Commentary on Article 45. Suspension of Judicial Proceedings in a Criminal Case and Interruption of Pre-Trial Investigation Time Limits of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan

1. Proceedings in a criminal case shall be suspended by a court ruling in the following cases:

1) where the accused has absconded from the court or their whereabouts have not been established for other reasons;

2) temporary mental disorder or other serious illness of the defendant, certified in accordance with the procedure established by law;

3) where the defendant is outside the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan;

4) an act of force majeure temporarily preventing further proceedings in the criminal case;

5) the performance of procedural actions related to obtaining legal assistance in accordance with the procedure provided for in Chapter 59 of this Code;

6) consideration by the prosecutor of the defendant's application made in court concerning the obtaining of evidence through the use of unlawful acts or cruel treatment, and the appeal against the prosecutor's decision, where it is impossible to continue the main court proceedings in the meantime.

2. The court shall be obliged to suspend proceedings in the case, either in their entirety or in the relevant part, if the court applies to the Constitutional Council of the Republic of Kazakhstan with a submission seeking recognition as unconstitutional of a law or other regulatory legal act applicable in the given criminal case that infringes upon the human and civil rights and freedoms enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

At the request of the parties, the court shall be obliged to suspend proceedings in the case, either in their entirety or in the relevant part, if the Constitutional Council of the Republic of Kazakhstan has accepted for consideration, at the initiative of another court, a submission seeking recognition as unconstitutional of a law or other regulatory legal act applicable in the given criminal case.

3. Proceedings in a criminal case before a court shall also be suspended, either in their entirety or in the relevant part, by a court ruling where the private prosecutor in a private prosecution case is unable to conduct criminal prosecution in court due to serious illness, being on a business trip outside the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, or performing a civic duty.

4. Proceedings in a criminal case shall be suspended until the circumstances that served as grounds for their suspension cease to exist, and the time limit for consideration of the case by the court shall be interrupted. Once such circumstances cease to exist, proceedings shall be resumed by a court ruling.

5. The participants in the proceedings shall be notified of the suspension or resumption of proceedings in the case.

6. A suspended case shall be subject to termination upon the expiry of the limitation periods established by criminal law, provided that the case contains no information indicating that the running of the limitation period has been interrupted.

7. The time limits for pre-trial investigation shall be interrupted in the following cases:

1) where the person who committed the criminal offence has not been identified;

2) where the suspect or accused is outside the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan;

3) where the suspect or accused has absconded from the criminal prosecution authorities or their whereabouts have not been established for other reasons;

4) temporary mental disorder or other serious illness of the suspect or accused, certified in accordance with the procedure established by law;

5) performance of procedural actions related to obtaining legal assistance in accordance with the procedure provided for in Chapter 59 of this Code;

6) failure to locate a person who has gone missing;

7) the absence of a real possibility for the suspect or accused to participate in the proceedings due to the resolution of the issue of deprivation of immunity from criminal prosecution or their extradition to a foreign state.

7-1. Interruption of the time limits for pre-trial investigation shall not prevent the conduct of necessary search operations in the case in accordance with the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Operational-Investigative Activities”, covert investigative actions, or the attachment of their results to the materials of the criminal case.

8. When the time limits for pre-trial investigation are interrupted, the person conducting the pre-trial investigation shall notify the participants in the proceedings thereof in writing. A copy of the ruling on the interruption of the investigation time limits shall be sent to the prosecutor within twenty-four hours.

8-1. The interrupted time limits for pre-trial investigation shall be resumed by a ruling of the person conducting the pre-trial investigation from the moment the circumstances that served as grounds for their interruption cease to exist, and the prosecutor shall be notified thereof in writing.

Note. An act of force majeure preventing further proceedings in a criminal case shall mean natural and man-made emergency situations.

Footnote. Article 45 was amended by Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 292-VI dated 27 December 2019 (see Article 2 for the procedure for its entry into force).

The title of the article under consideration makes it clear that suspension of proceedings in a case, as an independent institution of criminal procedure, is permitted only during the court's preparation of the case for trial, as well as during the main court proceedings, and must always be reasoned. Interruption of time limits, in turn, as an independent institution of criminal procedure, relates to the pre-trial investigation of a criminal case and must also be reasoned.

