Bringing a Person to Suicide Through Cruel Treatment or Systematic Humiliation of the Victim’s Human Dignity

1. General Description of the Elements of the Criminal Offence

Part 1 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan provides for liability for:

bringing a person to suicide or attempted suicide through threats, cruel treatment or systematic humiliation of the victim’s human dignity, as well as inducing a person to commit suicide or facilitating the commission of suicide.

The sanction under Part 1 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan is restriction of liberty for a term of up to three years or deprivation of liberty for the same term.

The full text of Article 105 is available on the Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan page on zakonpravo.kz.

In this regard, it is fundamentally important, for the type of conduct under consideration, to distinguish between:

1. bringing a person to suicide;
2. bringing a person to attempted suicide;
3. inducing a person to commit suicide;
4. facilitating the commission of suicide.

The user's request primarily concerns the first and second forms, namely cases in which psychological or physical influence is expressed specifically through cruel treatment or systematic humiliation of human dignity.

The offence has a complex objective structure: it is necessary to establish not merely the fact of cruel behaviour or humiliation, but also the connection between such conduct and the emergence of suicidal behaviour in the victim, resulting in the victim being brought to suicide or attempted suicide.

In other words, for criminal liability, it is insufficient to establish that:

“the accused treated the victim badly.”

It is necessary to prove the following chain:

specific unlawful conduct → formation or aggravation of a psychologically traumatic state → suicidal decision/behaviour → suicide or attempted suicide → causal relationship between the conduct and the result.

This is the central evidentiary issue in cases of this category.

2. Generic, Specific and Immediate Legal Interests Protected

2.1. Generic Legal Interest

Article 105 is included among offences against the person and primarily protects human life.

The principal social value protected is the human right to life.

Therefore, Article 105 is directly connected with the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan establishing liability for other infringements upon life and health.

Depending on the specific circumstances, issues of concurrence or cumulative qualification with the following offences may arise:

• murder;
• causing bodily harm;
• torture;
• battery;
• threats;
• unlawful deprivation of liberty;
• violent offences;
• offences against minors;
• promotion of suicide;
• other criminal offences.

The legal qualification is determined not by the label attached to the conflict between the parties, but by the factual circumstances established.

3. Objective Elements

The objective elements of Part 1 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, insofar as the conduct under consideration is concerned, consist of:

a) cruel treatment;

or

b) systematic humiliation of the victim’s human dignity;

resulting in:

a) suicide;

or

b) attempted suicide.

Three elements are of key importance:

1. unlawful conduct;
2. a specific form of such conduct;
3. the result and the causal relationship.

4. The Concept of Cruel Treatment

Article 105 does not contain an exhaustive list of actions that should be regarded as cruel treatment.

Therefore, the substance of this concept is determined taking into account the factual circumstances of the case.

Cruel treatment may include actions characterised by:

• brutality;
• mercilessness;
• the continuous infliction of physical or psychological suffering;
• abuse;
• the deliberate infliction of suffering;
• degrading treatment;
• prolonged violence;
• the creation of intolerable living conditions;
• systematic psychological pressure;
• a combination of physical and psychological violence.

In material concerning Article 105 published on zakonpravo.kz, cruel treatment is characterised as merciless and harsh behaviour causing the victim physical or psychological suffering.

However, the following principle is important:

not every instance of rude or conflict-related behaviour automatically constitutes cruel treatment within the meaning of Article 105 of the Criminal Code.

For example, a single family argument, insult or conflict does not, in itself, automatically indicate the presence of the elements of bringing a person to suicide.

It is necessary to establish:

• the intensity of the conduct;
• the nature and content of the conduct;
• its duration;
• the circumstances;
• the perpetrator’s attitude towards the victim;
• the consequences;
• the victim’s mental state;
• the causal relationship.

5. Systematic Humiliation of Human Dignity

This is one of the most difficult elements to prove.

The term “systematic” means not an isolated incident, but a certain degree of repetition of the conduct.

For example:

• regular verbal abuse;
• constant humiliation in front of relatives;
• systematic ridicule;
• regular public humiliation;
• repeatedly telling the victim that they are “worthless”;
• regularly humiliating the victim over their appearance;
• constant humiliation concerning their marital or family status;
• systematic humiliation in the workplace;
• regular humiliating messages sent through messengers;
• publication of humiliating materials;
• continuous psychological pressure.

At the same time, the word “systematic” should not be mechanically equated with a specific number of incidents.

Criminal law does not establish a formula whereby:

“three times = systematic conduct”.

The court must assess the totality of the circumstances.

6. The Difference Between a Conflict and Systematic Humiliation

For the purposes of defence and prosecution practice, it is fundamentally important not to confuse:

an ordinary interpersonal conflict

and

systematic humiliation of human dignity.

For example, a one-time dispute between spouses does not, in itself, indicate the presence of Article 105.

However, if it is established that, over a prolonged period, one spouse:

• constantly humiliated the other;
• controlled their contacts;
• regularly insulted them;
• threatened them;
• intimidated them;
• deprived them of means of subsistence;
• humiliated them in front of their children;
• disseminated humiliating information;
• systematically created psychologically intolerable conditions,

and the victim subsequently attempted suicide, the totality of these circumstances requires a criminal-law assessment.

7. The Need to Establish a Causal Relationship

This is the central element of the offence.

The following question must be answered:

Was it specifically the accused’s conduct that caused the victim’s suicidal behaviour to arise?

The mere fact that:

“a person attempted suicide after a conflict”

does not automatically mean that:

“the conflict caused the attempt”.

The investigation must examine the entire range of possible causes.

For example:

• family relationships;
• employment relationships;
• financial problems;
• health condition;
• mental state;
• consumption of alcohol or other substances;
• previous attempts;
• previous threats of suicide;
• medical history;
• relationships with other persons;
• the existence of other conflicts;
• correspondence;
• messages sent by the victim;
• suicide notes;
• search queries;
• audio and video materials;
• witness statements.

8. The Causal Relationship Must Not Be Replaced by an Assumption

The investigation cannot be limited to the following formula:

“the accused humiliated the victim, after which the victim attempted suicide”.

It is necessary to establish the intermediate facts.

For example:

A. the accused systematically humiliated the victim;

B. the humiliation occurred immediately before the deterioration of the victim’s condition;

C. the victim informed third parties about the conduct and treatment they were experiencing;

D. medical or psychological data confirm a change in the victim’s condition;

E. another incident occurred immediately before the suicide attempt;

F. alternative causes are absent or are not of a determining nature;

G. there is evidence linking the accused’s actions to the development of suicidal behaviour.

It is precisely the totality of these circumstances that may form the evidentiary basis.

9. Subjective Elements

Under Article 105 of the Criminal Code, the offence belongs to the category of intentional criminal offences in terms of the relevant mental attitude towards the conduct.

