./MRTG2632

PECULIAR FEATURES OF EVIDENCE AT THE TERMINATION OF A CRIMINAL CASE

ARTICLE INFO Keywords: guilty, termination of a criminal case, rehabilitation, termination of a criminal case on non-rehabilitation grounds, term of bringing to responsibility, suspect, accused, defendant, victim, victim statement.

Introduction One of the important issues in the

Makhmudov Sunnatjon Azim ugli Lecturer of the Department of Criminal Procedural Law, Tashkent State University of Law ORCID: 0000-0002-5397-4736 e-mail: s.maxmudov@tsul.uz

ABSTRACT This article analyzes the importance of proof and its features at the stage of termination of a criminal case based on the norms of criminal and criminal procedure legislation at the implementation stage of judicial reform. The article studies this institution’s scope through the views scientists expressed on proving when closing a criminal case. Based on the views and ideas put forward by scientists, the issue of proof in the termination of a criminal case is analyzed through scientific, theoretical, practical, and legal norms. The article analyzes the grounds for terminating a criminal case through a comparative analysis of the opinions of scientists on the issue of proving when terminating a criminal case. Based on the analysis results, conclusions, proposals, and recommendations aimed at improving the evidence in the termination of a criminal case have been developed.

and liberalization of the norms of criminal procedural legislation is one of the priority

implementation of judicial reforms is to protect the rights of individuals at all stages of the criminal process, including the termination of the criminal case, and to ensure their legal interests. Because improvement tasks in criminal procedural legislation. Due to the topicality of this issue, it is reflected in the adopted regulatory legal documents and state programs. In particular, the Concept of Improving the

26 TSUL Legal Report Volume 4, ISSUE 3 (2023) E-ISSN: 2181-1024

Criminal and Criminal Procedure Legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan [1], approved by the decision of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan № PD-3723 dated May 14, 2018, defined the task of improving certain institutions in criminal and criminal procedure. Based on this, it is important to research the issue of closing the criminal case and the implementation of evidence in the criminal process, as well as to create methodological bases for improving this institution, taking into account the specific features of the bases of closing the criminal case. Material and methods Although the issue of closing the criminal case is defined in the legislation, due to the concept of this institution and problems arising in practice, this research mainly used the method of comparative legal analysis. Because it consists of a comparative evaluation of human experience occurring in the legal systems of different jurisdictions. It involves a logical and inductive method of reasoning. It is valuable as it brings out the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches, procedures, and institutions. At the same time, observation, generalization, induction, and deduction methods were used. Research results As we know, the closing of a criminal case in criminal proceedings is a form of completion of an inquiry and preliminary investigation. In this case, the bodies and officials who have the authority to close the criminal case do so by proving (gathering, checking, and evaluating the evidence) to close the case on some basis. Today, scholars put forward different opinions about the closing of a criminal case and the circumstances that must be proven in it. According to U. Tukhtasheva, the existence of legal facts denying the existence of criminal-procedural relations in the act requires the termination of the criminal case [2, p. 181]. According to the opinion of a group of scientists headed by V. Radchenko [3, p.

18], the termination of the criminal case means the completion of the investigation by the termination of the case due to the discovery of circumstances that exclude further criminal-procedural actions. I can partially agree with the opinions expressed. Because, in some cases, the presence of legal facts denying the existence of criminal-procedural relations leads to the termination of the criminal case. At the same time, we cannot say that there are legal facts that deny the existence of criminal-procedural relations in the application of some grounds mentioned in the criminal-procedural legislation, including conciliation, private prosecution (cases initiated based on the victim’s complaint), as well as other grounds for termination of the case that are terminated with the consent of the person. The reason is that in this case, the criminal case can be terminated with the consent of the parties, or it can be continued in general order. That’s why it is necessary to approach each case individually and prove it based on the nature of the case when closing the criminal case. The completion of a criminal case is a type of investigation and the completion of the preliminary investigation. At this stage, the evidence collected in connection with the case is comprehensively analyzed, checked, and evaluated, and an official authorized to conduct a criminal case has the opportunity to make a well-founded conclusion about whether or not there are grounds for closing the case [4, p. 78]. Based on the above considerations, The concept of closing a criminal case should be interpreted as follows: “Criminal case termination is when an authorized official makes a firm conclusion about the termination of the criminal case and completes the case by issuing a procedural decision or decision, making sure that all the circumstances have been proven to apply a certain basis provided for by the law by evaluating the evidence collected in the case.”.

