The Constitutional Court received an application seeking a review of the constitutionality of subparagraph 2) of part two of Article 484 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which restricts the possibility of cassation review of certain judicial acts.
The application was prompted by a decision of the appellate court refusing to replace the unserved portion of the applicant’s sentence with a less severe type of punishment. Previously, the court of first instance had granted the convicted person’s application; however, the appellate court overturned that decision.
In the applicant’s view, the inability to seek cassation review of such a judicial act violates their constitutional rights to judicial protection, personal liberty, and equality before the law and the courts.
The Constitutional Court noted that the Constitution guarantees everyone the right to judicial protection but does not specify the number of judicial instances or the procedure for reviewing judicial acts. These matters are governed by procedural legislation.
The Court explained that judicial protection is ensured through the examination of a case by a court of first instance and the possibility of its review on appeal. Cassation review of judicial acts that have entered into legal force serves as an additional safeguard of justice, with the grounds and procedure for its implementation determined by the legislator.
At the same time, the Constitutional Court established that the contested provision had not been applied by the courts when considering the applicant’s case. The application of the contested legal provision in decisions of state bodies and courts in a particular case is a mandatory admissibility requirement for an individual application to the Constitutional Court.
As this requirement had not been met, the Constitutional Court refused to accept the application for constitutional proceedings.
Follow memleket.kz on social media
Important news from Kazakhstan and useful articles on the platform you prefer.
