Commentary on Article 65. The Accused Person of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan

1. A person shall be recognized as an accused person if, in respect of that person:

1) the prosecutor has approved the indictment or approved a ruling on the application of summary proceedings in a case concerning a minor-gravity crime;

2) the protocol on a criminal misdemeanor has been approved and a decision has been made to refer the criminal case to court under the relevant 3) article (articles) of the criminal law;

4) the pre-trial investigation has been completed by concluding a procedural agreement in accordance with the procedure provided for in Part Four of Article 617 of this Code;

5) the head of the inquiry body has approved a ruling on the application of summary proceedings in a case concerning a criminal misdemeanor.

2. An accused person in respect of whom a trial has been scheduled, and in private prosecution cases, a person in respect of whom the complaint has been accepted by the court for its proceedings, shall be referred to as a defendant.

3. A defendant in respect of whom a conviction has been rendered shall be referred to as a convicted person.

4. A defendant in respect of whom an acquittal has been rendered shall be referred to as an acquitted person.

5. An accused person shall have the right to exercise the rights provided for in Part Nine of Article 64 of this Code, as well as:

1) to know what he or she is accused of;

2) to receive a copy of the indictment approved by the prosecutor and the protocol on the criminal misdemeanor;

3) to defend his or her rights and legitimate interests by means and methods that do not contradict the law, and to have sufficient time and opportunity to prepare for the defence;

4) to exercise the rights of a civil defendant if recognized as such in connection with the filing of a civil claim in the case;

5) at any stage of the investigation, to file a motion or express consent to the conclusion of a procedural agreement, to conclude a procedural agreement, and to receive a copy of the procedural agreement;

6) in the cases provided for by this Code, to file a motion for the criminal case to be considered by a court with the participation of jurors.

6. A defendant shall have the right:

1) to participate in the judicial proceedings in the courts of first and appellate instances;

2) to exercise all the rights of the defence party, as well as the right to make a final statement;

3) at any stage of the judicial proceedings, to file a motion or express consent to the conclusion of a cooperation procedural agreement and to conclude a procedural agreement;

4) to withdraw from a concluded procedural agreement before the court retires to the deliberation room to make a decision;

5) to demand a public trial;

6) to object to the termination of the case.

7. A convicted or acquitted person shall have the right:

1) to familiarise themselves with the minutes of the court hearing and submit comments thereon;

2) to appeal against a judgment, court rulings and judge's rulings, and to receive copies of the decisions being appealed;

3) to be informed of complaints, motions of the prosecutor and protests submitted in the case, and to submit objections thereto;

4) to participate in the judicial consideration of submitted complaints, motions of the prosecutor and protests;

5) to file a motion or express consent to the conclusion of a cooperation procedural agreement and to conclude a procedural agreement.

8. The presence of a defence counsel or legal representative of an accused person may not serve as grounds for removing or restricting any right of the accused person.

Footnote. Article 65 as amended by the Laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 11 July 2017 No. 91-VI (shall enter into force upon the expiration of ten calendar days after the day of its first official publication); dated 21 December 2017 No. 118-VI (shall enter into force upon the expiration of ten calendar days after the day of its first official publication).

Unlike suspicion, an accusation is an act of establishing the grounds for criminal liability and determining a person's guilt in committing a specific criminal offence, supported by a body of sufficient evidence, with the precise article, part and paragraph of the article of the criminal law under which the person's act is classified specified in the final procedural decisions of the body conducting the criminal proceedings.

An accused person is a person who, just like a suspect, possesses a certain set of rights and freedoms and protects his or her rights and interests as part of the defence party. The significance of a formulated accusation lies in the fact that it enables the prosecutor to commit the accused person for trial and refer the criminal case to court (Part 1 of Article 305 of the CPC), and enables the court to conduct the main court hearing in respect of the defendant and within the scope of the accusation on the basis of which that person was committed for trial (Part 1 of Article 340 of the CPC).

