Between Convictions and Reconciliations: Processing Criminal Cases in Kazakhstani Courts

Abstract

Cornell International Law Journal: Vol. 50 : No. 1 , Article 5The criminal justice system in Kazakhstan is full of contradictions: Soviet-era accusatorial bias in pre-trial detention and sentencing goes hand in hand with the pro-defendant bias in closing criminal cases. This paradoxical co-existence of seemingly contradictory biases fits well within the informal power map of the criminal justice system. The major reform—reducing prison population to decrease recidivism and minimize international shaming—was coupled with the more recent drives for closing cases on the basis of reconciliation, the total registration of crimes, and zero tolerance approach to combating crime have been achieved only through the change of the incentive structure in the criminal justice system. The post-Soviet innovation of closing criminal cases of public prosecution based on the reconciliation with the victim of crime has proliferated in Kazakhstan because this matched both the incentives of the key actors in the criminal justice system and demands from private actors who are involved in criminal proceedings. In contrast, other types of public participation, such as jury trials, which implement the right to a fair trial, give teeth to adversarial proceedings, and cultivate judicial independence—requirements of the Constitution of Kazakhstan—have rarely been used because they disrupt existing power relationships within the law-enforcement system.

Unlikely downsizers: The prison service's role in reversing mass incarceration in Kazakhstan

“…Since then, this number has not gone below 32,000 and even exceeded 170,000 cases in 2015. Asanov explicitly stated that one of the aims of exoneration was to reduce the prison population in the long term (Trochev, 2017).…”

“…This particular mechanism was developed in response to international shaming about the number of pre-trial detainees and the state of pre-trial facilities (Trochev, 2017), a few These legislative and procedural reforms constitute the mechanisms by which the prison population in Kazakhstan declined. The presidential administration and General Prosecutor's Office played key roles in implementing these reforms.…”

“…The judiciary argued that law enforcement agencies should further limit the number of criminal cases sent to overloaded courts (Trochev, 2017). As a result, prosecutors also became key reconcilers.…”

Nature versus Nurture: A Comparison of Russian Law Graduates Destined for State Service and for Private Practice

“…Solomon () argues that, although efforts have been made to eliminate the accusatorial bias in most post‐Soviet states, only Estonia has succeeded. Trochev () documents the decline in the numbers of people incarcerated in Kazakhstan thanks to the increased use of reconciliation procedures, pursuant to which victims of crime agree not to press charges. As a result, the cases are closed.…”

The Devil is in the Details: Drug-Trafficking and Corruption in Kazakhstan

“…Post-Soviet criminal justice can be full of contradictions, but these contradictions fit well the informal power map among criminal justice actors (Trochev, 2017). As in many non-democratic regimes, post-Soviet criminal justice systems can be severely criticised for torture, lack of judicial independence and corruption.…”