Proceedings in a case may be suspended in their entirety or in the relevant part, while the time limit for consideration of the case by the court is interrupted. Such suspension is generally regarded as a temporary interruption of proceedings in a case, which may occur for objective reasons. It does not constitute the final termination of proceedings in the case, since, once the circumstances that served as grounds for suspension cease to exist, and in other cases, proceedings may be resumed by a corresponding court ruling from the relevant judicial stage or phase of the court process. Suspension of proceedings in a case by a court simultaneously means the cessation of any judicial actions in that case. This is consistent with the logic of judicial proceedings, the interests of the parties, and the purpose of the court's decision. The law establishes independent grounds for the suspension by a court of proceedings in a criminal case (Parts 1–3 of Article 45 of the CPC). Let us examine them.

A situation in which the accused may abscond from the court, etc., upon the case being received by the court, during the court's preparation of the case for trial, or in the course of the main court proceedings, is an objective one. This is the first ground for suspending proceedings in a case. Its cause is the inadequate examination of the defendant's personality before and after the commission of the criminal offence and, as a consequence, the selection of a preventive measure that does not correspond to the nature and degree of public danger of the criminal offence or to the defendant's personality. Where there are grounds indicating that the accused has absconded or that their whereabouts have not been established for other reasons (Subparagraph 1 of Part 1 of Article 45 of the CPC), the judge shall be entitled to suspend proceedings in the case against one or several defendants until the relevant circumstances cease to exist and continue proceedings against the remaining defendants (Part 3 of Article 341 of the CPC). At the time of suspending the case on this ground, the judge must have sufficient information (evidence, indicia) indicating that such circumstances exist.

Simultaneously with the suspension of the criminal case during the preliminary hearing, following which the case is to be returned to the prosecutor, the accused shall be placed on the wanted list and a preventive measure in the form of detention shall be imposed (Part 2 of Article 292 and Part 3 of Article 324 of the CPC). A criminal case suspended on the ground specified in Subparagraph 1 of Part 1 of Article 45 of the CPC shall be referred by the court to the prosecutor for supervision of the search for the defendant and, where grounds exist, for conducting proceedings for the confiscation of the defendant's property prior to the delivery of a court judgment.

 In cases involving several persons accused of a crime committed in complicity, where one or several of them have absconded from the court while the others are held in custody, proceedings against the accused who have absconded may be suspended, provided that this does not infringe upon the right to defence of the remaining accused. In such cases, following the preliminary hearing, the court must separate the case against the accused who have absconded into separate proceedings, forward the materials to the prosecutor for the organisation of their search, and schedule the main court proceedings in respect of the remaining accused who are held in custody (Paragraph 17 of Regulatory Resolution No. 10 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 8 December 2017, “On Certain Issues Concerning the Application by Courts of the Provisions of Criminal Procedure Legislation in Respect of Criminal Cases Received by the Court”).

During proceedings in a case, a situation may arise in which the defendant becomes seriously ill, thereby precluding their participation in the proceedings until recovery. This ground for suspending proceedings in a case must be certified by a physician working at a medical institution (Subparagraph 2 of Part 1 of Article 45 of the CPC). For example, temporary mental disorder as a ground for suspending proceedings in a case must be confirmed by a report of a forensic psychiatric examination (Subparagraph 4 of Part 1 of Article 271 of the CPC). In certain cases (where a person develops a mental disorder after committing a criminal offence), depending on the nature of the mental disorders, as well as where they require comprehensive and prolonged treatment and persons in such a condition pose a danger to themselves or others or may cause other substantial harm, the criminal case shall not be suspended. Instead, it shall be referred to the court for the application of compulsory medical measures in accordance with the rules set out in Articles 509–524 of the CPC. After such person recovers, the court, on the basis of a report issued by the medical institution that provided compulsory treatment, shall issue a ruling terminating the application of the compulsory medical measure and refer the case to the prosecutor for investigation and subsequent submission to the court in accordance with the general procedure. If a compulsory medical measure applied to a convicted person who has not fully served their sentence is cancelled due to recovery, the court shall send a copy of the ruling to the institution or body responsible for enforcing the sentence so that the person may resume serving the remaining part of the sentence, provided that the limitation period for enforcement of the conviction has not expired by that time. The time spent in a medical organisation shall be credited towards the term of serving the sentence (Article 524 of the CPC).

The defendant's presence outside the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Subparagraph 3 of Part 1 of Article 45 of the CPC) constitutes an independent ground for suspending proceedings in a case, regardless of whether the reasons for their presence abroad are valid or invalid. In the latter case, where the defendant is deliberately hiding outside the Republic of Kazakhstan from the bodies conducting criminal proceedings, trial in absentia shall be conducted and a judgment in absentia shall be delivered (Subparagraph 2 of Part 2 of Article 335 and Subparagraph 2 of Part 1 of Article 368 of the CPC). This circumstance shall not prevent the reopening of the case on the basis of newly discovered circumstances if the convicted person appears before the body conducting criminal proceedings (Subparagraph 7 of Part 2 of Article 499 of the CPC). Furthermore, in such cases, where grounds exist, the pre-trial investigation body may initiate proceedings for the confiscation of property prior to consideration of the case on its merits by the court (Articles 667–672 of the CPC).

An act of force majeure constitutes an unconditional ground for the court to suspend proceedings in a case (Subparagraph 4 of Part 1 of Article 45 of the CPC). The CPC defines the concept of “act of force majeure” as encompassing natural and man-made emergency situations. Such situations may cover certain periods of time and extensive territories, thereby significantly affecting the work of the bodies conducting criminal proceedings, disrupting its regular operation and preventing further proceedings in a criminal case (see the Note to Article 45 of the CPC).

The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 11 April 2014 “On Civil Protection” defines natural emergency situations as emergency situations arising as a result of hazardous natural phenomena (geophysical, geological, meteorological, agrometeorological and hydrogeological hazardous phenomena), natural fires, epidemics, and the destruction of agricultural plants and forests by diseases and pests (Paragraph 62 of Article 1); man-made emergency situations are defined as emergency situations caused by the harmful effects of hazardous industrial factors, transport and other accidents, fires (explosions), accidents involving the release (or threat of release) of highly potent toxic, radioactive and biologically hazardous substances, sudden collapse of buildings and structures, dam failures, and accidents involving electricity supply and communication systems of life-support infrastructure and treatment facilities (Paragraph 65 of Article 1). For the purposes of criminal proceedings, emergency zones are relevant, meaning designated territories in which an emergency situation has arisen (Paragraph 67 of Article 1). Depending on the scale of their spread and the extent of the damage caused, natural and man-made emergency situations are classified as facility-level, local, regional and global.

Once the act of force majeure has ceased, proceedings in the criminal case shall be resumed.

 An analysis of the current legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in this regard has shown that the expression “force majeure” is a rather broad legal concept and is not limited solely to natural and man-made emergency situations. In this respect, the wording of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan is more precise, defining force majeure as an extraordinary and unavoidable event under the given circumstances, which makes it possible to distinguish other forms in which such force may manifest itself (Subparagraph 1 of Paragraph 1 of Article 182 of the Civil Code). For example, the introduction of a state of emergency or martial law may substantially complicate the work of the justice authorities. According to Article 4 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 8 February 2003 “On the State of Emergency”, a state of emergency, as a temporary measure, shall be introduced where democratic institutions, independence and territorial integrity, political stability of the Republic of Kazakhstan, and the security of its citizens are under a serious and immediate threat and the normal functioning of constitutional state bodies has been disrupted. Circumstances serving as grounds for introducing a state of emergency include: mass crossing of the State Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan from the territories of neighbouring states; attempts to forcibly change the constitutional order of the Republic of Kazakhstan; acts of terrorism; actions aimed at the forcible seizure of power or the forcible retention of power in violation of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan; mass riots, interethnic and interfaith conflicts; blockades or seizures of individual localities and particularly important and strategic facilities; the preparation and activities of illegal armed formations; armed rebellion; acts of sabotage; provocative actions by other states aimed at imposing an armed conflict; violation of the territorial integrity of the Republic of Kazakhstan; natural and man-made emergency situations caused by natural disasters (earthquakes, mudflows, avalanches, floods and others), environmental crises, natural fires, epidemics and epizootics, the destruction of agricultural plants and forests by diseases and pests, industrial, transport and other accidents, fires (explosions), accidents involving the release (or threat of release) of highly potent toxic, radioactive and biologically hazardous substances, sudden collapse of buildings and structures, dam failures, accidents involving electricity supply and communication systems of life-support infrastructure and treatment facilities, which require the urgent stabilisation of the situation, maintenance of public order, and the creation of conditions for carrying out necessary rescue and emergency recovery operations. A state of emergency may also be introduced in the event of a real threat of a natural disaster or a large-scale accident (catastrophe), on the basis of a submission by the authorised body in the field of civil protection (Paragraph 2 of Article 4). A state of emergency throughout the entire territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan or in individual localities shall be introduced by the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan through an appropriate decree, following official consultations with the Prime Minister and the Chairpersons of the Chambers of Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan, with immediate notification of the Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The President's decree introducing a state of emergency shall be immediately published in official print media in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan and brought to the attention of the population through all mass media. The President's decree introducing a state of emergency shall enter into force within the time limits established by the President (Article 5 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On the State of Emergency”). The duration of a state of emergency introduced throughout the entire territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan shall not exceed 30 days, while the duration of a state of emergency introduced in individual localities shall not exceed 60 days. Upon expiry of the period for which the state of emergency was introduced, it shall be deemed terminated. If the circumstances that served as grounds for introducing the state of emergency have not been eliminated, the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan shall be entitled to extend its duration within the above-mentioned time limits by issuing an appropriate act (Article 7 of the Law “On the State of Emergency”).

 As an example of a legal act introducing a state of emergency, it is appropriate to refer to Decree No. 285 of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 15 March 2020 “On the Introduction of a State of Emergency in the Republic of Kazakhstan”. The Decree was adopted for the purpose of ensuring the safety of the population of the Republic of Kazakhstan and protecting the life and health of citizens, pursuant to Subparagraph 16) of Article 44 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and Articles 4, 5 and 6 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On the State of Emergency”, and in connection with the World Health Organization's declaration of the new coronavirus COVID-19 as a pandemic. According to Paragraph 2 of the Decree, a state of emergency was introduced throughout the entire territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the period from 08:00 on 16 March 2020 until 07:00 on 15 April 2020, and so forth.

During the period of validity of the Decree, the application of the provisions of Parts 1–6 of Article 45 of the CPC in the field of criminal proceedings is entirely appropriate, that is, courts are permitted to suspend the consideration of criminal cases until the end of the state of emergency in the country.

Under the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 5 March 2003 “On Martial Law”, martial law is defined as a special legal regime providing for a set of political, economic, administrative, military and other measures aimed at creating conditions for preventing or repelling aggression against the Republic of Kazakhstan or an immediate external threat to its security, and introduced by the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan throughout the entire territory of the Republic or in individual localities (Paragraph 4 of Article 1). The grounds for introducing martial law throughout the entire territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan or in individual localities are cases of aggression against the Republic of Kazakhstan or an immediate external threat to its security. Martial law shall be introduced throughout the entire territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan or in individual localities by a decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The President's decree introducing martial law shall specify the boundaries of the territory in which martial law is introduced and the time from which martial law shall take effect. The full text of the President's decree introducing martial law shall be immediately broadcast on radio and television and officially published (Article 4 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Martial Law”). The period of martial law shall commence from the time martial law is introduced and shall end from the time martial law is abolished. During the period of martial law, restrictions on the rights and freedoms of citizens and other persons shall be provided for, with the exception of the rights and freedoms specified in Paragraph 3 of Article 39 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as restrictions on the activities of organisations and the imposition of additional obligations upon them. In localities where martial law has been introduced, the powers of military command authorities shall be expanded in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, and all functions of state authorities and administration in the field of defence and maintenance of public order shall be transferred to them. The Armed Forces, other troops and military formations of the Republic of Kazakhstan shall be used during the period of martial law to repel aggression in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Civil and territorial defence measures during the period of martial law shall be carried out in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Article 5 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Martial Law”).

 Obtaining legal assistance in criminal cases within the framework of international treaties concluded by the Republic with other foreign states undoubtedly takes considerable time (Subparagraph 5 of Part 1 of Article 45 of the CPC), which constitutes a substantial reason for suspending proceedings in a criminal case. For example, summoning a witness, victim, civil claimant, civil defendant, their representatives or an expert, where they are citizens of a foreign state, to conduct judicial actions on the territory of the Republic; waiting for a response from a competent institution of a foreign state to a request for the performance of judicial actions or to a request for the surrender of a person for the purpose of bringing them to criminal liability, etc. (Articles 565–600 of the CPC). With regard to relations between courts on these matters, the provisions of the CPC designate the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan as the central authority. It submits requests (instructions, petitions) from courts for legal assistance during judicial proceedings and considers corresponding requests from courts of foreign states (Part 2 of Article 559).

 The law attaches serious importance to the court's response, during proceedings in a case, to reports of torture inflicted upon a defendant, which the court is obliged to investigate by suspending proceedings in the case (Subparagraph 6 of Part 1 of Article 45 of the CPC). On 29 June 1998, Kazakhstan acceded to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Therefore, the key obligation of the States Parties to the Convention is to adopt effective legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures to prevent acts of torture within their jurisdiction (Article 2). It is fundamentally important that, under the Criminal Code of 2014, Article 146 was included in Chapter 3, “Criminal Offences Against the Constitutional and Other Rights and Freedoms of Individuals and Citizens”.

The high degree of public danger posed by torture lies in the fact that, under the wording of Article 146 of the Criminal Code, its perpetrators may be an investigator, a person conducting an inquiry, another official, or another person acting at their instigation or with their knowledge or tacit consent. The above-mentioned persons possess a special status in criminal proceedings, which makes it difficult to identify and investigate unlawful actions committed by them. Furthermore, the specific nature of criminal cases in this category implies a distinct subject matter of proof and methods for obtaining information of evidentiary significance. By suspending proceedings in the case, the court assigns the investigation to the prosecutor participating in the case as the state prosecutor. In practice, this means conducting a pre-trial investigation using all the possibilities provided by the CPC, involving special prosecutors in the consideration of the defendant's application made in court and in the conduct of the investigation. Such prosecutors have experience in documenting torture and working with persons who have suffered psychological trauma, including trauma resulting from torture. This provision is fundamental in the context of bringing a special subject of a crime to criminal liability, where the primary task in such criminal cases is to ensure the independence and impartiality of the person conducting the criminal proceedings.

 Two independent grounds should be considered for suspending proceedings in a case, either in their entirety or in the relevant part, in connection with an application by the court to the Constitutional Council seeking recognition as unconstitutional of a law or other regulatory legal act applicable in the given criminal case that infringes upon the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Constitution (Part 2 of Article 45 of the CPC). This also takes a certain amount of time due to the specific nature of constitutional proceedings (Paragraph 3 of Article 73 of the Constitution, Articles 24 and 38 of the Constitutional Law “On the Constitutional Council of the Republic of Kazakhstan”). In addition, it should be noted that the court is obliged to suspend proceedings in the case where constitutional proceedings on the above-mentioned grounds have been initiated by another court in a similar case. In this instance, the initiative to suspend proceedings in the case may originate either from the court considering the case or from participants in the criminal proceedings (Part 2 of Article 45, Part 1 of Article 324 and Part 1 of Article 341 of the CPC).

The law provides for the possibility of suspending proceedings in private prosecution cases (Part 3 of Article 45 of the CPC). In such cases, the prosecutor's participation is not предусмотрена, and the prosecution in court must generally be maintained by the victim of the criminal offence. In this regard, the law identifies three independent grounds for suspending proceedings in a private prosecution case before a court: serious illness of the private prosecutor, their being on a business trip outside the Republic of Kazakhstan, or their performance of a civic duty. The court shall not apply this ground for suspending proceedings where a representative of the private prosecutor participates in the case. According to Part 3 of Article 411 of the CPC, during the court proceedings, the private prosecutor and the defendant are entitled to be present in person or to be represented by their representatives.

Suspension or resumption of proceedings in a case constitutes an independent decision of the court in that case. Therefore, in all instances, the participants in the criminal proceedings shall be notified thereof. A decision to suspend proceedings in a case may be appealed and reviewed by a higher court upon a motion by the prosecutor in accordance with the rules of appellate proceedings (Parts 4 and 5 of Article 45 and Article 422 of the CPC).

Closely connected with the suspension of proceedings in a case is the institution governing the calculation of limitation periods for bringing a person to criminal liability, which we have commented on above (see the commentary on Subparagraph 4 of Part 1 of Article 35 of the CPC) (Part 6 of Article 45 of the CPC). These periods may be interrupted only by the commission of a serious or particularly serious crime. In all other cases, if a person commits another crime before the expiry of the limitation period, the limitation period for each crime shall run independently (Part 7 of Article 71 of the Criminal Code). Thus, the expiry of the limitation period in a case (as provided for in Part 1 of Article 71 of the Criminal Code) that has been suspended by the court entails termination of the case on this ground, except for the cases specified in Part 4 of Article 71 of the Criminal Code, which entail the resumption of the limitation period as a result of the detention of a person who previously evaded investigation or trial, or their voluntary surrender, or the commencement of a new calculation of the limitation period from the date of commission of a new intentional crime.

 Unlike the suspension by a court of proceedings in a case, at the pre-trial investigation stage the proceedings themselves are not suspended; rather, their time limits are interrupted by issuing a ruling, notifying the participants in the criminal proceedings in writing, and sending a copy of the decision to the prosecutor within twenty-four hours for the purpose of exercising supervision over its legality.

 It should be noted that, when the time limits for pre-trial investigation are interrupted, the meaning of the provisions of Parts 7–9 of Article 45 of the CPC is that the conduct of operational-investigative measures and covert investigative actions is not prohibited due to their specific nature. Parts 7–9 of Article 45 of the CPC contain no prohibitions in this regard. This is connected with the fact that, during proceedings in a case, it is the time limits for pre-trial investigation that are interrupted, whereas the proceedings in the criminal case themselves are not suspended during the pre-trial investigation. Moreover, the time limits for conducting operational-investigative measures and covert investigative actions may, as a rule, differ from the time limits for pre-trial investigation, etc. (Articles 11–12 of the Law “On Operational-Investigative Activities”, Article 236 of the CPC).

As in the case of suspension of proceedings, once the circumstances that served as grounds for interrupting the time limits for pre-trial investigation cease to exist (the grounds for interruption have ceased to apply, or the prosecutor has cancelled the decision of the inquiry officer or investigator to interrupt the time limits, etc.), the interrupted time limits for pre-trial investigation shall be resumed by issuing a ruling, with written notification to the prosecutor and, presumably, to the participants in the criminal proceedings.

The law establishes seven grounds for interrupting the time limits for pre-trial investigation. However, it does not establish an act of force majeure that may prevent further pre-trial investigation of a criminal case as an independent ground for such interruption. If such a situation arises, the bodies and officials conducting criminal prosecution must change their approaches to their work until the force majeure ceases to operate, reasonably plan the scope of their work in specific criminal cases, and extend the investigation time limits in a timely manner.

The first ground concerns cases involving criminal offences where the perpetrator is unknown (Subparagraph 1 of Part 7 of Article 45 of the CPC). Failure to identify a person who is to be brought in as a suspect means that the person's identity was unknown both at the time the act was committed and during the pre-trial investigation. Where a case in which it was impossible to identify the person who committed the criminal offence is transferred to an investigator, the inquiry body shall, even without instructions from the investigator, take search measures to identify the person who committed the criminal offence and notify the investigator of the results (Part 3 of Article 196 of the CPC). The progress of the criminal case on this ground may be interrupted only after the expiry of the time limits for pre-trial investigation conducted in the form of an inquiry or preliminary investigation (Part 2 of Article 192 of the CPC). Before these time limits expire, the inquiry officer or investigator is obliged to take all necessary procedural measures and investigative actions in the case to identify the person who committed the criminal offence. After the time limits for pre-trial investigation have been interrupted on this ground, the inquiry officer or investigator is generally not entitled to conduct investigative actions in the case, but is entitled to continue operational-investigative measures and covert investigative actions in accordance with the procedure established by law or to instruct authorised units of law enforcement and special bodies to conduct them. In other words, due to the specific features of this ground for interrupting the time limits for pre-trial investigation, operational-investigative measures and covert investigative actions must be continuously conducted throughout the proceedings in the case until it is transferred to the prosecutor with an indictment or the criminal case is terminated.