Part 1 of Article 65 of the CPC identifies four grounds for recognizing a person as an accused person:

— pursuant to paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Article 302 or paragraph 1 of Part 4 of Article 629-3 of the CPC, following examination of the materials of the criminal case, the prosecutor takes one of the following actions, respectively: approves the indictment or the ruling on the application of summary proceedings in a case concerning a minor-gravity crime. It is precisely from this moment that the figure of the accused person emerges in the case;

— having examined the protocol and the materials attached thereto, the head of the inquiry body shall be entitled to approve the protocol on the criminal misdemeanor and refer the criminal case to court. A copy of the protocol shall be sent to the prosecutor (paragraph 1 of Part 2 of Article 528 of the CPC). The act of approving the protocol on the criminal misdemeanor also establishes the emergence of an accused person in the criminal case;

— following the conclusion of a procedural agreement in the form of a plea bargain, the pre-trial investigation in the case shall be deemed completed, and the prosecutor shall immediately refer the case to court without an indictment, notifying the victim thereof (Part 4 of Article 617 of the CPC). The procedural agreement is signed by the prosecutor, the suspect, the accused person and his or her defence counsel, and establishes the emergence of an accused person in the case (Part 2 of Article 616 of the CPC);

— in cases concerning criminal misdemeanors, a ruling on the application of summary proceedings issued by the person conducting the pre-trial proceedings shall be submitted to the head of the inquiry body, who, having immediately examined the criminal case, shall be entitled to approve the ruling on the application of summary proceedings and refer the criminal case to court for consideration. From the moment the ruling on the application of summary proceedings in a case concerning a criminal misdemeanor is approved, an accused person emerges in the criminal case. No later than twenty-four hours after its approval, a copy of the ruling shall be served on or sent to the accused person, his or her defence counsel (if participating), the victim, the civil claimant, the civil defendant and the prosecutor (Part 2 of Article 629-2, paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Article 629-3 of the CPC).

It is important to note that the knowingly unlawful prosecution of a person as an accused person is punishable under Article 412 of the Criminal Code. From the perspective of criminal law, the subjects of this corpus delicti are the relevant officials of the criminal prosecution authorities; the crime under consideration is formal in its construction, that is, it is deemed completed from the moment the relevant procedural decision is issued, establishing the formula of accusation (paragraph, part and article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code) against the subject of criminal liability, which is sufficient to commit that person for trial. The said crime is always committed with direct intent, as indicated by the presence of such a feature of its subjective element as knowledge, that is, the conscious, unconditional, previously known and obvious prosecution of a person who has not, in fact, committed a particular crime.

In the context of the foregoing, the question arises as to which procedural document of the pre-trial investigation sets out the formula of accusation and who, under the law, bears legal responsibility for establishing it lawfully and on reasonable grounds in criminal proceedings.

Without delving into the history of criminal procedure, I will merely note that the Criminal Procedure Code of the Kazakh SSR of 1959 (Article 158) and the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 1997 (Article 206) linked the commencement of criminal liability to the emergence of an accused person in the criminal case, that is, to the investigator issuing a reasoned ruling on bringing a person in as an accused. The investigator's subsequent actions, such as announcing this decision to the accused person, ascertaining his or her attitude towards the accusation brought, and questioning the accused person on the substance of the accusation brought, were no longer relevant to establishing the possible criminal liability of the investigator. During the specified periods of criminal justice, criminal liability, in particular for the investigator, arose upon the adoption of a ruling on bringing a person in as an accused (Article 189 of the Criminal Code of 1959, “Unlawful Bringing to Criminal Liability”; Article 344 of the Criminal Code of 1997, “Bringing a Person Known to Be Innocent to Criminal Liability”).

