Name: Әділ process (Perfect process)
Relevance: The society still does not recognize legal proceedings as "fast and right", still there are frequent complaints that there is hidden red tape in the courts, bias and injustice of judicial practice.
Purpose: To ensure fair and uniform judicial practice, clarity and optimality of procedural actions, efficiency and transparency of judicial procedures.
As part of the program, it is planned to optimize the judicial process and judicial procedures through the prism of the needs of society, the real simplification of the procedural legislation, analyze the reasonableness and identify the reasons for public dissatisfaction with fairness and objectivity of judicial practice, and work out mechanisms for an adequate assessment of justice by the population.
The project is aimed at:
- ensuring the right of everyone to be heard in court;
- ensuring the exhaustive use of the judicial protection mechanism in each case;
- timely consideration of cases within a reasonable time;
- increasing the authority of the first and appellate courts;
- giving an exceptional character to the cassation review of cases;
- overcoming the accusatory bias in the judicial process;
- ensuring genuine equality of the parties to the lawsuit;
- minimization of judicial errors through the formation of stable judicial practice and other measures.
The project is planned to be implemented through the following key areas: "Simplified litigation", "Optimal judicial procedures" and "Fair court practice".
As a result of work in these areas, it is assumed:
- minimize the number of procedural actions of the court of organizational and administrative nature; ensure their simplicity and clarity;
- review the system for assessing the quality of the administration of justice;
- exclude hidden red tape in the courts;
- reduce the extrajudicial burden of judges;
- ensure strict adherence to the principles of justice;
- ensure transparency in decision-making, legal certainty for the most common categories of disputes, and so on.
№ |
Stages |
Terms |
||
Start |
Ending |
|||
Stage 1: 2018 |
||||
1.1.1. |
Develop proposals to reduce the excessive repression of the criminal process and its humanization, as well as to expand the scope of alternative measures to imprisonment (fines, restrictions on freedom) |
March 2018 |
May 2018 |
|
1.1.2. |
Determine the jurisdiction of the investigative courts as part of amending the existing legislation |
March 2018 |
April 2018 |
|
1.1.3. |
Development of a methodology for conducting the process for investigative courts |
April 2018 |
December 2018 |
|
1.1.4. |
Proposal for revision of criteria for assessing the procedural activity of judges |
April 2018 |
December 2018 |
|
1.1.5. |
Introduce proposals for the introduction of standards of evidence, human rights standards in criminal prosecution |
April 2018 |
May 2018 |
|
1.1.6. |
Expanding the scope of mediation in the criminal process |
April 2018 |
May 2018 |
|
1.2.1. |
Apply project management in the work on the AAPC project (analyzes, studies, international experience) |
March 2018 |
December 2018 |
|
1.2.2. |
Conduct an analysis of court practice on claims involving state bodies |
May 2018 |
December 2018 |
|
1.3.1. |
Participation in the development of new Rules for access to courts |
March 2018 |
April 2018 |
|
1.3.2. |
Development of the publication standard for judicial acts |
April 2018 |
May 2018 |
|
1.3.3. |
Development of proposals in the Regulatory Resolution on the issues of publicity of proceedings |
May 2018 |
June 2018 |
|
1.4.1. |
Develop a standard of conduct for the judge in the process |
April 2018 |
August 2018 |
|
1.5.1. |
Change of tariffs for payment for the services of translators (Government Decree) |
April 2018 |
September 2018 |
|
1.5.2. |
Conducting an analysis of the quality of the administration of justice in the state language |
May 2018 |
December 2018 |
|
2.1.3. |
Proposals for the formation and systematization of analytical bases of judicial practice (in conjunction with E-Sot) |
April 2018 |
December 2018 |
|
2.2.2. |
Elaboration of criteria for distinguishing judicial errors from abuse |
April 2018 |
December 2018 |
|
3.3.1. |
To analyze the effectiveness of private decisions, definitions |
April 2018 |
December 2018 |
|
3.3.2. |
Proposals based on analysis of the mechanisms of liability for abuse of rights |
April 2018 |
December 2018 |
|
3.4.1. |
Simplify the civil process (reduction of cases of mandative production, expansion of the application of the institution of executive inscriptions, reduction of the list of authorized actions of the CIC) |
March 2018 |
December 2018 |
|
3.4.3. |
Development of procedural rules for digitalization of the process and proposals for improving the digitalization of the process |
April 2018 |
December 2018 |
|
3.4.4. |
Elaboration of proposals to exclude orders not related to the administration of justice |
April 2018 |
December 2018 |
|
Stage 2: 2019 |
||||
1.1.7. |
