Signs of an insult to the honor and dignity of a person
By the verdict of the Akkol District Court of the Akmola region dated April 29, 2020: F., who had no previous convictions, was acquitted under part 2 of Article 131 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Code) for the absence of elements of a criminal offense in her actions. By the decision of the judicial Board for Criminal Cases of the Akmola Regional Court dated June 16, 2020, the verdict remained unchanged. In the protest, the Prosecutor General disagreed with the conclusions of the judicial authorities about the absence of F.'s actions. the composition of the criminal offense provided for in part 2 of Article 131 of the Criminal Code indicates that according to the conclusion of the psychological and philological examination in the studied statements, in the lexemes "moron", "idiot" there are signs of insulting the honor and dignity of the personality of private prosecutor D. In this communicative situation, these statements contain a negative assessment of a person in an indecent form. He believes that the court unreasonably did not accept the expert opinion as evidence, the court's conclusions are not based on the case materials and the requirements of the law. He also points to significant violations of the criminal procedure law during the court's consideration of this criminal case: the failure of the court to explain the rights and obligations to the parties, the order of court arguments, and the failure of the defendant to provide the last word. The protest raises the issue of the annulment of the judicial acts issued against F. and the referral of the criminal case for a new judicial review to the court of appeal. Private prosecutor D. accused F. The fact that on February 11, 2020, at a parent-teacher meeting in the building of Akkol secondary school No. 1, she publicly insulted her, saying the words "moron", "idiot", humiliating her honor and dignity in an indecent manner. Criminal liability under part 2 of Article 131 of the Criminal Code occurs when the honor and dignity of another person is humiliated, expressed in an indecent form and committed in public.
Signs of an insult to the honor and dignity of a person
Meanwhile, the statements "moron", "idiot" are really rude and have signs of insulting honor and dignity. However, they do not contain the obligatory sign of a criminal offense provided for in part 2 of Article 131 of the Criminal Code – humiliation of a person's honor and dignity expressed in an indecent form, which means negative statements containing obscene language and phraseology that grossly offend public morals and violate the norms of public decency. In such circumstances, the courts came to the correct conclusion that F.'s actions were not involved. the composition of the criminal offense provided for in part 2 of Article 131 of the Criminal Code. As for the protest arguments regarding the expert's opinion, according to the explanations contained in paragraph 11 of the normative resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 26, 2004 No. 16 "On forensic examination in criminal cases", when examining the expert's opinion, it should be taken into account that it does not have any advantages over other evidence and has a predetermined force, is subject to analysis, comparison and evaluation in conjunction with other evidence in the case. Thus, an expert, defining humiliation of another person's honor and dignity expressed in an indecent form, refers it to a negative assessment of a person through profanity, which is linguistically defined in the expert opinion as abusive speech and at the same time as expressions contrary to the norms of public morality. Whereas, within the meaning of the criminal law, the basis for criminal prosecution under part 2 of Article 131 of the Criminal Code cannot be the utterance of any expression containing only certain signs of insulting the honor and dignity of a person.
In accordance with the requirements of part 6 of Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the CPC), the totality of evidence is considered sufficient to resolve a criminal case if acceptable and reliable evidence is collected that establishes the truth about each and every one of the circumstances to be proved without any doubt and indisputably. In such circumstances, the court gave this expert opinion a proper assessment in accordance with the requirements of article 125 of the CPC. The arguments protesting the cancellation of an acquittal in connection with significant violations of the criminal procedure Law contradict the requirements of article 440 of the CPC, according to which an acquittal cannot be overturned on grounds of a significant violation of the criminal procedure law if the innocence of the acquitted person, the grounds for justification and the essence of another decision rendered in favor of the defendant are not disputed. According to sub-paragraphs 6), 8) of paragraph 3 of Article 77 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the accused is not obliged to prove his innocence, irremediable doubts about the guilt of a person are interpreted in favor of the accused. Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court judicial acts of local courts in relation to F. I left it unchanged. The protest of the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Kazakhstan was left without satisfaction.
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