At present, with the adoption of the Criminal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code in 2014, the approaches to the commencement of criminal liability and the designation of the status of an accused person prior to trial have changed substantially. This is due to a new understanding of the constitutional function of criminal prosecution (accusation) within criminal proceedings (see subparagraph 22) of Article 7 of the CPC).

According to the provisions of the Constitution, the exercise of criminal prosecution on behalf of the State is entrusted exclusively to the Prosecutor's Office (paragraph 1 of Article 83 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan). In other words, the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 83 of the Constitution do not impose this function on the bodies and officials conducting pre-trial investigations of criminal cases and objectively do not identify them as such. In this regard, under the new Criminal Procedure Code of 2014, the occurrence of criminal liability of a person who has committed an act containing all the elements of a criminal offence, or the establishment of an accusation (Article 4 of the Criminal Code), as one of the principal functions of criminal proceedings and, consequently, the emergence of the status of an accused person in a criminal case, is organically linked by law to the prosecutor's conduct of criminal prosecution during the pre-trial investigation of the criminal case.

In light of the foregoing, it should be noted that, at certain stages of the progress of a criminal case, suspicion that a person has committed a crime does not, in terms of its significance, reach the level of an accusation, while playing an independent procedural role and constituting part of criminal prosecution. This is also confirmed by a fragmentary analysis of the relevant provisions of the CPC governing matters of criminal prosecution or accusation in criminal proceedings.

Thus, pursuant to Part 1 of Article 65 of the CPC, an accused person is a person in respect of whom: 1) the prosecutor has approved the indictment or approved a ruling on the application of summary proceedings in a case involving a minor offence; 2) the protocol on a criminal misdemeanour has been approved and a decision has been made to refer the criminal case to court under the relevant article (articles) of the criminal law; 3) the pre-trial investigation has been completed by concluding a procedural agreement in accordance with the procedure provided for in Part Four of Article 617 of this Code; 4) the head of the body of inquiry has approved a ruling on the application of summary proceedings in a case involving a criminal misdemeanour. That is, the content of these provisions demonstrates that, in criminal cases concluded by an indictment, a procedural agreement, or a ruling on the application of summary proceedings in a case involving a minor offence, the official who approves the commencement of criminal liability of the subject of the crime in the form of the final pre-trial legal classification of the crime and, in fact, the status of the accused person is primarily the prosecutor.

In addition to the prosecutor, pursuant to Article 412 of the Criminal Code, the heads of criminal prosecution bodies (the head of the body of inquiry) who approve the final investigation documents in cases involving criminal misdemeanours and summary proceedings may also be subjects of criminal liability.