The criminal prosecution authorities must act in the same manner where the grounds specified in Subparagraphs 2–7 of Part 7 of Article 45 of the CPC exist. In other words, before interrupting the time limits for pre-trial investigation on the above-mentioned grounds (after which they are not entitled to conduct investigative actions), these authorities are obliged to conduct an active investigation using investigative actions and, regardless of the interruption of the time limits, to continuously carry out operational-investigative measures and covert investigative actions for the purpose of obtaining evidence in cases involving the suspect's presence outside the Republic of Kazakhstan; their deliberate evasion of an inquiry or investigation; temporary mental disorder; the performance of procedural actions within the framework of obtaining international legal assistance from competent authorities of foreign states; failure to locate a missing person; or the inability of the subject of a criminal offence to participate in the pre-trial investigation due to the resolution of the issue of deprivation of their privileges and immunity from criminal prosecution or their extradition to a foreign state.

It is also evident that the cessation of the relevant circumstances, namely: the search for, discovery and surrender (extradition) of a person by the competent authority of a foreign state for the continuation of criminal prosecution in Kazakhstan; the search for and detention of the subject and resumption of ordinary criminal prosecution; the person's recovery from a serious illness; receipt of the necessary materials following the provision of international legal assistance in the criminal case; discovery and establishment of signs of a criminal offence in relation to a missing person; and receipt, in accordance with the established procedure, of consent from state bodies or officials to deprive a person of immunity from prosecution in criminal proceedings, shall serve as grounds for resuming the interrupted time limits and continuing the investigation in the ordinary manner.

Since the law does not provide otherwise, the conduct of a forensic examination cannot be regarded as a ground for interrupting the time limits for pre-trial investigation in a case, even if further proceedings in the case become problematic without the expert's report. A forensic examination generally takes a certain amount of time. For example, the general period of a person's stay in a medical organisation while undergoing a forensic medical or forensic psychiatric examination (a suspect who is not held in custody, as well as a victim or witness) is up to thirty days. If it is impossible to complete the forensic examinations within this period, the specified period may be extended by thirty days upon a reasoned request by the expert (expert commission), in accordance with the requirements of Part 2 of Article 14 of the CPC (Part 5 of Article 279 of the CPC).

 In cases in which proceedings have been interrupted during the pre-trial investigation, a situation may arise where the case remains in that status indefinitely. In this case, taking into account the requirements of Article 71 of the Criminal Code, upon expiry of the limitation period (calculated from the date of commission of the criminal offence until the moment the judgment enters into legal force), the case against the person shall be terminated. In this regard, the article expressly provides that the running of the limitation period shall be suspended if the person who committed the crime evades investigation or trial. In such a case, the running of the limitation period shall resume from the moment the person is detained or voluntarily surrenders. However, a person may not be brought to criminal liability if the limitation period has not been interrupted and the following periods have elapsed since the commission of the crime: 1) ten years after the commission of a minor offence; 2) fifteen years after the commission of an offence of medium gravity; 3) twenty years after the commission of a serious crime; 4) twenty-five years after the commission of an especially serious crime. The running of the limitation period shall be interrupted if, before the expiry of the periods specified in Part 1 of Article 71 of the Criminal Code, a person who has committed a serious or especially serious crime commits another serious or especially serious crime. In such cases, calculation of the limitation period shall begin anew from the date of commission of the new crime. In other cases, if a person commits another crime before the expiry of the limitation period, the limitation period for each crime shall run independently, etc. The criminal law specifically stipulates that the running of limitation periods for criminal misdemeanours shall neither be suspended nor interrupted, regardless of whether a new criminal offence is committed (Part 3 of Article 71 of the Criminal Code).

Commentary of 2020 on the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan by Marat Chekishuly Kogamov, Doctor of Law, Honorary Lawyer of Kazakhstan, Professor, Academician of the National Academy of Natural Sciences of Kazakhstan, Honoured Worker of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Constitution Law Code Regulatory Decree Order Decision Resolution Lawyer Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Consultation Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative case disputes Defence Arbitration Legal Company of Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases Declaration Decree Order Resolution Decision Report Conclusion Application Conclusion Convention Contract Memorandum Methodology Norms Note Rules Programme Charter Charter Article Commentary Resolution Regulation Protocol Draft Programme Rules