However, it is necessary to distinguish between:

9.1. The intention to cause suffering

and

9.2. The intention to bring a person to suicide.

These are not always the same.

For example, a person may deliberately and systematically humiliate the victim while claiming that they did not wish the victim to die.

Therefore, the subject matter of proof must include the following question:

Was the person aware of the nature of their conduct and its possible consequences for the victim?

10. Can a Person Be Held Liable if They Did Not Want the Victim to Commit Suicide?

The mere absence of a desire for the victim’s death does not automatically exclude the application of Article 105.

Otherwise, this Article would effectively apply only to persons who directly sought the victim’s death.

However, the criminal-law assessment must be based on the established form of guilt and the specific circumstances of the case.

It is particularly important to examine:

• whether the accused understood the victim’s mental state;
• whether the victim had warned of their intention to commit suicide;
• whether there had been previous attempts;
• whether there had been threats of suicide;
• whether relatives had informed the accused of the danger;
• whether the accused continued the conduct after receiving such warnings;
• whether the accused could have foreseen the consequences of their behaviour.

11. Subject of the Offence

The subject is a sane natural person who has reached the age of criminal responsibility.

Part 1 of Article 105 does not establish a special subject.

This means that the perpetrator may be:

• a spouse;
• a relative;
• an employer;
• a colleague;
• a manager;
• a teacher;
• an acquaintance;
• a former partner;
• any other person.

The victim’s position in relation to the accused is of particular importance.

If the victim was:

• financially dependent;
• otherwise dependent;
• in a helpless condition,

this may also be relevant to qualification under Part 2 of Article 105, since the current version of the Article expressly provides for such qualifying circumstances.

12. Qualified Offences under Article 105

For the purpose of proper legal qualification, Parts 2 and 3 of Article 105 must be examined from the outset.

Part 2 provides for more severe liability where the act is committed, in particular:

• against a person who is knowingly in a helpless condition;
• against a person who is financially or otherwise dependent;
• against two or more persons;
• by a group of persons;
• by a criminal group;
• through telecommunications networks, information systems or the Internet.

The sanction is restriction of liberty for a term of up to five years or deprivation of liberty for the same term.

Part 3 provides for liability for acts under Parts 1 or 2 committed against a minor — deprivation of liberty for a term of five to nine years.

Consequently, the victim’s age must be established at the initial stage of the investigation.

13. Specific Features of Internet-Based Evidence

In modern cases under Article 105, the following may be of particular importance:

• WhatsApp;
• Telegram;
• Instagram;
• TikTok;
• Facebook;
• email;
• SMS;
• voice messages;
• video calls;
• posts;
• comments;
• private chats;
• CCTV recordings;
• phone backups.

If the Internet is used to commit the relevant acts, qualification under paragraph 4 of Part 2 of Article 105 may arise.

However, the mere fact of using a messenger does not automatically mean that the qualifying circumstance applies.

It is necessary to establish:

1. who exactly created the message;
2. to whom it was sent;
3. when it was sent;
4. what exactly the message contained;
5. whether the account belonged to the accused;
6. whether third parties had access to it;
7. whether the original or a duly obtained copy exists;
8. whether the content and context are corroborated.

14. Evidence and Proof

In cases under Article 105, evidence may be conditionally divided into several groups.

14.1. Electronic Evidence

The following are particularly important:

• correspondence;
• audio messages;
• video recordings;
• photographs;
• screenshots;
• posts;
• email;
• social media data;
• backups;
• call history.

However, a screenshot alone should not be considered outside its context.

It is advisable to establish:

• the source;
• the date;
• the time;
• the device;
• the account;
• the participants in the communication;
• the integrity of the file.

15. Medical Evidence

The following may be relevant:

• medical records;
• a psychiatrist’s report;
• a psychologist’s report;
• ambulance service documents;
• hospitalisation records;
• information about previous medical consultations;
• data concerning previous suicide attempts;
• information about treatment;
• expert opinions.

At the same time, it is necessary to distinguish between:

the medical fact of a suicide attempt

and

the cause of the suicide attempt.

The former does not automatically prove the latter.

16. Forensic Psychological and Psychiatrico-Psychological Examination

In appropriate cases, the need for an expert examination may arise.

Experts may be asked questions concerning:

• the psychological state of the person;
• the presence of psychologically traumatic circumstances;
• psychological influence;
• the characteristics of interpersonal relationships;
• the presence of signs of psychological pressure;
• the person’s ability to correctly perceive the circumstances;
• the presence of other factors.

However, the lawyer should carefully monitor the wording of the questions.

An expert must not effectively replace the court and answer a legal question such as:

“Is the accused guilty under Article 105 of the Criminal Code?”

Legal qualification falls within the competence of the criminal prosecution authority and the court.

17. Witness Testimony

Key witnesses may include:

• a spouse;
• relatives;
• friends;
• neighbours;
• colleagues;
• employees of an organisation;
• teachers;
• classmates;
• medical professionals;
• psychologists;
• persons to whom the victim spoke about what was happening.

Particular importance may attach to witnesses whom the victim informed immediately before the suicide attempt about what they were experiencing:

“I can't take it anymore”;

“They have driven me to this”;

“I don't want to live”;

“If this continues, I will kill myself”.

However, such statements must be assessed in the context of all other evidence.

18. Suicide Note

If a suicide note exists, it may have significant evidentiary value.

However, it is not automatically sufficient evidence of the guilt of a particular person.

It is necessary to verify:

• authorship;
• the time it was written;
• the victim’s condition;
• authenticity;
• content;
• the circumstances in which it was discovered;
• whether other notes exist;
• consistency of the note with electronic correspondence and witness testimony.

19. The Accused’s Unsubstantiated Denial

The defence statement:

“I did not force them to commit suicide”

does not, in itself, resolve the issue of legal qualification.

Since Article 105 specifically provides for bringing a person to suicide through certain methods of influence, it is necessary to examine the objective picture of the conduct.

At the same time, the opposite logical error is also impermissible:

“the victim attempted suicide, therefore the accused is guilty”.

The principle of the presumption of innocence applies in criminal proceedings.

20. Subject Matter of Proof

In the case, at least the following must be established:

1. the event of the criminal offence;
2. the time;
3. the place;
4. the method;
5. the person who committed the act;
6. the form of guilt;
7. the nature of the actions;
8. the systematic nature of the humiliation — if the charge is based on this method;
9. the fact of cruel treatment — if the charge is based on this method;
10. the fact of suicide or attempted suicide;
11. the causal relationship;
12. the motive;
13. the consequences;
14. the amount of pecuniary damage;
15. non-pecuniary damage;
16. circumstances affecting the legal qualification;
17. circumstances excluding criminal liability;
18. circumstances mitigating or aggravating liability.

 21. Jurisdiction

The issue of jurisdiction is governed by the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (CPC RK).

