Lawyer's office in Almaty for criminal cases Grounds for refusal to grant applications for parole

An analysis of the materials on parole showed that, by refusing to satisfy petitions and representations, the courts mainly motivate their decision by a set of necessary circumstances characterizing the personality of the convicts. By the decision of the court No. 2 of the Zhetysu district of Almaty dated January 24, 2012, the petition for parole of the convicted N. was denied on the following grounds. As follows from the submitted material, by the verdict of the Almaty City Court dated April 09, 2007, N. was sentenced under Part 1 of Article 96 of the Criminal Code to eight years in prison, to serve her sentence in a correctional colony of general regime. It follows from the convict's personal file that for the entire time she was serving her sentence, the administration of correctional institutions characterized N. negatively, had 14 penalties, the last of which was not lifted. N., while in the LA-155/1 facility, was subjected to 7 penalties, in the form of 6 reprimands and was sent to a punishment cell for three days, in the LA-155/4 facility she has 6 penalties, in the form of 4 reprimands and was twice sent to a punishment cell for ten and three days, respectively. After being transferred to the LA-155/13 penal colony, she again violated the conditions of serving her sentence, for which she was reprimanded on June 22, 2011. In addition, the convict has not taken any measures to reconcile with the victim. In such circumstances, and also taking into account the opinion of the administration of the institution and the prosecutor, who at the court session asked to dismiss the petition, the conclusion of the psychologist, the court reasonably refused the convict parole. Another example.

The convicted D. applied to the court for parole, pointing out that during the time he served his sentence he showed himself on the positive side, he did not allow violations of the regime of serving his sentence. By the verdict of the Atyrau court No. 2 dated January 21, 2009, D. was sentenced under paragraph "b" of Part 3 of Article 179 of the Criminal Code to eight years in prison, with confiscation of property, and serving his sentence in a correctional colony of general regime. On the day of consideration of the petition, the convicted person had served more than half of the sentence imposed for committing a serious crime. From the personal file of D. It follows that he has been characterized negatively by the administration of correctional institutions for the entire time he has been serving his sentence. He evades performing unpaid 2-hour work under the guise of poor health, although there are no complaints about the convict's health and medical certificates of illness in the case file. He reacts negatively to educational events, and does not participate in cultural events. He has only one commendation in March 2010, and two penalties for violations of the regime of serving his sentence in August 2010 and April 2012, the last penalty for violations of the regime has not been lifted. The convicts have not taken any measures to compensate for the recovered damage. There is no consent from the victims for the release of the convicted person. In this regard, D.'s application for parole from serving his sentence was refused. Meanwhile, we note that one of the reasons for the low percentage of satisfaction of petitions in 2012 (44.5%), in our opinion, is the increased number of unsubstantiated petitions of convicts for parole from serving their sentences. This is due to changes in legislation, namely the Law No. 490-IV dated November 09, 2011 "On Amendments and Additions to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on improving law enforcement and further Humanizing criminal legislation", Article 169 of the Criminal Executive Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter - PEC) was supplemented with paragraph 1-1 of the following content: "when the convicted person has served a legally prescribed part of the sentence, the body executing the punishment is obliged to notify the convicted person in writing within five days of the right to file a petition to the court to consider the issue of parole from serving the sentence," that is, which granted the convicts the right to independently file such petitions from November 27, 2011 to court.  At the same time, there are cases when persons who are negatively characterized by the place of serving their sentences and who have outstanding disciplinary penalties repeatedly apply for parole. On March 27, 2012, Court No. 2 in Pavlodar considered a petition for parole from convicted L., who is serving his sentence in the State Institution AP-162/3. The court refused to satisfy the petition, because L. During the time he served his sentence, he received 9 penalties, has no incentives, does not join amateur organizations, does not participate in public life, and was negatively characterized by a representative of the correctional institution at a court hearing. Another example. The convicted A. appealed to court No. 2 of Pavlodar with a petition for release from punishment. At the hearing, a representative of the correctional institution described convict A. negatively, explaining that during the time served, the latter committed thirty-one violations of the regime of detention and received only two incentives.

From the moment of arrival at the correctional facility, he maintains contact with convicts who are characterized negatively. He has a negative attitude towards work and amateur organizations, and does not show any desire to join the section. He does not participate in cultural and sports events, as well as in the social life of the detachment, and does not respond to conversations of an educational nature. In such circumstances, the court reasonably issued a decision to refuse parole to convicted A. At the same time, there are cases of unjustified refusal of parole from punishment. According to paragraph 19 of the regulatory decree of December 25, 2007, in the practice of courts, there should be no cases of either improper application of parole or unjustified refusal to release convicted persons who do not need to fully serve the entire term of their sentence. The courts do not have the right to refuse parole for reasons not provided for by law, such as the leniency of the sentence imposed, the short duration of the convict's stay in this correctional institution, the denial of guilt to the convicted person, the presence of a criminal record in the past, serving a sentence for committing a serious or especially serious crime, and so on. However, contrary to these requirements, the courts, denying parole to convicts, cite grounds not provided for by law. By the resolution of Aktau City Court dated June 05, 2012 K. the person convicted under paragraph "b" of part 4 of Article 259 of the Criminal Code was denied parole, in substantiating the refusal to satisfy the petition, the court indicated in the descriptive and motivational part that "K. convicted of committing a serious crime. 

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