Comment to article 434. Minor hooliganism The Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offences

Home / Codes / Comment to article 434. Minor hooliganism The Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offences

Chapter 25. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENSES THAT INFRINGE ON PUBLIC ORDER AND MORALITY

The Republic of Kazakhstan recognizes itself as a democratic, rule-of-law state, the highest values of which are the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, having secured the duty to recognize, observe and protect them. Administrative offenses have been and remain the most widespread types of illegal acts. Practice shows that the commission of administrative offenses that infringe on public order and morality causes a public outcry, thereby necessitating a prompt and adequate response from the state in the person of police officers. That is, the need to regulate the sphere of public order is obvious, this area requires increased stability and protection from the state.

According to modern administrative legislation, administrative offenses that infringe on public order and morality are a special, specific group of administrative offenses, reflected in Chapter 25 "Administrative offenses that infringe on public order and morality" of the Special Part of the Administrative Code. This chapter contains 20 elements of administrative offenses.

Administrative offenses that infringe on public order and morality are socially harmful, illegal, culpable acts that violate public order and morality protected by measures of administrative responsibility, the environment of public and personal peace of citizens, their honor and dignity. In the above definition, the main importance is the fact that an offense in the field under consideration forms such actions of people who encroach on the established order of public relations in public places, in other words, it is an offense that disrupts public life.

State regulation of legal relations in the sphere of public order and morality by bringing perpetrators to administrative responsibility is not only protection from administrative offenses, but also the prevention of criminally punishable ones.

Article 434. Minor hooliganism

1. Minor hooliganism, that is, swearing in public places, insulting harassment of individuals, desecration of residential premises, pollution of public areas, parks, squares, including the release of municipal waste in unidentified places, and other similar actions expressing disrespect for others, violating public order and tranquility of individuals, -

entails a fine in the amount of five monthly calculation indices or administrative arrest for up to ten days.

2. The actions provided for in the first part of this Article, committed repeatedly within a year after the imposition of an administrative penalty, -

they entail administrative arrest for up to fifteen days.

3. The actions provided for in the second part of this Article, committed by persons to whom administrative arrest in accordance with the second part of Article 50 of this Code does not apply, -

they entail a fine in the amount of twenty monthly calculation indices.

comment_____________________________________________

As part of the measures taken to humanize administrative legislation, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 28, 2017 No. 127 reduced the sanction of part 1 of this article in the form of an administrative fine by 50%. Examining the opinions of scientists and draft laws, the conclusion is justified that the current version of the article is not the final version.

The general object of the offense in question is public order and morality. Public order is understood as a system of relations that develop in public places between people. As a rule, these relations are regulated not only by the norms of law, but also by customs and norms of morality.

Since the article contains qualifying signs in the form of pollution of public areas, parks, squares, including the release of municipal waste, the optional object of the offense is public relations in the field of environmental protection and management in this area.

Kazakh legislation does not contain normative definitions of public order and, moreover, morality. The category of "public order" is closely related to the concept of "public safety". Some modern researchers, characterizing public order as a legal category, actually do not distinguish between it and public safety, using these concepts as synonyms. In many ways, these are evaluative concepts, which creates additional difficulties in law enforcement practice, since there are opportunities for extremely broad interpretation in determining which acts and offenses really pose a threat to public order and morality.

Public order is the entire system of social relations that develops as a result of the implementation of social norms: norms of law, norms of morality, norms of public organizations, norms of customs, traditions and rituals. In a State governed by the rule of law, all elements of public order interact with each other and are protected by it. However, only the rule of law is protected by special state-legal measures. Other elements of the social order are provided with their own means of influence: moral, corporate habits, social habits proper, natural skills and habits, and the power of tradition.

The basis of social order consists of relationships that develop in public places, i.e. in places where people communicate while satisfying their material, spiritual needs, and during recreation. There is no clear definition of a public place at the codified and legislative level.