District courts and courts equated to them are courts of first instance and hear criminal cases, except for cases falling within the jurisdiction of specialized courts. This is established by Article 306 of the CPC RK.

Specialized inter-district criminal courts have jurisdiction over, in particular, certain categories of especially serious crimes and the criminal offences expressly listed in Article 308 of the Criminal Code.

With regard to the ordinary case under Part 1 of Article 105, it is necessary to proceed from the applicable sanction and the rules of jurisdiction in force at the time the case is heard.

Accordingly, where the charge is brought under Part 1 of Article 105, the matter generally falls within the jurisdiction of a district court or a court equated to it, unless the specific circumstances bring the case within special jurisdiction.

22. Competence of Authorities

The term “subject-matter jurisdiction” is used less precisely in relation to criminal proceedings than in civil or administrative proceedings.

In criminal proceedings, it is more appropriate to distinguish between:

• investigative jurisdiction;
• judicial jurisdiction;
• the competence of the criminal prosecution authority.

It is necessary to determine which authority is responsible for conducting the pre-trial investigation.

Once the case has been referred to court, the issue becomes one of judicial jurisdiction.

Disputes concerning jurisdiction are resolved in accordance with the CPC rules; Article 318 provides for a mechanism for resolving disputes between courts.

23. Pre-Trial Investigation

The general procedure for criminal proceedings applies to Article 105.

It is necessary to distinguish between:

a report of a criminal offence

and

proof of the elements of a criminal offence.

The receipt of a statement constitutes grounds for a procedural review and for a subsequent decision in accordance with the CPC. However, the victim's statement, in itself, does not prove a person's guilt.

24. The State's Obligation to Investigate the Circumstances of a Death or Attempted Suicide

The following circumstances must be examined with particular care:

• death;
• attempted suicide;
• bodily injuries sustained by the victim;
• hospitalization;
• changes in behaviour.

This is due to the State's obligation to ensure an effective investigation into circumstances involving an infringement of the right to life.

The international legal basis includes, in particular, Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Kazakhstan ratified the ICCPR by Law No. 91 dated 28 November 2005; the Covenant entered into force for Kazakhstan on 24 April 2006.

The Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan separately provides clarifications on the need for courts to apply the provisions of international treaties to which Kazakhstan is a party.

25. State Duty

25.1. Civil Claim within Criminal Proceedings

This is a fundamentally important advantage.

Pursuant to Part 3 of Article 167 of the CPC RK, a civil claimant who files a civil claim in criminal proceedings is exempt from payment of the state duty.

Therefore, a victim filing a claim for:

• material damage;
• moral damage;
• other damage,

within the framework of criminal proceedings is not required to pay the state duty in advance, as would be the case with an independent civil claim.

26. Where Moral Damages Are Claimed Separately in Civil Proceedings

Here, it is necessary to distinguish between a claim considered together with a criminal case and an independent civil proceeding.

The current Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, effective from 2026 — Code No. 214-VIII dated 18 July 2025 — regulates state duty rates.

The specific rate depends on the nature of the claim and the applicable subparagraph of Article 610 of the Tax Code.

An overview published on zakonpravo.kz states that a claim for compensation for moral damage generally falls within the category of non-property claims, whereas a special rate of 1% is provided for monetary claims concerning moral damage caused by the dissemination of information discrediting honour, dignity and business reputation.

Therefore, in the case of a separate claim for moral damage caused specifically by a criminal offence under Article 105, the claim must be classified in accordance with the current version of the Tax Code, rather than automatically applying the 1% rule applicable to cases involving the protection of honour and dignity.

27. Pre-Trial Procedure for a Civil Claim

Where a civil claim is filed within the framework of criminal proceedings, a separate mandatory pre-trial claim procedure is generally not required.

A civil claim may be filed:

• from the commencement of the pre-trial investigation;
• until the conclusion of the judicial investigation.

This is expressly provided for in Article 167 of the CPC RK.

28. Time Limit for Filing a Civil Claim in Criminal Proceedings

This is one of the most important procedural features.

Article 167 of the CPC allows a civil claim to be filed:

from the commencement of the pre-trial investigation until the conclusion of the judicial investigation.

Accordingly, the victim is not required to wait until the criminal proceedings have been completed.

Moreover, filing the claim at an early stage makes it possible to:

• submit motions;
• determine the amount of damage;
• participate in the evidentiary process;
• request the adoption of interim protective measures;
• obtain the procedural status of a civil claimant.

29. Who May File a Civil Claim in the Event of the Victim's Death

Article 167 of the CPC specifically provides that, where the death of a person has resulted from a criminal offence, a civil claim may be filed by:

• close relatives;
• the spouse of the deceased,

who exercise the victim's rights to the extent provided for by law.

In this regard, in a case involving bringing a person to suicide where death has occurred, it is necessary to establish:

• the person's status;
• the family relationship;
• the grounds for recognizing the relevant person as a participant in the proceedings;
• the nature of the damage claimed.

30. Court's Decision on the Civil Claim

Pursuant to Article 170 of the CPC, the court may:

1. uphold the claim in full;
2. uphold the claim in part;
3. dismiss the claim;
4. recognize the right to satisfaction of the claim and refer the issue of the amount to civil proceedings;
5. accept the withdrawal of the claim;
6. approve a settlement agreement or a mediation agreement;
7. leave the claim without consideration.

This means that the inability to determine the exact amount of damage directly within criminal proceedings does not necessarily result in the complete loss of the right to compensation.

31. Moral Damage

Article 951 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (CC RK) defines moral damage as the violation, diminution or deprivation of personal non-property benefits and rights, including mental and physical suffering.

The legislator expressly identifies the following experiences among such suffering:

• humiliation;
• irritation;
• depression;
• anger;
• shame;
• despair;
• physical pain;
• a sense of inferiority;
• a state of discomfort.

Where the victim has died, compensation for moral damage may be awarded to close relatives and the spouse of the deceased in the cases provided for by law.

32. Amount of Compensation for Moral Damage

The amount of compensation is not determined arithmetically.

The following factors must be taken into account, among others, when determining the amount:

• the nature of the offence;
• the severity of the consequences;
• the degree of mental suffering;
• the significance of the violated benefit;
• family circumstances;
• age;
• state of health;
• duration of suffering;
• publicity of the impact;
• the nature of the perpetrator's conduct;
• consequences for the family.

Of particular importance is Regulatory Resolution No. 7 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 27 November 2015, “On the Application by Courts of Legislation on Compensation for Moral Damage”.

Furthermore, in Regulatory Resolution No. 32-NP dated 6 October 2023, the Constitutional Court considered issues concerning the constitutionality of the provisions of Article 951 of the CC and Paragraph 9 of Regulatory Resolution No. 7 of the Supreme Court, including issues relating to the conditions for compensation for moral damage.