E-ISSN: 2181-1024 Volume 4, ISSUE 3 (2023) TSUL Legal Report 27

When completing a criminal case and carrying out the proof in it, scientists divide it into several stages. In particular, most authors believed that the termination of the criminal case consisted of clarifying the situation by evaluating the evidence and formalizing this situation through a procedural decision [5, p. 78].

It is impossible to completely agree with the opinions of these authors. Because here, after the completion of the criminal case, the issue of physical evidence and the issue of a precautionary measure remain open.

In our opinion, the completion of the criminal case includes the following steps as one of the types of completion of the inquiry and preliminary investigation:

1) by analyzing and evaluating the evidence collected in the case, determining the appropriate basis for the termination of the case in law, and making a well-founded and reliable conclusion about the impossibility of continuing the investigation, preliminary investigation, or court stage in the future, or about the expediency of the termination; 2) documentation and systematization of criminal case materials as required (this is usually related to the evaluation and recording of evidence, as these actions help in researching the sources of evidence); 3) adoption of a decision (judgment) on the termination of a criminal case; 4) solving all issues related to the decision (judgment) to close the criminal case, including cancellation of the precautionary measure applied to the suspect (accused, defendant), return of property and other items taken from them, etc.; 5) to inform the suspect, the accused, the defendant, and all persons interested in the termination of the case on the termination of the criminal case and, upon their request, to acquaint them with the materials of the terminated case.

Analysis of research results It should be noted that although the grounds and procedures for the termination of the criminal case are provided for in the criminal procedural legislation, the circumstances that must be proven (identified) are not provided for. However, the grounds and procedure for closing the criminal case are provided for.

The grounds for closing a criminal case are defined in Articles 83 and 84 of the Criminal Procedure Code and 16 grounds for closing a criminal case are mentioned in these articles. These 16 bases are divided into certain classifications according to certain criteria [6, pp. 96–102].

The procedure for closing the case on certain grounds is defined in Articles 373 and 374 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Most scientists classify the reasons for closing a criminal case according to rehabilitation and non-rehabilitation grounds [7, pp. 88– 90].

Upon completion of the criminal case based on rehabilitation, the investigator, investigator, and prosecutor shall take necessary measures to restore the person’s pre-commitment rights, honest name, and reputation in court or administrative procedure, and the damage caused to him as a result of the crime shall be fully compensated. [8, p. 70].

Non-rehabilitation grounds are legal facts that allow the termination of the criminal case, which excludes the rehabilitation of a person and the recovery of damages caused to a person.

Termination of the criminal case on grounds that do not lead to rehabilitation means that the state has given up the claim to criminal responsibility without considering whether or not the person is guilty of the crime [9, p. 492].

There are two different procedures for closing a criminal case in the current Criminal Procedure Code. These are: the first, termination of the criminal case on the grounds of rehabilitation (Article 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 3 grounds); the second is the termination of the criminal case without resolving the issue of guilt (non-rehabilitative grounds) (Article 84 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 13

28 TSUL Legal Report Volume 4, ISSUE 3 (2023) E-ISSN: 2181-1024

grounds). The issue of closing the criminal case is one of the issues to be resolved after the authorized official conducting the case collects sufficient evidence on all the circumstances related to the case and proves the facts [10, p. 90].

In agreement with these points, it can be said that initiating a criminal case is fundamentally different from ending it. That is, when deciding whether to open a case, investigative bodies do not always have complete information that will clarify the situation of the case.

At the end of the case, on the contrary, the official conducting the criminal case must have collected sufficient and reliable evidence that sheds light on the current situation and must be examined and evaluated. In this case, the competent official, by analyzing the evidence collected in the case, makes sure that all the circumstances for the application of this basis have been proven and concludes on the termination of the criminal case.

When closing a criminal case, officials determine the circumstances that must be proven based on which the criminal case was closed. We will discuss these issues in detail below.