Based on paragraph 27 of the Order of the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated September 19, 2014 No. 89 "On approval of the Rules for Receiving and Registering applications and reports of criminal offenses, as well as maintaining a Unified Register of pre–trial Investigations", a public place is a specially equipped common area within or outside cities and towns intended for use by the public, and as well as holding mass events, servicing and recreation of citizens.

Public places include:

1) organization of education and recreation;

2) Healthcare organizations;

3) catering establishments;

4) cinemas, theaters, circuses, concert, viewing and exhibition halls, sports arenas and other indoor facilities intended for mass recreation, including nightclubs and discos;

5) Museums, libraries and lecture halls;

6) local and long-distance trains, air, sea and river transport vessels, salons of urban and intercity buses, fixed-route taxis and urban electric transport;

7) buildings of airports, railway, automobile and water stations, platforms of railway stations and subways;

8) premises of government agencies and organizations that do not use access control;

9) premises that are workplaces at facilities with access control, used by workers' collectives to work in cases of hooliganism;

10) entrances of houses.

Public places are divided into:

1) permanent (places that can be accessed at any time: streets, alleys, squares, boulevards, embankments, squares, train stations, courtyards (except for courtyards of private houses));

2) periodic (premises intended for servicing and recreation of the population at certain hours: markets, educational and health-improving institutions, recreation areas, cultural, entertainment, sports facilities, public transport, trade enterprises, passenger train cars (except vestibules), as well as a dining car, a passenger compartment at night bathroom and toilet).

Of the total number of offenses classified as committed in public places, street offenses are distinguished, that is, those committed in socially equipped places: streets, squares, boulevards, embankments, bridges, alleys, unfenced courtyards (with the exception of private ones), in residential areas, wooded areas, within cities (populated areas settlements), squares, beaches, recreation areas, markets, stadiums during their operation.

Offences committed in public places and on the streets are not subject to accounting.:

1) at public facilities that are not performing their functions at the time of the commission of the offense;

2) at facilities with access control, used by labor collectives for work and guarded parking lots;

3) offenses committed in utility rooms, closets of organizations, institutions, commercial and entertainment establishments, including locker rooms of gyms of educational and other institutions;

4) offenses committed in a taxi;

5) offenses committed on the territory of abandoned buildings, regardless of the presence of fencing, in underground utilities, in an undeveloped area - a wasteland, the riverbank, with the exception of embankments of streets and the beach, a section of highway without any infrastructure facilities;

6) thefts from apartments and other offenses committed in the living quarters of dormitories, hotels, rest homes, passenger train cars located on stages in the absence of passengers, on sidings, in dead ends and waste parks;

7) offenses committed in common areas in communal apartments, attics, basements, elevators, with the exception of hooliganism;

8) ongoing offenses;

9) traffic offenses.

It should be borne in mind here that the concepts of a public place set out in the above-mentioned order of the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Kazakhstan apply to the procedure for statistical accounting of offenses, and not to the process of qualifying offenses.

Minor hooliganism, the responsibility for which is provided for in Article 434 of the Administrative Code, is a vivid example of the difficulties that can be encountered in law enforcement practice if it is necessary to classify certain acts as illegal. For example, the qualifying feature related to harassment, in addition to Article 434 of the Administrative Code, is also contained in art. 73 "Illegal actions in the sphere of family and household relations" and art. 449 "Harassment in public places".

The objective side of part 1 of the commented article is characterized by the following qualifying features:

1) swearing in public places;

2) abusive harassment of individuals;

3) desecration of residential premises;

4) pollution of public areas, parks, squares, including the release of municipal waste in unidentified places;

5) other similar actions expressing disrespect for others, violating public order and peace of mind of individuals.

It should be noted that the list of actions characterizing minor hooliganism is not exhaustive, since the disposition of this article contains the phrase "other similar actions expressing disrespect for others, violating public order and the peace of individuals."