• It is important to note that, for the prosecutor, the emergence of an accused person is an entirely natural course of pre-trial investigation. The fact is that the prosecutor was and remains the permanent head of the pre-trial investigation even before an accused person emerges in the case, bearing in mind the provisions of the CPC stipulating that all decisions made by the investigator concerning a suspect must necessarily be sent to the prosecutor, together with copies thereof, within twenty-four hours, for the purpose of supervising their legality. The prosecutor remains in this capacity throughout all subsequent stages of criminal proceedings. In particular, upon receiving a criminal case accompanied by an indictment from the investigator, the prosecutor is obliged to examine and verify it (emphasis added — by me): 1) whether the act took place and whether that act contains the elements of a criminal offence; 2) whether there are any circumstances in the case that entail its termination; 3) whether the act of the suspect has been correctly classified; 4) whether the act imputed to the person is confirmed by the evidence available in the case; 5) whether the person has been recognized as a suspect in respect of all established criminally punishable acts; 6) whether measures have been taken to bring to criminal liability all persons in respect of whom evidence of their commission of criminal offences has been obtained in the case, etc. (see Part 1 of Article 301 of the CPC). Based on the results of examining the materials of the criminal case (emphasis added — by me), the prosecutor takes one of the following actions: 1) approves the indictment; 2) draws up a new indictment, etc. (see Part 1 of Article 302 of the CPC). The criminal procedure law specifically imposes on the prosecutor the obligation to ensure that the indictment is served on the accused person. The receipt confirming that the accused person has received the indictment, which contains an explanation of the accused person's rights, is attached to the case (see Part 1 of Article 304 of the CPC). Finally, after performing the actions provided for in Article 304 of the CPC, the prosecutor, by means of a ruling, commits the accused person for trial and forwards the criminal case to the court having jurisdiction over it (see Part 1 of Article 305 of the CPC).
• The accusation is of fundamental importance at the judicial stages, since it establishes the limits of the main court hearing (see Article 340 of the CPC).
• The main court hearing shall be conducted only in respect of the defendant and within the limits of the accusation on which that person has been committed for trial, as stated in Part 1 of Article 340 of the CPC. Where, during the preliminary hearing, the criminal case under consideration is joined with a newly received case, the court shall grant the prosecutor time to prepare a new indictment, as provided in Part 4 of Article 340 of the CPC. If, during the main court hearing, it becomes necessary to bring a more serious accusation against the defendant or an accusation differing from the original one, the court shall adjourn the hearing and grant the prosecutor the time necessary to prepare a new indictment, as established in Part 5 of Article 340 of the CPC. The prosecutor's procedural activities aimed at maintaining the accusation, as the principal subject matter of the administration of justice in criminal cases, are sufficiently clearly evident in the exercise of the prosecutor's powers during the main court hearing, as well as at the appellate and cassation stages.
• Thus, at present, the person responsible for establishing the fact that criminal liability has commenced during the pre-trial investigation and for the emergence of the status of an accused person is the prosecutor.
• Accordingly, if, as a result of examining the criminal case, the prosecutor knowingly (deliberately) knew that the suspect was innocent and, nevertheless, approved the indictment prepared by the investigator, the prosecutor must incur criminal liability under Part 1 of Article 412 of the Criminal Code. Alongside the prosecutor, the accomplices to this crime may include heads of criminal prosecution bodies, the investigator, an operational officer of a criminal prosecution body, and other persons. Conversely, if the prosecutor was unaware that he was bringing a person who was knowingly innocent of committing a crime to criminal liability, that is, if he was honestly mistaken as to the guilt of a particular person (in the absence of signs of negligence under Article 371 of the Criminal Code), then the elements of the crime under consideration are absent from his actions.