There are several specific aspects of closing a criminal case: firstly, the bodies and officials authorized to close the criminal case are clearly defined. In this case, the investigator, investigator, prosecutor, and the court are authorized to close the criminal case.

An example, As a result of a quarrel between a person named A. and a person named B., a person named A. caused bodily injury to a person named B. In this case, the person named A. announced that he wanted to compensate for the damage caused to the person named B. and reconcile with the person. The official of the body investigating before the investigation completed the case based on reconciliation and sent the materials to the prosecutor by Article 329 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The prosecutor got acquainted with the case and sent the case to the relevant investigative authorities.

If we analyze this example, the actions of the prosecutor are considered correct. Because before the investigation, the officials of the investigating body do not have the authority to close the criminal case. Here, the investigator or the investigator could finish according to Articles 36, 38, 373, 347, 381/11 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Secondly, it is possible to terminate the criminal case at any stage of the criminal proceedings (not the criminal proceedings), including the initiation of the criminal case. In this case, it is not allowed to terminate the criminal case at any stage of the criminal case on certain grounds of termination.

For information: the concept of “conducting criminal cases” [11, p. 11] refers only to relations that arise after the initiation of a criminal case, and the termination of a criminal case is also carried out at this stage. In this case, criminal proceedings do not include the stage before the initiation of a criminal case, that is, the stage of investigation before investigation. At the investigation stage, the criminal case is not closed, but the initiation of the criminal case is refused.

Proceeding of criminal cases before the court and at the trial stages is a criminal procedure. The criminal process includes the investigation stage before the investigation.

An example. As a result of a quarrel between a person named A. and a person named B., a person named A. caused bodily injury to a person named B.

The case was considered in court, and the person was found guilty by court verdict. The convict filed an appeal and asked to be released from criminal responsibility, stating that he confessed to his guilt, that the damage caused had been eliminated, and that he wanted to reconcile with the victim.

If we analyze this example, according to our current legislation, an application for reconciliation can be submitted by the victim (civil plaintiff) or his legal representative at any stage of the inquiry and preliminary

E-ISSN: 2181-1024 Volume 4, ISSUE 3 (2023) TSUL Legal Report 29

investigation, as well as the trial, but before the court enters the consultation room (Article 583 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). Therefore, according to the example given above, it is not allowed to close the criminal case based on reconciliation. Thirdly, formalized in the form of an official procedural document. In this case, the investigator, the investigator, and the prosecutor issue a decision to terminate the criminal case, and the court terminates the criminal case by issuing a verdict. As mentioned above, the circumstances to be proven in the termination of the criminal case directly depend on the termination of the criminal case. In this case, the issue of proof arises from the specific aspects of the ground of termination. First, we will focus on the circumstances that must be proven when closing a criminal case based on rehabilitation. Article 83 of the Criminal Procedure Code stipulates 3 grounds for rehabilitation, and the suspect, accused, defendant is found innocent and rehabilitated in the following cases: 1) if a criminal incident did not occur in the case in which the case was initiated and investigative actions or court proceedings were held; 2) if the person’s act does not contain a criminal element; 3) if the person is not involved in the committed crime. In closing the criminal case on the grounds of rehabilitation, it is required to establish that the person is innocent of committing the crime (that he did not commit the crime or was not related to the committed crime). [10, p. 448]. Because the issue of proof was considered the obligation of the investigator, the prosecutor, and the court. By paragraph 1 of Article 83 of the Criminal Procedure Code (if a criminal incident has not occurred in a case where a case has been initiated and investigative actions or a trial has been conducted), the following issues should be determined when closing a criminal case:

1) the objective non-existence of a criminal incident that is the basis for the initiation of a criminal case, that is, the fact that the incident did not occur at all (for example, the victim’s alleged stolen item is found in his house, or the crime turns out not to have been committed at all, etc.); 2) an incident occurred, but its origin did not occur as a result of a person’s criminal behavior (for example, a fire caused by a natural disaster burns the organization’s warehouse and causes a large amount of property damage. Such situations are caused by floods, earthquakes, and other types of natural disasters). 3) the incident occurred, but the victim himself was responsible for its occurrence (for example, suicide, accidents in the field of traffic and its use, which caused the death of the victim due to negligence, etc.). Clause 2 of Article 83 of the Criminal Procedure Code (if a person’s act does not contain the content of a crime) requires the determination of the absence of one or more of the elements of the composition of the crime (the object of the crime, the objective aspect of the crime, the subject of the crime, the subjective aspect of the crime) in the criminal case. According to paragraph 3 of Article 83 of the Criminal Procedure Code (if the person is not involved in the committed crime), it is necessary to prove that the person has no connection to the committed crime when closing the criminal case. Involvement in a crime means that a crime is being prepared, committed, or committed, as well as knowingly not reporting to the authorities about the persons who committed it, concealing the traces of the crime or the persons who committed it without a prior promise, fighting against crime, and preventing it. It is said that it is understood that the persons charged with the obligation do not prevent the crimes committed [10, p. 448]. As noted by B. Murodov, to apply the basis of Article 83, paragraph 3 of the Criminal Procedure Code, that is, if it is not

30 TSUL Legal Report Volume 4, ISSUE 3 (2023) E-ISSN: 2181-1024

related to the committed crime, the person must not be related to the committed crime at all. If a person is involved in the crime but sufficient evidence is not collected to prove that his act contained a criminal element, it is correct to terminate the case against him based on Clause 2 of Article 83, that is, “if his act does not contain a criminal element” [11, p. 94]. By paragraph 9 of the decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On the verdict,” if the fact and the origin of the socially dangerous act are determined, but the fact that it was committed by the defendant is denied or not confirmed by the evidence presented and verified at the trial, the court issues a verdict of acquittal because the person was not involved in the committed crime (Clause 3 of Article 83 of the Criminal Procedure Code). The reasoned conclusion of the investigator or the court that the evidence collected in the case is insufficient, that it cannot be considered as evidence because it was obtained illegally, or that it is not possible to eliminate the doubt about the defendant’s complete guilt in the charged case to terminate the criminal case or issue an acquittal by paragraph 3 of Article 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure serves as a basis. Termination of the criminal case without solving the issue of guilt (Article 84 of the Code of Criminal Procedure contains 13 grounds) [12, pp. 110–115]. When closing a criminal case due to the expiration of the term, it is required to determine whether the time limit for prosecution specified in Article 64 of the Criminal Code has passed, whether the term has been interrupted or not, and whether the criminal case has been suspended or not. When closing the criminal case regarding the death of a person (accused, defendant), it is necessary to determine the fact that the death occurred and that the crime was committed by the deceased person. In case of termination of the criminal case with the consent of the person without solving the issue of his guilt (the fifth part of Article

84 of the Code of Criminal Procedure), the following circumstances must be proven: 1) whether or not there is a person’s voluntary consent (suspect, accused, and defendant) to close the criminal case; 2) a plea of guilty must be filed. In this case, it is required that the application be filed before the person is suspected or charged, that the person has committed a crime for the first time, and that the committed crime falls into the category of crimes with a low or low social risk according to the severity of the crime; 3) it is required to be sincerely remorseful and to have actively helped to solve the crime. In this case, it is required that the person express his sincere remorse (compensation for damages) and the state of actively helping to solve the crime (exposing his accomplices, telling about the planned crime, providing physical evidence). Conclusion Based on the results of the analysis, the following are proposed to improve the issue of proof in the termination of the criminal case: First of all, every case that is subject to proof when closing a criminal case on the grounds of rehabilitation must be proven by the investigator, the prosecutor, and the court. Secondly, if the criminal case is terminated due to the expiration of the term, it is appropriate to reconsider the amount of damage caused by the crime and the issue of compensation. Thirdly, in order to terminate the criminal case without solving the issue of guilt with the consent of the person, it is necessary to prove the confession of the person. In this case, the confession must be given based on the consent of the person. In conclusion, it can be said that it is necessary to improve the institution of closing the criminal case based on the analysis of advanced international standards and the practices of developed foreign countries. It is also necessary to ensure the protection of the legal rights and freedoms of citizens in the implementation of evidence at the stage of closing the case.

E-ISSN: 2181-1024 Volume 4, ISSUE 3 (2023) TSUL Legal Report 31