The objective side of the offense is characterized by fully evaluative concepts, which may cause some difficulties in interpretation in the law enforcement process, since there is no uniform approach. When qualifying an offense, it should be borne in mind that the above illegal actions may exist independently and combine with each other. Here are brief characteristics of the above-mentioned signs of an offense.

1.The legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan does not provide a clear concept of foul language, and how to distinguish it from simple swearing.

Swearing should be considered obscene if it is perceived as such by the surrounding citizens. For the correct qualification of a word as obscene, it is enough to apply the principle of its well-known meaning and the presence of public censure for such a public statement. As an example from judicial practice, let's take the decision of the Bayanaul district Court of the Pavlodar region. It follows from the Resolution that on July 10, 2018, at 7:30 p.m., citizen F. being in a public place, in the Rauan store in Uzynbulak village, he expressed himself to the citizen K. using obscene language, he showed obvious disrespect for others and violated public order. The judge, in the reasoning part, revealing the composition of minor hooliganism, explained the following. According to the definition of the word "obscene" given in Ozhegov's explanatory dictionary, it means indecent, obscene. Profanity is recognized as profanity, obscene language, unprintable language, obscene, vile, vulgar expressions. In this case, the offender is F. by "sending" the victim to He insulted her and used profanity in a public place, in front of other people, that is, he showed obvious disrespect for society and violated public order. By a court order, citizen F. he was subjected to an administrative penalty in the form of a fine of 5 MCI.

Another example from law enforcement practice. The court was considering a case of an administrative offense when citizen K. insulted citizen Sh with obscenities, but the insult sounded in German. There were four witnesses in the case at once, who, according to the victim's emotions, perceived the words as obscene language, but they did not speak German, and they could not repeat and explain the contents of the obscene words at the trial. The victim claimed that these words were obscene language, and the offender reproduced these words in a different way, which the judge did not recognize as obscene language and the case was dismissed for lack of corpus delicti. That is, in this case there is no objective side to the administrative offense.

Many researchers, philologists of this field, also cannot come to a common concept of obscenity. By examining various sources in this field, foul language can be classified in different ways.

For example, names of persons with emphatically negative characteristics such as:

1) a stupid, incomprehensible person;

2) a mean, low person;

3) an insignificant person, a nobody;

3) a prostitute, a corrupt woman.

And also:

1) the names of "indecent", socially tabooed body parts are "shameful words";

2) the names of the process of sexual intercourse;

3) names of physiological functions (functions), etc.

2. To understand abusive harassment, it is necessary to determine when it is considered offensive. Since its other form, as noted above, may be annoying harassment, which will be qualified under Article 449 of the Administrative Code "Harassment in public places." Intrusive and intrusive harassment, unlike abusive harassment of a person, is expressed not in an effort to humiliate him, but in pestering with any requests (begging, fortune-telling, etc.). Abusive harassment involves more active actions and is aimed at humiliating the victim. Not every harassment forms the type of petty hooliganism in question, the motive for their commission plays an important role. When qualifying abusive harassment in public places, the offender should be characterized by active volitional harmful acts, immorality of behavior, and a cynical attitude towards surrounding citizens. The immorality of a bully is manifested in the desire to offend or humiliate an individual by their actions, or to achieve the same harmful effect by using profanity or jargon.

Abusive harassment can be characterized by the repeated, intrusive actions of the offender, causing moral, emotional or psychological harm, despite the victim's opposition. A bully is characterized by unlawful acts aimed at humiliating the victim, incompatible with the moral principles of the victim, whom such actions offend and humiliate. Therefore, it is very important in the protocols on an administrative offense to reflect not only the fact of harassment, but also to determine the presence of an insult, to reflect all the circumstances of the case.