33. Who Qualifies as a Victim

In criminal proceedings, a victim is a person who has directly suffered:

• moral damage;
• physical harm;
• property damage,

as a result of a criminal offence.

A victim has a broad range of procedural rights.

In particular, the victim has the right to:

• submit evidence;
• file motions;
• have a representative;
• examine procedural documents in accordance with the procedure established by law;
• appeal decisions;
• file a civil claim;
• participate in its consideration.

34. Persons Participating in the Proceedings

The following persons may participate in proceedings under Article 105:

On the prosecution side

• prosecutor;
• investigator;
• inquiry officer — within the limits of their competence;
• other authorized persons.

On the defence side

• suspect;
• accused;
• defendant;
• defence counsel;
• legal representative — where applicable.

On the victim's side

• victim;
• victim's representative;
• civil claimant;
• civil claimant's representative.

Additional participants

• civil defendant;
• civil defendant's representative;
• witness;
• expert;
• specialist;
• interpreter;
• mediator;
• legal representative of a minor.

35. Defence Counsel

The participation of defence counsel is of fundamental importance even at the pre-trial investigation stage.

It is particularly important to ensure the participation of defence counsel during:

• questioning;
• the notification of suspicion;
• the selection of a preventive measure;
• the conduct of expert examinations;
• familiarization with the case materials;
• consideration of motions;
• judicial proceedings.

Defence counsel may not, contrary to the position of the person being defended, admit that person's guilt or acknowledge the civil claim.

36. Reconciliation of the Parties

Particular caution is required here.

Under its sanction, Part 1 of Article 105 falls within the category of minor or medium-gravity offences, depending on the applicable classification of offences and the specific version of the law.

Article 68 of the Criminal Code provides for exemption from criminal liability in connection with reconciliation for persons who have committed a criminal misdemeanour or a crime of minor or medium gravity not associated with causing death, subject to the conditions established by law.

The main conditions are:

1. reconciliation;
2. the existence of a victim;
3. redress for the damage caused;
4. absence of statutory impediments.

37. A Critically Important Issue: Whether Death Occurred or Only an Attempted Suicide Took Place

This is fundamentally important for Article 105.

If the victim attempted suicide but survived, the possibility of applying Article 68 may be considered under the rules applicable to an offence of the relevant category, provided that no other restrictions apply.

However, if the result of bringing the person to suicide was death, a direct restriction under Article 68 arises, since Part 1 of Article 68 applies to acts not associated with causing death.

Consequently, the same outward conduct of the accused may have substantially different procedural consequences depending on the outcome.

38. Mediation

The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Mediation” expressly extends the mediation procedure to criminal proceedings involving:

• criminal misdemeanours;
• crimes of minor gravity;
• crimes of medium gravity;
• certain serious crimes specified in Article 68 of the Criminal Code.

The specific features of mediation in criminal proceedings are regulated by Article 24 of the Law.

It is important to note:

the mere fact of participating in mediation does not constitute an admission of guilt.

Furthermore, judges and criminal prosecution authorities are not entitled to compel the parties to participate in mediation.

39. Redress for Damage

A mere promise:

“I will pay the money later”

may be insufficient for the application of Article 68.

Regulatory Resolution No. 4 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 21 June 2001 states that redress for damage must be real and must take place before a decision is made to release the person from criminal liability.

This is particularly important in cases where the parties enter into an agreement providing for future payments.

40. Voluntary Nature of Reconciliation

This issue is of particular importance in cases involving psychological violence.

If the victim remains under the continuing influence of the accused, the statement of reconciliation must be examined in terms of:

• voluntariness;
• freedom of expression of will;
• absence of threats;
• absence of pressure;
• understanding of the consequences.

The Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan concerning Article 68 expressly states that a victim's statement of reconciliation made under coercion cannot serve as grounds for releasing a person from criminal liability.

41. Measures of Procedural Compulsion

The measures of procedural compulsion provided for by the CPC may be applied in proceedings under Article 105.

Depending on the circumstances, these may include:

• detention;
• preventive measures;
• an undertaking;
• a written undertaking;
• house arrest;
• detention in custody;
• other measures provided for by the CPC.

The selection of a preventive measure must take into account:

• the gravity of the charge;
• the identity of the suspect;
• the risk of absconding;
• the risk of exerting pressure on the victim;
• the risk of destroying evidence;
• the risk of continuing unlawful conduct.

42. Detention in Custody

Article 147 of the CPC provides for detention in custody as the strictest preventive measure.

As a general rule, it is applied to a person suspected of committing a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding five years, where the application of a less restrictive preventive measure is impossible.

The law also provides for exceptions in respect of crimes carrying a maximum penalty of up to five years where special circumstances exist.

Therefore, in relation to Part 1 of Article 105, where the maximum penalty is three years, detention in custody requires the existence of the relevant exceptional circumstances.

43. Ensuring the Safety of the Victim

If the accused continues to:

• send messages to the victim;
• make telephone calls;
• issue threats;
• stalk or harass the victim;
• exert influence on the victim's relatives;
• exert influence on witnesses,

the protection of the victim must be considered separately from the issue of whether the elements of the criminal offence have been proven.

For the victim's lawyer, it is important to submit motions for protective measures in a timely manner and to document every new incident of interference or pressure.

44. Limitation Periods for Criminal Prosecution

It is necessary to distinguish between:

the time limit for filing a civil claim

and

the limitation period for criminal prosecution.

These are entirely different legal institutions.

The limitation period for criminal liability is determined by Article 71 of the Criminal Code, depending on the category of the offence.

According to material published on zakonpravo.kz, the current system provides for different limitation periods for criminal misdemeanours and crimes of minor, medium, serious and especially serious gravity.

The category must be determined in accordance with the current version of Article 11 of the Criminal Code and the sanction of the relevant part of Article 105.

45. Limitation Period for a Civil Claim

Under the CC RK, the general limitation period is three years, unless a special period is established by law.

However, it is necessary to distinguish between:

the limitation period

and

the time limit for filing a civil claim in criminal proceedings.

The latter is determined by the special rules of the CPC and a claim may be filed before the conclusion of the judicial investigation in the criminal case.

46. Application of the Limitation Period

Pursuant to Article 179 of the CC:

• a claim is accepted by the court regardless of the expiration of the limitation period;
• the limitation period is applied upon the application of a party;
• the application must be made before the court renders its decision;
• the expiration of the limitation period constitutes grounds for dismissing the claim.

Consequently, the court should not automatically apply the limitation period in the absence of a corresponding application by a party, unless otherwise provided by law.

47. Restoration of the Limitation Period

Article 185 of the CC provides for the exceptional possibility of restoring the limitation period.

The court may recognize circumstances relating to the claimant's personal circumstances as valid reasons, for example:

• serious illness;
• helpless condition;
• illiteracy;
• other circumstances of a similar nature.