• Accordingly, if an investigator, while conducting procedural activities involving a suspect and duly formalizing the emergence of this participant in criminal proceedings in the criminal case (see Part 1 of Article 64 and Articles 202–204 of the CPC), did not know that the suspect had falsely incriminated himself and assumed responsibility for another person, and such circumstances were subsequently confirmed by the materials of the criminal case and then by the judgment of the court of first instance, particularly one that has entered into legal force, there can be no doubt that this investigator likewise cannot be held criminally liable. However, if the investigator was aware of the innocence of the suspect and deliberately created and, in a certain manner, established the prerequisites for the commencement of that person's criminal liability under the relevant article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code, then, unquestionably, the investigator must bear criminal liability only for those acts that resulted in the subsequent unlawful bringing of the suspect to criminal liability by the prosecutor. Such crimes may include the use of unlawful investigative methods by the investigator, including abuse of official powers, unlawful detention, torture, violence, threats, coercion to give testimony, falsification of evidence, abuse of power and official authority, etc.
• Part 2 of Article 65 of the CPC establishes two grounds for the emergence of the status of a defendant in a case.
• Thus, the scheduling of the main court hearing under the general or simplified procedure is carried out by issuing a ruling specifying the person who is the defendant (subparagraph 1) of Part 2 of Article 322 of the CPC); having considered a complaint in a private prosecution case, the judge shall, within three days, issue a ruling accepting the complaint for his or her proceedings and thereby establish the emergence of the defendant in the case (subparagraph 1) of Part 2 of Article 409 of the CPC).
• Part 3 of Article 65 of the CPC regulates one general ground for the emergence of the status of a convicted person in a case: the issuance of a guilty verdict in respect of the defendant. Guilty verdicts, in turn, are divided into verdicts: 1) imposing a criminal penalty to be served by the convicted person; 2) releasing the person from criminal liability; 3) imposing a criminal penalty and releasing the person from serving it; 4) imposing no criminal penalty; 5) postponing the serving of a criminal penalty (Part 2 of Article 393 of the CPC). It is from the date on which the full text of the guilty verdict is signed and pronounced that the defendant is considered a convicted person (Articles 402 and 404 of the CPC).
• Part 4 of Article 65 of the CPC establishes one general ground for the emergence of the status of an acquitted person in a case: the issuance of an acquittal. Acquittals are divided into verdicts establishing: the absence of an event constituting a criminal offence; the absence of the elements of a criminal offence in the defendant's act; or the failure to prove the defendant's involvement in the commission of a criminal offence. An acquittal on any of the above grounds means that the court recognizes the defendant's innocence and entails the defendant's full rehabilitation (Article 394 of the CPC). It is from the date on which the full text of the acquittal is signed and pronounced that the defendant is considered an acquitted person (Articles 402 and 404 of the CPC).
• Like a suspect, an accused person is vested with a set of rights enabling that person, independently or with the participation of defence counsel and a legal representative, to defend himself or herself against the accusation brought. Therefore, the law attributes some of the rights of a suspect to the legal capacity of the accused person in the case (Part 5 of Article 65 of the CPC), while simultaneously setting out specific rights belonging to the accused person (subparagraphs 1)–6) of Part 5 of Article 65 of the CPC).
• The service of the indictment or a copy of the ruling on the application of summary proceedings on the accused person (Article 304 and Part 2 of Article 629-2 of the CPC), familiarizing the suspect with the protocol on a criminal misdemeanour (Part 1 of Article 528 of the CPC), the reading out of the protocol on a criminal misdemeanour by the judge during its consideration (subparagraph 8) of Part 1 of Article 529 of the CPC); the signing by the accused person, at the pre-trial investigation stage, of a procedural agreement in the form of a plea bargain, which specifies the classification of the crime (Article 616 of the CPC), and the prosecutor's presentation of the substance of the procedural agreement in court (Parts 1–2 of Article 625 of the CPC) are different forms of familiarizing the accused person with the substance of the accusation in the case and implementing the rule set out in subparagraph 1) of Part 5 of Article 65 of the CPC.
• The rule set out in subparagraph 2) of Part 5 of Article 65 of the CPC is complied with in all cases and constitutes one of the forms of the accused person's right to defence in court through the use of the final documents of the pre-trial investigation of the criminal case (the indictment, the protocol on a criminal misdemeanour, and the ruling on the application of summary proceedings).
• The rules set out in subparagraph 3) of Part 5 of Article 65 of the CPC constitute the totality of the accused person's defence rights established for that person from the moment of emergence in the criminal case until the case is referred to court. The rules under consideration are an expression of the principle of ensuring the suspect's and accused person's right to defence (Article 26 of the CPC).