3. Desecration of residential premises should be distinguished from vandalism provided for in Article 294 of the Criminal Code. In the case of vandalism, the violation of public order is not in all cases demonstratively audacious and expressing obvious disrespect for society, since the violation of public order remains unknown until its consequences are discovered. If vandalism involves the desecration of buildings, other structures, historical and cultural monuments, natural objects protected by the state, as well as deliberate damage to property on transport or in other public places, then minor hooliganism implies the desecration of residential premises, which include apartment buildings, entrances, residential buildings.

4. Pollution of public areas, parks, squares, including the release of municipal waste in unidentified places

For the first time in national legislation, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 22, 2011 "On Amendments and Additions to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on housing relations" provided for administrative liability for the pollution of parks, squares and the release of municipal waste in unidentified places.

The new codified legislation, which entered into force on January 1, 2015, has not changed the approaches to the definition of minor hooliganism in the Code of Administrative Offences of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the competing norm of "Hooliganism" in the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, except for a different numbering of articles.

But in order to apply this rule correctly, you should carefully analyze it, that is, give answers to two questions.:

1. What is municipal waste?

2. What should be understood by "unidentified places" where citizens are prohibited from leaving garbage?

Municipal waste is often referred to as solid household waste (household waste) — objects or goods that have lost their consumer properties. Solid household waste is also divided into biological waste and household waste itself (non-biological solid waste of artificial or natural origin), and the latter is often referred to simply as garbage at the household level.

According to the Order of the Minister of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 25, 2014 No. 145 "On approval of Standard Rules for calculating the norms of formation and accumulation of municipal waste" municipal waste includes solid household waste and consumer waste generated in populated areas, including as a result of human activity, as well as industrial waste similar in composition. and the nature of education.

The Order of the Minister of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated March 20, 2015 No. 235 "On approval of Standard Rules for the maintenance and protection of green spaces, rules for the improvement of territories of cities and settlements" regulates the collection of municipal waste in specially designated places. Bins, special containers, as well as containers for collecting mercury-containing lamps and appliances, etc. can be attributed to specially installed places.

In addition, the Waste Classifier provides for 20 types of waste, in the sense of which municipal waste is referred to as "household waste", where more than a hundred specific names of things and objects related to municipal household waste are contained in 60 paragraphs.

Maslikhats of all levels, on the basis of the order of the Minister of Energy of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 25, 2014 No. 145 "On approval of Standard Rules for calculating the norms of formation and accumulation of municipal waste", issue Rules for the improvement of administrative territories where temporary garbage storage sites are determined. They define the places of temporary storage of municipal waste – these are established places where waste accumulates and is stored for a specified short time before its removal. For example, the Maslikhat of Almaty provided that "... special sites are allocated on the territory of households for the placement of containers equipped with devices for their capture and unloading, with convenient entrances for specialized transport. Owners of individual residential buildings have the right to have small containers for collecting solid household waste. It is not allowed to store and dispose of solid household waste on the carriageway of streets, as well as in the adjacent territories of individual residential buildings ...".

In other words, any places where local executive authorities have not provided for temporary storage of garbage should be considered unidentified places for the disposal and storage of municipal garbage. And it is not necessary that due to the dumping of garbage there should be violations of public order and the peace of mind of individuals. As an example from judicial practice, let's take the decision of the specialized administrative court of Aktobe in the case of an administrative offense under part 1 of the commented article of the Administrative Code. It follows from the resolution that citizen Sh. On January 9, 2018, at about 13:20 a.m. local time, while in Aktobe on A. Moldagulova Avenue opposite the Batys-2 store, that is, in a public place, he smoked a cigarette and threw the cigarette butt on the ground, thereby polluting public areas, showing disrespect to others, violated public order, than he committed the offense provided for in Part 1st434 of the Administrative Code and was brought to administrative responsibility.

Thus, if the release of municipal waste took place in an unidentified place for the disposal and storage of municipal waste, including a deserted place (riverbank, forest, park, roadside, etc.), then it must qualify under part 1 of the commented article of the Administrative Code. But here it is questionable whether the definition of the object of the offense is correct based on the qualifying attribute being analyzed.