At the same time, the legislator specifically provides that valid reasons must have existed during the final six months of the limitation period, or, where the limitation period is six months or less, throughout the entire limitation period.

48. Specific Features of Suicide-Related Cases

In cases involving bringing a person to suicide, the issue of limitation periods may have an additional psychological dimension.

For example:

the victim attempted suicide but did not immediately report the systematic humiliation.

The reasons may include:

• fear;
• dependency;
• shame;
• psychological trauma;
• dependence on the accused;
• hospitalization;
• a prolonged recovery period.

However, such circumstances must be proven.

The mere statement:

“it was psychologically difficult for me to apply to the court”

will not always be sufficient to restore the procedural time limit.

49. Procedural Time Limits and Their Restoration

If the matter concerns a procedural time limit in civil proceedings, Article 126 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (CPC RK) applies.

The court may restore a time limit established by law if valid reasons for missing it exist.

An application for restoration of the time limit must be submitted to the court in which the relevant procedural action should have been performed.

Under the current version of Article 126 of the CPC RK, the application must be submitted no later than one month from the date on which the applicant became aware of the violation of their rights or legitimate interests; at the same time, the relevant procedural action must be performed and evidence substantiating the validity of the reasons for missing the time limit must be submitted.

50. Evidence of Valid Reasons for Missing a Time Limit

In practice, the following documents should be attached:

• medical documents;
• hospitalization records;
• treatment records;
• documents confirming incapacity;
• documents confirming the person's stay outside the country;
• documents confirming non-receipt of a judicial act;
• evidence of improper notification;
• documents relating to extraordinary circumstances;
• correspondence with government authorities.

The Supreme Court's commentary on Article 126 of the CPC RK identifies illness, improper notification, untimely receipt of a judicial act, business trips and other circumstances that objectively prevented the timely performance of a procedural action as possible valid reasons.

51. Main Evidence in a Case under Article 105

In practical terms, it is useful to organize the evidence into the following blocks.

Block No. 1. Fact of influence

• messages;
• audio recordings;
• video recordings;
• witness testimony;
• documents;
• medical records.

Block No. 2. Systematic nature

A chronology is created:

Such a table is often more effective than a general statement:

"I was constantly humiliated."

52. Causation Block

A separate evidentiary line must be established:

influence → deterioration of condition → suicidal statements → suicide attempt/suicide.

For example:

1. the victim informed a relative about the influence exerted on them;
2. several days later, the victim consulted a psychologist;
3. suicidal statements began to emerge;
4. the accused continued exerting influence;
5. immediately after another incident, an attempt occurred.

The more consistently this chain of events is corroborated by independent sources, the more substantiated the evidence of causation appears.

53. Alternative Causes

The defence is entitled to raise the following question:

Was there another cause of the suicide attempt?

For example:

• serious illness;
• another conflict;
• divorce;
• loss of employment;
• debt burden;
• death of a relative;
• mental illness;
• other circumstances.

The mere existence of an alternative cause does not automatically exclude the application of Article 105.

However, the investigation is obliged to examine it.

If a reasonable alternative version exists, it must be verified through evidence.

54. Prosecution Error: Psychological Characterisation Instead of Evidence

The prosecution cannot be based exclusively on the following statement:

"The accused is an aggressive person."

A person's personal characteristics, in themselves, do not prove the commission of a specific criminal offence.

It is necessary to establish:

specific act → specific consequence.

55. Defence Error: Absence of a Direct Threat

On the other hand, the absence of the phrase:

"Kill yourself"

does not automatically exclude the application of Article 105.

This is because Part 1 expressly provides for various methods of exerting influence:

• threats;
• cruel treatment;
• systematic humiliation of human dignity.

Thus, for qualification under the part in question, the existence of a direct instruction to commit suicide is not mandatory.

56. Distinguishing Driving a Person to Suicide from Incitement to Suicide

It is necessary to distinguish between driving a person to suicide and incitement to suicide.

In driving a person to suicide, an individual creates a situation through certain forms of influence as a result of which the victim engages in suicidal behaviour.

In incitement to suicide, the influence aimed at forming the decision to commit suicide is more evident.

For example:

"you would be better off dead";

"kill yourself";

"do it";

"you should not be alive."

However, qualification depends not only on the words themselves but also on the overall context.

57. Distinguishing from Assistance

Assistance may be expressed through the provision of:

• information;
• means;
• opportunities;
• help in carrying out the intention.

Therefore, in a specific case, it is necessary to determine which particular form of conduct was implemented.

58. Aggregate of Criminal Offences

A single factual incident may involve not only Article 105 but also other criminal offences.

For example, if a person:

• systematically beat the victim;
• unlawfully deprived the victim of liberty;
• threatened the victim;
• disseminated information;
• stalked the victim;
• drove the victim to attempt suicide,

it is necessary to examine whether separate elements of criminal offences are present.

All actions cannot automatically be subsumed under Article 105.

The issue is resolved in accordance with the rules governing the competition of criminal law provisions and the aggregate of criminal offences.

59. Domestic Violence

Family conflicts present particular complexity.

In such cases, it is necessary to examine:

• the duration of cohabitation;
• economic dependence;
• housing dependence;
• the presence of children;
• instances of violence;
• reports to the police;
• protective orders;
• medical consultations;
• correspondence;
• police calls;
• statements from neighbours;
• previous complaints.

If the victim was dependent on the accused, it is additionally necessary to verify the existence of the aggravating circumstance provided for in Part 2 of Article 105.

60. Minor Victim

If the victim is a minor, Part 3 of Article 105 applies.

This substantially changes the legal assessment.

The sanction under Part 3 of Article 105 provides for imprisonment for a term of five to nine years.

In addition, special rules governing the participation of minors in criminal proceedings apply, including issues relating to:

• a legal representative;
• a psychologist;
• a teacher;
• protection against re-traumatisation;
• the conduct of questioning;
• special safeguards.

61. International Legal Standards

61.1. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

The provisions most directly applicable are:

Article 6

Right to life.

Article 7

Prohibition of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 14

Right to a fair trial.

Article 2

Obligation to ensure effective remedies.

Kazakhstan ratified the ICCPR by Law No. 91 dated 28 November 2005.

The Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan specifically states that courts must be guided by the ICCPR where necessary.

62. Convention on the Rights of the Child

If the victim is a child, the Convention on the Rights of the Child must be taken into account.

The following rights are of particular importance:

• the child's right to life;
• protection against violence;
• protection of dignity;
• protection of mental health;
• the right to effective judicial protection.

When qualifying an offence under Part 3 of Article 105, international standards must be considered together with national safeguards for the protection of minors.

63. Why the European Convention on Human Rights Is Not a Source of Directly Applicable Law in Kazakhstan

A common mistake must be avoided.

Kazakhstan is not a State Party to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the same sense as the member states of the Council of Europe.

Therefore, judgments of the European Court of Human Rights cannot automatically be presented as binding on Kazakhstani courts.

They may be used exclusively as comparative legal material, a scholarly source or an argument when examining international standards, provided that their legal status is correctly identified.

64. Regulatory Resolutions of the Supreme Court

For the category of cases under consideration, regulatory resolutions governing the following matters are of particular importance:

1. application of criminal legislation;
2. court judgments;
3. evidence;
4. victims' rights;
5. civil claims;
6. moral damages;
7. court costs;
8. reconciliation;
9. application of international treaties.

Of particular importance is:

Regulatory Resolution No. 4 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 20 April 2018, "On the Court Judgment".

In particular, the Supreme Court explains issues concerning the termination of proceedings on non-exonerating grounds and the application of limitation periods.

65. Regulatory Resolution on Civil Claims

Regulatory Resolution No. 1 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 20 June 2005, "On the Consideration of Civil Claims in Criminal Proceedings", remains practically relevant for understanding the mechanism for filing civil claims.

In particular, it confirms provisions concerning:

• filing a claim;
• exemption from payment of state duty;
• jurisdiction;
• supplementation of claims.

66. Regulatory Resolution on Reconciliation

Regulatory Resolution No. 4 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 21 June 2001 explains the application of Article 68 of the Criminal Code.

For the category of cases under consideration, the following provisions are particularly important:

• voluntary nature of reconciliation;
• actual reparation of harm;
• inadmissibility of coercing the victim;
• participation of a mediator;
• stages at which reconciliation is possible.

67. Law "On Mediation"

The principal special legislative act is:

Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 401-IV dated 28 January 2011, "On Mediation".

It regulates:

• principles of mediation;
• status of a mediator;
• procedure for conducting mediation;
• specific features of mediation in criminal proceedings;
• mediation agreements.

Article 24 establishes special rules for mediation in criminal proceedings.

68. Law "On Legal Acts"

For the analysis of subordinate regulatory framework, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 480-V dated 6 April 2016, "On Legal Acts", is of key importance.

It defines the system of legal acts, their hierarchy, adoption procedure and effect.

Article 1 defines subordinate regulatory legal acts as other regulatory legal acts that are not laws and are issued on the basis of, in implementation of, or for the further implementation of laws and other higher-level regulatory legal acts.

69. Hierarchy of Regulatory Legal Acts

Article 7 of the Law "On Legal Acts" divides regulatory legal acts into primary and derivative types.

Primary types include, in particular:

• the Constitution;
• constitutional laws;
• codes;
• laws;
• regulatory decrees of the President;
• regulatory resolutions of the Government;
• regulatory resolutions of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court;
• regulatory acts of central state bodies;
• regulatory orders of ministers;
• certain acts of local authorities.

Derivative types include, in particular:

• provisions;
• technical regulations;
• rules;
• instructions.

They are approved through primary regulatory legal acts.

70. Significance of the Hierarchy

Article 12 of the Law "On Legal Acts" establishes that:

where there are contradictions between regulatory legal acts of different levels, the act having higher legal force shall apply.

It also provides that, in the event of a contradiction between a law and a code, the relevant provisions of the law shall apply, taking into account the need to make corresponding amendments to the code.

This is of fundamental importance for criminal law:

a subordinate regulatory act cannot establish a new corpus delicti, expand criminal liability or worsen the position of the accused.

The elements of a criminal offence and criminal punishment are established by the Criminal Code.

71. A Subordinate Regulatory Act Cannot Replace Article 105 of the Criminal Code

For example, an order of a state body may establish:

• registration procedures;
• document management procedures;
• procedures for conducting examinations;
• organisational procedures;
• technical standards.

However, it cannot state:

"Any humiliation constitutes a criminal offence under Article 105."

This would mean creating criminal-law content through a subordinate regulatory act, which is impermissible.

72. Article 24 of the Law "On Legal Acts"

Article 24 provides that laws establish the principal objectives, tasks, principles, competencies and powers of the relevant area.

These provisions may be further detailed through subordinate regulatory legal acts.

At the same time, a subordinate regulatory act must not establish rules that exceed the limits set by law.

This is particularly important when using:

• departmental instructions;
• rules;
• orders;
• methodologies;
• administrative regulations.

73. Official Registration of Regulatory Legal Acts

Article 53 of the Law "On Legal Acts" regulates the state registration of regulatory legal acts and provides for the maintenance of the State Register of Regulatory Legal Acts and the Reference Control Bank of Regulatory Legal Acts.

When preparing a procedural position, a lawyer should verify:

1. date of adoption;
2. date of entry into force;
3. existence of amendments;
4. version in force at the time the act was committed;
5. version in force at the time of the investigation;
6. version in force at the time of judicial consideration.

74. Particular Importance of the Time of Commission of the Criminal Offence

In a criminal case, the version of the Criminal Code in force on the date of the court hearing cannot automatically be applied.

It is necessary to determine:

which criminal law was in force at the time the act was committed.

If a new law improves the position of the person concerned, the issue of the retroactive effect of criminal law may arise.

Therefore, a lawyer must record:

• the date of each episode;
• the date of amendments to Article 105;
• the date on which the amendments entered into force;
• the date on which the consequence occurred.

75. Practical Algorithm for the Victim's Lawyer

Stage 1. Establishing a Chronology

Prepare a table of all episodes.

Stage 2. Electronic Evidence Preservation

Preserve:

• correspondence;
• voice messages;
• video recordings;
• photographs;
• publications.

Stage 3. Witnesses

Identify every person to whom the victim reported what had happened.

Stage 4. Medical Documentation

Obtain:

• medical records;
• certificates;
• extracts;
• reports;
• ambulance service records.

Stage 5. Expert Examination

Determine whether a psychological/forensic psychological and psychiatric examination is necessary.

Stage 6. Causation

Separately establish the link between the accused's conduct and the suicidal behaviour.

Stage 7. Legal Qualification

Verify:

• Part 1;
• Part 2;
• Part 3 of Article 105;
• aggregate with other articles.

Stage 8. Civil Claim

Submit claims for:

• material damage;
• moral damages;
• necessary expenses.

76. Practical Algorithm for the Defence of the Accused

The defence must examine:

1. whether any influence was exerted at all;
2. whether such influence was unlawful;
3. whether it was systematic;
4. whether it was cruel in nature;
5. whether a suicidal act actually occurred;
6. whether the accused's actions caused it;
7. whether alternative causes existed;
8. whether reliable evidence is available;
9. whether the electronic evidence was obtained lawfully;
10. whether the expert examination is admissible;
11. whether the expert is substituting the court's function;
12. whether the charges correspond to the factual circumstances.

77. Typical Hypothetical Example No. 1

Situation.

For several months, an employer systematically humiliated an employee in public:

• called the employee incapable;
• insulted the employee in front of colleagues;
• threatened dismissal;
• disseminated humiliating information;
• sent corresponding messages.

The employee repeatedly informed their spouse that they could no longer continue working.

The employee subsequently attempted suicide.

Evidence:

• correspondence;
• audio recordings;
• testimony of colleagues;
• messages to the spouse;
• medical documents;
• expert opinion.

In such a case, the investigative body must examine not only the fact of the attempt itself but also the sequence of events and the causal relationship.

78. Hypothetical Example No. 2

One spouse repeatedly humiliated the other:

• in the presence of children;
• in the presence of relatives;
• in the presence of acquaintances;
• through messaging applications.

At the same time, the victim repeatedly stated that they did not want to live.

Despite this, the influence continued.

Several days after another incident, the victim attempted suicide.

In this case, the following circumstances are additionally significant:

• family dependence;
• duration of the influence;
• previous reports;
• presence of children;
• information about the psychological condition;
• possibility of qualification under Part 2, if material or other dependence is established.

79. Hypothetical Example No. 3 — Insufficiency of Evidence

Two individuals were in a conflictual relationship.

A serious argument occurred once.

Several days later, the victim attempted suicide.

There is no other evidence of systematic humiliation.

At the same time, it was established that the victim had:

• a serious illness;
• financial problems;
• another family conflict;
• a previous attempt.

In such a situation, a causal relationship cannot automatically be inferred solely from the chronological sequence of events.

80. Practical Evidentiary Matrix

81. What Is Particularly Important to Include in a Motion for an Expert Examination

It is not recommended to put exclusively the following legal question to the expert:

"Did the accused drive the victim to suicide?"

It is more appropriate to formulate questions concerning factual psychological circumstances, for example:

• whether the victim exhibited signs of a psychologically traumatic condition;
• what factors could have contributed to its development;
• whether the described circumstances had a significant psychological impact;
• whether there is evidence of a connection between certain circumstances and changes in the victim's psychological condition;
• what alternative factors could have affected the victim's condition.

 82. Electronic Correspondence: Common Mistakes

It is not sufficient to rely solely on a printed copy:

“Screenshot from WhatsApp.”

Where possible, it is necessary to establish:

telephone number;

owner of the telephone number;

device;

account;

date;

time;

integrity of the correspondence;

sequence of messages.

It is particularly important to preserve the messages preceding and following the disputed statement, since a phrase taken out of context may have an entirely different meaning.

83. The Role of Previous Reports to the Police

If the victim had previously contacted:

the police;

the local police officer;

a medical institution;

a psychologist;

a social worker;

relatives,

such information may confirm the duration and systematic nature of the conduct.

Statements made before the suicide attempt are of particular significance.

84. Significance of Protection Orders and Administrative Records

If measures had previously been taken against the accused in connection with violence or harassment, such documents may have evidentiary significance.

However, they do not replace the requirement to prove the elements of the offence under Article 105.

It is necessary to establish the specific contents of the previous records.

85. The Criterion of Direct Harm

For the purposes of a civil claim in criminal proceedings, it is particularly important to determine to whom the harm was directly caused.

Article 167 of the CPC links the status of a civil claimant to the direct infliction of property or moral harm.

In the event of the victim's death, the law specifically extends the circle of persons who may exercise the relevant rights.

86. Possibility of Separate Civil Proceedings

If a civil claim was not filed in the criminal proceedings or was left without consideration, the victim may, in cases provided for by law, bring the relevant claim in civil proceedings.

Article 71 of the CPC expressly provides for the possibility of filing a claim for compensation for moral harm in civil proceedings if it was not brought in the criminal proceedings or was left without consideration.

87. Risk of Double Recovery

A situation in which the same harm is recovered twice must not be allowed:

in criminal proceedings;

and subsequently, again, in civil proceedings.

Therefore, when transitioning from criminal proceedings to civil proceedings, it is necessary to clearly determine:

what has already been recovered;

what has been left without consideration;

which claims have been considered;

which claims have not been considered.

88. International Guarantees of a Fair Trial

When considering a case, the court must ensure:

equality of the parties;

the right to defence;

the right to examine witnesses;

the opportunity to submit evidence;

independent consideration;

a reasonable time;

a reasoned decision.

These guarantees correspond to Article 14 of the ICCPR.

The Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan expressly indicates the need to apply international treaties in relevant cases.

89. System of Key Regulatory Legal Acts

For the comprehensive handling of a case under Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, it is recommended to use the following body of regulatory legal acts.

Criminal Law

Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan:Article 3 — basic concepts;

Article 10 — criminal offences;

Article 11 — categories;

Article 14 — recidivism;

Article 15 — age;

Articles 53–54 — punishment;

Article 68 — reconciliation;

Article 71 — limitation periods;

Article 105 — principal offence.

Criminal Procedure

Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan:rights of the victim;

rights of the suspect;

defence counsel;

evidence;

civil claim;

measures of procedural coercion;

preventive measures;

jurisdiction;

trial proceedings;

appeal.

Civil Law

Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan:general grounds for compensation of harm;

moral harm;

limitation periods.

Civil Procedure

Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan:jurisdiction;

procedural time limits;

evidence;

court costs;

restoration of time limits.

Tax Law

Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 2025:state duty;

exemptions.

Mediation

Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Mediation”.

Regulatory Resolutions

Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the application of Article 68 of the Criminal Code.

Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan on civil claims in criminal proceedings.

Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan on court judgments.

Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan on moral harm.

Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan on court costs.

Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the application of international treaties.

International Law

ICCPR.

Convention on the Rights of the Child — if the victim is a minor.

Other international treaties binding on Kazakhstan.

90. Links to Key Materials on zakonpravo.kz

Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — bringing a person to suicide, inducing suicide and assisting suicide

Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Article 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — filing a civil claim

Article 170 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — decisions on a civil claim

Article 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — jurisdiction of the district court

Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — jurisdiction of the specialised inter-district criminal court

Article 318 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — resolution of disputes concerning jurisdiction

Article 147 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — detention in custody

Reconciliation and Mediation

Article 68 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — exemption from criminal liability in connection with reconciliation

Regulatory Resolution No. 4 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 21 June 2001 — practice of applying Article 68 of the Criminal Code

Article 1 of the Law “On Mediation”

Article 24 of the Law “On Mediation” — criminal mediation

Civil Law

Article 951 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — compensation for moral harm

Article 178 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — limitation periods

Article 179 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — application of the limitation period

Article 185 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — restoration of the limitation period

Regulatory Resolution No. 7 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the application of legislation concerning compensation for moral harm — through the Constitutional Court's material

Civil Procedure

Article 126 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — extension and restoration of procedural time limits

Tax Legislation

Article 610 of the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — state duty rates

Legal Acts

Article 1 of the Law “On Legal Acts” — definition of a subordinate regulatory legal act

