Commentary to article 651. The debate of the parties in court with the participation of jurors The Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan
After the end of the judicial investigation, the court, with the participation of jurors, proceeds to listen to the arguments of the parties. The debate of the parties in court with the participation of jurors consists of two parts.
The first part of the debate consists of speeches by the public prosecutor, the victim, the defense attorney and the defendant, who state their positions on the proven or unproven guilt of the defendant without mentioning his previous criminal record.
The parties may not mention circumstances that are not subject to consideration by a court with the participation of jurors, and refer to evidence that has not been examined at the court session. The presiding judge interrupts such statements and explains to the jurors that they should not take these circumstances into account when passing sentence. In case of disobedience to the orders of the presiding judge, a monetary penalty may be imposed on a participant in the proceedings in accordance with the procedure provided for by this Code.
The second part of the debate consists of speeches by the public prosecutor, as well as by the victim, the civil plaintiff and the defendant or their representatives, the defense attorney and the defendant, which set out positions on the qualification of the defendant's actions, sentencing, and civil action. The second part of the debate is conducted without the participation of jurors.
1. Before proceeding to the judicial debate, the presiding judge must ask the parties whether they need time to prepare. If such a motion is received from a participant in the process, the presiding judge is obliged to provide him with the necessary time of a reasonable length to prepare for the judicial debate.
At the end of the time allowed for preparation, the court announces the beginning of the judicial debate. At the same time, the presiding judge explains to the parties that they have the right to refer only to the evidence considered in the judicial investigation in court arguments.
2. In accordance with article 383 of the CPC, judicial debates consist of speeches by the prosecutor, the victim or his representative, the civil plaintiff and the civil defendant or their representatives, the defendant and the defense attorney. The sequence of speeches of the participants in the trial is determined by the court according to their proposals, but in all cases the prosecutor speaks first.
If the public prosecution is supported by several public prosecutors, several victims, defenders, civil defendants and their representatives, civil plaintiffs and their representatives, and defendants participate in the case, the presiding judge provides them with time to coordinate the order of their statements. If necessary, a break in the court session may be announced for this purpose. If these persons do not agree on the order of their statements in the debate, the court, after hearing their opinions, decides on the order of their statements.
The court may not limit the duration of the judicial debate to a certain time, but the presiding judge has the right to stop the persons participating in the debate if they relate to circumstances unrelated to the case under consideration, or are based on evidence not examined at the court session. If, during the judicial debate, one of the participants expresses the need to present new evidence to the court, they may request the resumption of the judicial investigation.
Upon receipt of such a petition, the presiding judge suspends the judicial debate, discusses with the parties the need to resume the judicial investigation of the petition and makes an appropriate decision. If the motion is dismissed, the presiding judge announces the continuation of the judicial debate. If the request is granted, the presiding judge decides to resume the judicial investigation, during which new evidence is examined, completes the judicial investigation and reopens the judicial debate, which begins from the beginning.
2. Ensuring compliance with the procedure for the debate of the parties in cases considered with the participation of jurors is entrusted to the judge, he must be guided by the requirements of the law on holding debates only within the issues to be resolved by the jury.
A special feature of judicial debates in cases considered with the participation of jurors is their conduct in two parts.
In accordance with article 651 of the CPC, the first part of the debate consists of speeches by the public prosecutor, the victim, the defense attorney and the defendant, who state their positions on the proven or unproven guilt of the defendant without mentioning his previous criminal record. At the same time, the jurors are present in the courtroom.
3. And the parties to the judicial debate must adhere to the requirements of the law that they cannot mention circumstances that are not subject to consideration by a court with the participation of jurors, and refer to evidence that has not been examined at the court session.
In the event that the parties in the first part of the debate, in support of their position, refer to evidence that was declared inadmissible or not examined at the court session, or to circumstances that must be resolved in the second part of the debate, the judge, in accordance with part three of article 651 of the CPC, is obliged to interrupt the speech of such a participant in the process and explain to the jurors that they These circumstances should not be taken into account when making a decision in a conference room.
4. The second part of the debate consists of speeches by the public prosecutor, as well as by the victim, the civil plaintiff and the defendant or their representatives, the defense attorney and the defendant, which set out positions on the qualification of the defendant's actions, sentencing, and civil action. The second part of the debate is conducted without the participation of jurors.
Commentary to the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan from the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan
Constitution Law Code Standard Decree Order Decision Resolution Lawyer Almaty Lawyer Legal service Legal advice Civil Criminal Administrative cases Disputes Defense Arbitration Law Company Kazakhstan Law Firm Court Cases