In many foreign countries, pollution of public areas, parks, and squares, including the release of municipal waste, is codified as administrative offenses that infringe not on public order, but as an offense in the field of environmental protection.

5. Other similar actions expressing disrespect for others, violating public order and the peace of individuals, should be understood as such actions that are accompanied by demonstrative disregard for generally accepted norms of morality and morality in society. The range of such actions can be very wide, and criminalization depends on the actual circumstances, behavior, place, methods and time of commission, participants. Examples of such actions include: public display of clothing with elements of obscenity, loud singing of songs in the cemetery, loud music in the open area of cafes and restaurants, satisfaction of physiological needs in places not designated for this purpose, movement of vehicles with high noise effects, throwing bottles, cigarette butts, etc.

A practical example. An administrative case against citizen K. was considered in the specialized administrative court of Astana. According to the case file, on August 20, 2018, citizen K., while in a public place, on the roadway and in the pedestrian zone, together with citizen S., swam on an inflatable boat in a flooded area, thereby, according to the court, his actions caused a negative public resonance, he unnecessarily used an inflatable boat outside the place of direct use, for entertainment and photographing purposes. The police saw signs of an offense under Part 1 of Article 434 of the Administrative Code in the actions of the "violators of order", as a result of which a protocol was drawn up. At the hearing, the young men did not dispute the circumstances set out in the protocol and explained that they had driven past the flood in a car, and for positive and humorous purposes, they wanted to take a photo with a fishing rod on a boat, got out of the car, inflated the boat and sailed. They did not know that this action could cause a public outcry and disrespect for individuals, they asked for forgiveness and not to be severely punished, that is, not to use arrest. They expressed their willingness to pay the fine. By a court order, citizen K. was subjected to an administrative penalty in the form of a fine of 5 MCI.

Thus, the court of first instance concluded that there was a violation of the requirements of Part 1 of the commented article of the Administrative Code in the actions of citizen K.

At the same time, the court of appeal overturned the decision and terminated the proceedings in the case for lack of corpus delicti provided for in Part 1 of Article 434 of the Administrative Code. Motivated her decision by the fact that art. 434 of the Administrative Code - minor hooliganism refers to the chapter providing for liability for offenses that infringe on public order and morality, and responsibility comes for minor hooliganism, that is, swearing in public places, insulting harassment of individuals, desecration of residential premises, pollution of public areas, parks, squares, including the release of municipal waste. in unidentified places, and other similar actions expressing disrespect for others, violating public order and the peace of individuals. In the case under consideration, none of the listed qualifying features are indicated in the protocol and in the judge's ruling, which expressed minor hooliganism, is not seen from the ruling. Thus, the fault of citizen K. the commission of an offense under Part 1 of Article 434 of the Administrative Code was not confirmed by the case materials and was not confirmed during the court session. In addition, no witnesses have been identified or interviewed in whose presence the actions of citizen K. the violation of public order and the tranquility of individuals has not been determined, the objective side of the offense has not been determined, where the obligatory sign is the expression of disrespect for others with a violation of public order and tranquility of individuals, there is also no subjective side of the offense, that is, his mental attitude to the act, namely, there was no intention on his part to commit minor hooliganism, what he said at the court hearing. In such circumstances, the appellate instance agreed with the arguments of the complaint and the appeal petition, the conclusions of the court of first instance on the guilt of citizen K. in violating the requirements of Part 1 of Article 434 of the Administrative Code are not based on the law and there is no corpus delicti in his actions under the imputed article.