• The rule set out in subparagraph 4) of Part 5 of Article 65 of the CPC was described above when commenting on subparagraph 4) of Part 9 of Article 64 of the CPC (see also Article 74 of the CPC) and is a consequence of the harm caused by the accused person as a result of the crime, the emergence in the case of a civil claim brought by a civil claimant, and the involvement of the person responsible for compensation for the harm (the civil defendant).
• The exercise of the accused person's right under subparagraph 5) of Part 5 of Article 65 of the CPC to conclude a procedural agreement becomes possible after the prosecutor has approved the indictment and before the court accepts the case for its proceedings, since until that moment the person is considered an accused person, and we are discussing the rights of that person in this capacity (see also Article 323 of the CPC).
• The jurisdiction of cases to a court with the participation of jurors and the procedure for exercising the rule set out in subparagraph 6) of Part 5 of Article 65 of the CPC are regulated by Articles 631 and 634 of the CPC and are as follows: a court with the participation of jurors shall hear, subject to the exceptions, cases involving crimes for which the criminal law provides for the death penalty or life imprisonment, as well as cases involving crimes provided for in subparagraph 1) of paragraph 1) of Part Three of Article 125, subparagraph 1) of Part Four of Article 128, Part Five of Article 132, subparagraph 1) of Part Four of Article 135, Articles 160, 163, Part Two of Article 164, Article 168, and subparagraph 6) of Part Two of Article 380-1 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. A suspect or accused person has the right to file a motion for the consideration of the case by a court with the participation of jurors when all the case materials are presented for familiarization, as well as during the subsequent period, including at the preliminary hearing of the case in court, but before the court schedules the main court hearing. A motion by a suspect or accused person requesting that the case be considered by a court with the participation of jurors, or that person's waiver of the right to have the case considered by a court with the participation of jurors, shall be recorded in the protocol on notifying the suspect of the completion of investigative actions and explaining the suspect's rights. A motion submitted at a later stage shall be set out in writing by the suspect or accused person and immediately forwarded to the court having jurisdiction over the case. A motion submitted during the preliminary hearing may be made in writing or orally. After the court has scheduled the main court hearing, a motion by the accused person requesting that the case be considered by a court with the participation of jurors shall not be accepted, etc. (Article 634 of the CPC).
• Pursuant to the provisions of Part 6 of Article 65 of the CPC, the defendant is also the holder of additional rights that differ from those of a suspect or accused person. The defendant exercises these rights in the courts of first instance and appeal. Let us briefly consider them.
• As a participant in court hearings in a court of first instance or appellate court (subparagraph 1) of Part 6 of Article 65 of the CPC), the defendant has the right to file motions, including motions to conclude a procedural agreement or a reconciliation agreement under the mediation procedure, to participate in the examination of evidence, to make statements during closing arguments, and to be heard in the final statement.
• The rules set out in subparagraph 2) of Part 6 of Article 65 of the CPC constitute a particular expression of the essence of the principle of ensuring the suspect's and accused person's right to defence (see the commentary on Article 26 of the CPC). In particular, the right to defence includes the defendant's right to make a final statement, which is regulated by a separate article of the CPC (Article 384). This right is exercised by the defendant during the main court hearing and, in principle, is also permissible in the appellate court, given the nature of the judicial decisions adopted at this stage. The final statement is made after the closing arguments of the parties have concluded and may serve as grounds for reopening the judicial investigation (Article 385). The defendant's final statement is not permitted during a simplified judicial investigation in cases involving a procedural agreement or an agreement on achieving reconciliation through mediation (Part 2 of Article 384 of the CPC).
• The rules set out in subparagraphs 3)–4) of Part 6 of Article 65 of the CPC are exercised by the defendant, taking into account the provisions of Article 628 of the CPC, from the moment the main court hearing is scheduled until the court retires to the deliberation room to deliver its verdict. Regardless of when, at what stage of the proceedings, a plea agreement was concluded, agreement proceedings in court are excluded in all cases if, before the court retires to the deliberation room, the defendant expresses disagreement with the procedural agreement (subparagraph 4) of Part 6 of Article 65, Articles 622 and 628–629 of the CPC).