Development of recommendations for law enforcement agencies to reduce the accusatory bias |
June 2018 |
June 2019 |
|
1.1.8. |
Pilot probation project |
April 2018 |
April 2019 |
|
1.1.9. |
Development of a training course for judges on the theory of evidence, the organization of courses with the invitation of international lecturers |
September 2018 |
September 2019 |
|
1.4.2. |
Participation in the organization of training courses for judges on psychological techniques and skills of communication with citizens |
August 2018 |
August 2019 |
|
2.1.1. |
Development of a unified approach to specific issues of law enforcement |
June 2018 |
June 2019 |
|
2.1.2. |
Analyze and develop proposals for improving judicial practice in cases related to entrepreneurial activities (in conjunction with the Atameken NPP) |
April 2018 |
March 2019 |
|
2.2.3. |
Elaboration of proposals to minimize the influence of chairmen of courts |
May 2018 |
January 2019 |
|
2.2.4. |
Identify the "real" level of corruption in the decision, the degree of influence of the chairmen of the courts on justice in conjunction with the "Atameken" |
June 2018 |
June 2019 |
|
3.1.1. |
Development of effective criteria for assessing the procedural actions of judges |
June 2018 |
June 2019 |
|
3.2.1. |
Development of the draft Law on Amendments to the CCP on simplification of judicial procedures |
April 2018 |
September 2019 |
|
3.2.2. |
To improve the quality of litigation by developing a methodology for all categories of cases |
April 2018 |
August 2019 |
|
3.2.3. |
Elaboration of proposals on the expediency of limitation of cassation appeal of judicial acts |
March 2018 |
March 2019 |
|
3.2.4. |
To create a training program for judges on the organization and planning of the trial process in conjunction with the Academy of Justice |
July 2018 |
July 2019 |
|
3.2.5. |
Analysis of the possibility of increasing the active role of the court |
July 2018 |
July 2019 |
|
3.2.6. |
Development of proposals to improve the efficiency of process planning |
July 2018 |
July 2019 |
|
3.4.2. |
Pilot project on mediation in court |
April 2018 |
December 2019 |
|
4.1.1. |
Reduce unnecessary procedures and judicial acts by mapping business processes across all types of process |
June 2018 |
September 2019 |
|
4.1.2. |
Alignment with KGD MF Creation of a single BCF (intermediate code) for payment of state duty |
June 2018 |
June 2019 |
|
4.1.3 |
Development of a draft law on amending the Tax and Budget Codes on the introduction of a unified CSC |
June 2018 |
June 2019 |
|
Stage 3: 2019 |
||||
1.1.10. |
Proposal to the procedural legislation on the expansion of the probation institute (based on the results of the pilot project) |
October 2019 |
January 2020 |
|
1.5.3. |
Establishment of an interpreter service in courts |
October 2019 |
December 2020 |
|
2.2.1. |
Analysis of the norms of wide interpretation |
January 2019 |
December 2020 |
|
3.2.7. |
Amendments to the procedural legislation based on the results of the project |
January 2019 |
December 2020 |
No |
Name of restriction |
Description of restriction |
1 |
Financing |
To conduct research, analysis, development of methodology, mapping of business processes, appropriate financial resources are needed |
2 |
Human resources |
Qualified specialists are needed to carry out activities within the program |
No |
Name of the assumption |
Description of the assumption |
1 |
Decrease in the accusatory bias |
revision of the performance of law enforcement agencies |
2 |
Citizen and state are equal participants in the process |
adoption of the AAPC, establishment of administrative courts |
3 |
Ensuring the right to publicity of the process |
with observance of the order in the courtroom and the rights of the participants in the processes for inviolability of private life |
4 |
Ensuring the right of everyone to be heard in court |
in case of reduction of the extrajudicial burden and the burden of indisputable cases |
5 |
Improving the quality of translation in the process |
availability of funding |
6 |
Reduction of the number of court errors |
definition of norms of wide interpretation, exclusion of the interests of judges |
7 |
Reducing the abuse of judges in the adoption of judicial acts |
interaction with law enforcement bodies, NPP Atameken |
8 |
Revision of the system for assessing the procedural actions of judges |
conducting of a sociological survey |
9 |
Rules of procedure for the judge in all types of proceedings |
availability of qualified specialists in the development of methodology, interaction with the Academy of Justice |
10 |
Effective mechanism to protect against abuse of procedural rights |
introduction of amendments and additions to the legislation |
11 |
Judges are exempt from extrajudicial functions |
introduction of changes and additions to the legislation, lack of human and technological resources |
12 |
Simplification of judicial procedures for all types of processes |
availability of qualified specialists (companies) in mapping, making changes and amendments to the legislation |