In the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated January 12, 2009 No. 3 "On judicial practice in cases of hooliganism" it is noted that obvious disrespect for society should be understood as a demonstrative violation of generally accepted norms and rules of conduct dictated by the perpetrator's desire to set himself against others, to demonstrate a disdainful attitude towards them. In cases where obscenity in public places, insulting harassment of individuals, desecration of residential premises, common areas and other similar actions expressing disrespect for others, violating public order and peace of mind of individuals, were accompanied by the use of violence or the threat of its use, as well as the destruction or damage of other people's property, such actions come out They go beyond the scope of an administrative offense and form part of a criminally punishable hooliganism.

The objective side of part 2 of the commented article provides for a qualifying sign of the commission of an offense provided for in part one of the article repeatedly within a year after the imposition of an administrative penalty.

It should be borne in mind that the disposition of the first part of the article under study provides an exhaustive list of violations that entail liability for minor hooliganism, which excludes an expanded interpretation of the norm.

Since the sanction of part 2 of the article in question provides for only one non-alternative administrative penalty in the form of an administrative penalty, the existence of part 3 of this article is justified.

The objective side of part 3 of the analyzed article provides for the procedure for administrative liability of persons to whom administrative arrest in accordance with the second part of Article 50 of the Administrative Code does not apply.

The subject of parts 1 and 2 of the offense is a sane individual who has reached the age of sixteen by the time the administrative offense ends or is suppressed (Article 28 of the Administrative Code). The subjects of the offense provided for in part 3 of the commented article are individuals who cannot be sanctioned in the form of administrative arrest. Such persons are:

1) pregnant women;

2) women with children under the age of fourteen;

3) persons under the age of eighteen;

4) disabled people of groups 1 and 2;

5) women over the age of fifty-eight;

6) men over the age of sixty-three.

7) men who raise children under the age of fourteen alone (art. 50)

8) persons specified in Article 32 of the Administrative Code, as well as other persons granted immunity to administrative responsibility.

The subjective side of the administrative offense under study is characterized by an intentional form of guilt in the form of direct or indirect intent.

To qualify under Article 434 of the Administrative Code, it is necessary that the perpetrator is aware that as a result of his socially dangerous actions, the normal functioning of other people in public places is disrupted, foresaw the possibility or inevitability of such socially dangerous consequences and desired, or consciously allowed them (direct intent), or treated them indifferently (indirect intent).

When considering a case of an administrative offense, at the request of participants in the proceedings on an administrative offense and (or) internal affairs bodies, the court may establish special requirements for the behavior of a person who has committed an administrative offense provided for in Article 434 of the Administrative Code.

It should be noted that the offender cannot escape responsibility due to reconciliation with the injured party, but it is possible to release him from administrative responsibility by establishing special requirements for the offender's behavior. In accordance with Part 2 of Article 52 of the Administrative Code, Article 54 of the Administrative Code may be applied along with the imposition of an administrative penalty, or instead of it, when a person who has committed an administrative offense is released from administrative responsibility on the grounds provided for in Article 64-1 of the Administrative Code (insignificance of the offense).

Cases of administrative offenses provided for in all parts of Article 434 of the Administrative Code are considered by judges of specialized district and equivalent administrative courts (art. 684 Part 1).

On the basis of Article 804, Part 1 of the Administrative Code, proceedings on administrative offenses may be initiated under the article.:

1) internal affairs bodies (paragraph 1);

2) military police bodies of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Kazakhstan on offenses committed by military personnel, conscripts, conscripts, other troops and military formations of the Republic of Kazakhstan (paragraph 4).

Scientific and practical commentary to the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offences (article-by-article) from the Author's team:

Bachurin Sergey Nikolaevich, Candidate of Law, Associate Professor – chapter 48 (co-authored with E.M. Khakimov);

Gabdualiev Mereke Trekovich, Candidate of Law – Chapters 11, 21, 22, 23;

Zhusipbekova Ainur Maratovna, M.yu.n. – chapter 13 (co-authored with Karpekin A.V.); chapters 33, 39 (co-authored with Seitzhanov O.T.);

Karpekin Alexander Vladimirovich, Candidate of Law, Associate Professor – chapter 13 (in collaboration with Zhusipbekova A.M.);