• The rule set out in subparagraph 5) of Part 6 of Article 65 of the CPC is related to the operation of the principle of publicity of criminal proceedings and is possible in the absence of circumstances preventing the conduct of an open court hearing (Article 29 of the CPC). The question of whether a criminal case is to be heard in an open or closed court hearing is decided in the judge's ruling scheduling the main court hearing (subparagraph 9) of Part 2 of Article 322 of the CPC).
• We examined the application of the rule set out in subparagraph 6) of Part 6 of Article 65 of the CPC when commenting on subparagraph 22) of Part 9 of Article 64 of the CPC. The only difference is that, in the present case, the defendant applies it when preparing the case for hearing by the court and during the main court hearing, before the court adopts a decision to terminate the proceedings on various grounds, subject to the exceptions (Articles 327 and 343 of the CPC).
• The provisions of Part 7 of Article 65 of the CPC are addressed both to the convicted person and to the acquitted person and develop the rights they acquire after the verdict has been delivered and pronounced.
• The rule set out in subparagraph 1) of Part 7 of Article 65 of the CPC takes effect after the verdict has been delivered and pronounced (Part 3 of Article 402 of the CPC). The procedure for submitting comments on the record of the main court hearing after it has been signed, and for considering such comments, is regulated by Articles 348–349 of the CPC. Comments on the record and the judge's ruling issued following consideration of those comments shall be attached to the record of the main court hearing (Part 2 of Article 349 of the CPC).
• The rule set out in subparagraph 2) of Part 7 of Article 65 of the CPC allows a convicted or acquitted person to appeal against a verdict, a court ruling, or a judge's ruling in a case involving that person through appellate proceedings, cassation proceedings, proceedings concerning the execution of judicial decisions, etc. For example, a convicted person has the right to appeal against a verdict on a broad range of grounds. An acquitted person has the right to appeal against the verdict with regard to the grounds for acquittal, since this circumstance may be related to the civil claim in the case. The fact is that, pursuant to Regulatory Resolution No. 4 of the Supreme Court dated 20 April 2018, “On the Judicial Verdict”, when delivering an acquittal, the court, depending on the grounds for acquittal, makes a decision on the civil claim, stating its reasons: it rejects the civil claim if there was no event constituting a crime or if the commission thereof by the defendant has not been proven; it leaves the civil claim without consideration if the defendant's actions do not contain the elements of a crime (paragraph 50). If the civil claim is left without consideration, the measures taken to secure it are not cancelled (paragraph 53 of the aforementioned Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court). In the latter case, the issue of exercising the civil claimant's right to compensation for harm is transferred to and resolved under the procedure of civil proceedings.
• The rule set out in subparagraph 3) of Part 7 of Article 65 of the CPC is exercised by a convicted or acquitted person at the judicial stages, beginning with the appellate stage, and reflects their right to submit written objections to the arguments contained in a prosecutor's motion, a prosecutor's protest, or a complaint by the prosecution party filed against a verdict, a court ruling, or a judge's ruling, and to make submissions in the relevant court proceedings in relation thereto (Articles 420–421 of the CPC).
• The rule set out in subparagraph 4) of Part 7 of Article 65 of the CPC is related to the rule set out in subparagraph 3) of Part 7 of Article 65 of the CPC and presupposes the participation of the convicted or acquitted person in the court of the relevant instance where a complaint, a prosecutor's motion, or a prosecutor's protest against a verdict, a court ruling, or a judge's ruling is to be considered (Part 3 of Article 428, Article 486 of the CPC, etc.).
• The rules set out in subparagraph 5) of Part 7 of Article 65 of the CPC may be exercised by a convicted person after the verdict has been pronounced and only in the form of a cooperation agreement, the terms and procedure for concluding which are provided for in Articles 618–621 of the CPC. Upon fulfilment of the terms of the agreement by the convicted person, the prosecutor shall take measures to fulfil the agreement on the prosecutor's part, guided by Articles 476–478 of the CPC, which regulate the consideration of issues at the stage of execution of the verdict (Part 3 of Article 621 of the CPC).
• In concluding the analysis of the provisions of Article 65 of the CPC, it should be noted that the provisions of Part 8 thereof do not permit, under any circumstances, any diminution of the aforementioned rights of the accused person, defendant, convicted person, or acquitted person, even if their interests in the case are represented by defence counsel or a legal representative.

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

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