Article 7 of the Law “On Legal Acts” — principal and derivative types of regulatory legal acts

Article 12 of the Law “On Legal Acts” — conflicts between regulatory legal acts of different levels

Article 24 of the Law “On Legal Acts” — requirements for the content of regulatory legal acts

Article 53 of the Law “On Legal Acts” — state registration of regulatory legal acts

International Law

Law on the Ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the application of international treaties of the Republic of Kazakhstan

91. Final Legal Framework for the Elements of the Offence

For the purposes of the legal classification under Part 1 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, it is advisable to use the following formula:

1. Is there a victim?

↓

1. Was there specific conduct or influence on the part of the accused?

↓

1. Did it constitute cruel treatment or systematic humiliation of dignity?

↓

1. Has systematic conduct been proven, if the prosecution is based specifically on this element?

↓

1. Did the victim commit suicide or attempt suicide?

↓

1. Is there a causal link between the conduct of the accused and the result?

↓

1. Has the guilt of the accused been proven?

↓

1. Are there no qualifying elements under Part 2?

↓

1. Is the victim not a minor — Part 3?

↓

1. Is there an aggregate of offences involving other crimes?

↓

1. Are there grounds for terminating the case?

↓

1. Is the application of Article 68 of the Criminal Code possible?

↓

1. Is there a civil claim?

↓

1. What is the amount of property and moral harm?

92. Main Practical Conclusions

First Conclusion

It is not sufficient to prove a poor relationship between the accused and the victim for Article 105 to apply.

It is necessary to prove legally significant conduct or influence and its connection with the suicidal outcome.

Second Conclusion

In cases involving systematic humiliation, a chronology of the episodes must be prepared.

Third Conclusion

In cases involving cruel treatment, specific actions and their consequences must be established.

Fourth Conclusion

The fact of an attempted suicide, in itself, does not prove the guilt of a particular person.

Fifth Conclusion

Alternative causes of suicidal behaviour must be examined.

Sixth Conclusion

If the victim was in a dependent position, Part 2 of Article 105 must be examined.

Seventh Conclusion

If the victim is a minor, Part 3 of Article 105 must be examined.

Eighth Conclusion

It is advisable to file a civil claim during the criminal proceedings, since Article 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code exempts the civil claimant from payment of the state duty.

Ninth Conclusion

Reconciliation is not possible in all cases and requires compliance with all the conditions of Article 68 of the Criminal Code.

Tenth Conclusion

Mediation does not constitute an admission of guilt, and coercion to participate in mediation is impermissible.

Eleventh Conclusion

If the victim has died, the possibility of applying Article 68 must be analysed separately, since Part 1 of Article 68 contains a restriction in respect of offences involving the causing of death.

Twelfth Conclusion

The general limitation period under the Civil Code is three years; however, the issue of restoration of the limitation period is governed by the special rules of Article 185 of the Civil Code.

Thirteenth Conclusion

A subordinate regulatory legal act may only specify the law and may not expand the elements of a criminal offence. This follows from the hierarchy of regulatory legal acts and the requirements of the Law “On Legal Acts”.

Fourteenth Conclusion

For the purposes of proving an offence under Article 105, it is necessary to use not an individual item of evidence, but a system of interrelated evidence.

93. Practical Formula for the Victim's Statement of Claim

In a civil claim filed in criminal proceedings, it is advisable to address the following separately:

1. The fact of the criminal offence.
2. The specific actions of the accused.
3. Systematic conduct or cruelty.
4. The fact of suicide or attempted suicide.
5. Causal link.
6. Mental and physical suffering.
7. Material damage.
8. Medical treatment expenses.
9. Psychological assistance expenses.
10. Amount of moral compensation.
11. Reasons justifying the claimed amount.
12. A request for recovery of court costs.

94. Practical Defence Formula

In the defence position, it is advisable to examine the following issues consistently:

1. Which specific episode does the prosecution consider to constitute bringing a person to suicide?
2. Which specific method is indicated: cruel treatment or systematic humiliation?
3. How many episodes are there?
4. How was the systematic nature expressed?
5. What evidence confirms each episode?
6. What evidence confirms authorship of the messages?
7. Is there medical confirmation?
8. Is there a causal link?
9. Which alternative causes have been examined?
10. Which expert conclusions go beyond the scope of specialised knowledge?
11. Are there qualifying circumstances that have not actually been proven?
12. Has an assumption been substituted for evidence?

95. Conclusion

Part 1 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan establishes an offence in which the central issue is neither the mere existence of conflictual relations nor the mere fact of an attempted suicide, but the proven causal link between specific unlawful conduct or influence and the suicidal outcome.

The most complex elements of proof are:

cruel treatment;

systematic humiliation of dignity;

the nature and content of the conduct or influence;

the psychological state of the victim;

causal link;

the guilt of the accused.

Therefore, a proper investigation must not be based on the following model:

“the victim attempted suicide → the accused humiliated the victim → therefore, Article 105 applies”,

but rather on the following model:

specific conduct or influence → a confirmed sequence of episodes → objectively established psychological impact → suicidal behaviour → outcome → causal link → proven guilt.

It is precisely this structure that makes it possible both to ensure the protection of the victim against psychological and physical violence and to comply with the fundamental guarantees of criminal proceedings, including the presumption of innocence and the requirement that the charge be proven.

For civil law consequences, the most effective procedural approach is generally to consider the civil claim directly within the criminal proceedings: Article 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code permits it to be filed from the commencement of the pre-trial investigation until the end of the judicial investigation and exempts the claimant from payment of the state duty.

If the victim has died, it is additionally necessary to determine the appropriate persons who exercise the rights of the victim and the civil claimant, as well as to separately assess the issue of moral harm, since Article 951 of the Civil Code expressly regulates compensation for the suffering of close relatives and the spouse of an individual in the event of that individual's death as a result of an offence.

Finally, when using subordinate regulatory legal acts as an evidentiary or regulatory basis, the hierarchy of legislation must be observed: a subordinate act may specify the law, but it may not alter its substance or establish broader criminal liability than that provided for by the Criminal Code.

Thus, in cases involving bringing a person to suicide, the most important subject of proof is not the suicidal act itself, but the entire causal mechanism that led to it, which must be confirmed by a body of admissible, relevant, reliable and sufficient evidence.

Attention!   

       Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.  

 For more information,  please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085. 

Constitution Law Code Standard Decree Order Decision Resolution Lawyer Almaty Lawyer Legal service Legal advice Civil Criminal Administrative cases Disputes Defense Arbitration Law Company Kazakhstan Law Firm Court Cases Declaration Decree Order Resolution Decision Report Conclusion Statement Conclusion Convention Contract Memorandum Methodology Norms Note Rules Program Charter Charter Article Commentary Resolution Regulations Protocol Draft Program Rules Messages