Korneychuk Sergey Vasilyevich – chapters 2; chapter 6 (co-authored with O.T. Seitzhanov, E.M. Khakimov); chapter 8; chapter 25 (co-authored with E.M. Khakimov); articles 457-470, 488, 488-1, 491-506; chapters 28, 30, 52;

Ilya Petrovich Koryakin, Doctor of Law, Professor – Chapter 49;

Kisykova Gulnara Bauyrzhanovna, Candidate of Law – chapter 20;

Omarova Botagoz Akimgereevna, Candidate of Law – chapters 17; chapter 18 (co-authored with B.A. Parmankulova); chapters 26, 31; chapter 32 (co-authored with B.A. Parmankulova);

Parmankulova Bayan Askhanbaevna – chapter 18 (co-authored with Omarova B.A.); chapters 19, 32 (co-authored with Omarova B.A.); chapter 43 (co-authored with Tukiev A.S.);

Podoprigora Roman Anatolyevich, Doctor of Law, Professor - Chapter 24, articles 489, 489-1, 490;

Porokhov Evgeny Viktorovich, Doctor of Law – Chapters 14, 15, 16, 29, articles 471-475;

Seitzhanov Olzhas Temirzhanovich, Candidate of Law, Associate Professor, – chapter 4; chapter 5 (co-authored with E. M. Khakimov); chapter 6 (co-authored with S.V. Korneychuk, E.M. Khakimov); chapter 9; chapter 10 (co-authored with B.E. Shaimerdenov, V.V. Filin); chapter 33 (co-authored with Zhusipbekova A.M.); chapter 36 (co-authored with Shaimerdenov B.E.); chapter 39 (co-authored with Zhusipbekova A.M.);

Smyshlyaev Alexander Sergeevich, PhD. – chapters 38, 40, 42, 43-1 (co-authored with A.S. Tukiev); chapter 44;

Aslan Sultanovich Tukiev - Candidate of Law, Associate Professor – chapters 1, 3, 35; chapters 38, 40, 42, (co-authored with A.S. Smyshlyaev); chapter 43 (co-authored with B.A. Parmankulova); chapter 43-1 (co-authored with A.S. Smyshlyaev); chapter 44-1 (co-authored with Shipp D.A.); chapter 45; 46 (co-authored with Shipp D.A.); chapter 47;

Filin Vladimir Vladimirovich, Candidate of Law, Associate Professor – Chapter 10 (in collaboration with O.T. Seitzhanov, B.E. Shaimerdenov);

Yerzhan Maratovich Khakimov, M.yu.n. – chapter 5 (co-authored with O.T. Seitzhanov); chapter 6 (co-authored with O.T. Seitzhanov, S.V. Korneychuk); chapter 7; chapter 25 (co-authored with S.V. Korneychuk); chapters 34, 41; chapter 48 (co-authored with S.N. Bachurin); chapter 53;

Shaimerdenov Bolat Yerkenovich, M.yu.n., – chapter 10 (co-authored with O.T. Seitzhanov, V.V. Filin); chapter 12; articles 476-487, 507-509; chapter 36 (co-authored with O.T. Seitzhanov); chapters 37, 50, 51.

Shipp Denis Alekseevich – chapters 44-1, 46 (in collaboration with A.S. Tukiev).

Date of amendment of the act: 01.01.2020 Date of adoption of the act: 01.01.2020 Place of acceptance: 100050000000 Authority that adopted the act: 103001000000 Region of operation: 100000000000 NPA registration number assigned by the regulatory body: 5 Status of the act: new Sphere of legal relations: 029000000000 / 028000000000 / 029002000000 / 028004000000 / 029001000000 / 026000000000 / 001000000000 / 001008000000 / 030000000000 The form of the act: COMM / CODE Legal force: 1900 Language of the Act: rus

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.

Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases