TORTURE COMMITTED FOR HIRE

I pay particular attention to distinguishing “torture committed for hire” under subparagraph 5) of part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan from related criminal offences, since disputes between the parties most often concern the legal assessment of motive, the method of commission, and the purpose of obtaining remuneration.

TORTURE COMMITTED FOR HIRE

Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure Commentary on Subparagraph 5) of Part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan

1. General Characteristics of the Elements of the Criminal Offence

Subparagraph 5) of part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan establishes enhanced criminal liability for torture committed for hire.

The current version of Article 110 of the Criminal Code provides as follows:

Part 1. Infliction of physical or mental suffering by means of violent acts committed with particular cruelty or humiliation, for the purpose of causing torment to the victim, provided that the act does not result in grievous bodily harm or bodily harm of moderate severity.

Part 2. The same act committed, inter alia, for hire —

shall be punishable by imprisonment for a term of four to seven years.

The current text of the provision is available at the following sources:

• ZakonPravo.kz — Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, “Torture”
• Adilet Legal Information System

Accordingly, qualification under subparagraph 5) of part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code is possible only where all the mandatory elements of the basic offence of torture have been established, together with the qualifying circumstance of commission “for hire.”

This is a matter of fundamental importance.

The following circumstances, taken individually, do not automatically establish the offence of torture committed for hire:

• receipt of money;
• the existence of a prior agreement;
• a promise of remuneration;
• a dispute concerning money;
• the use of violence in the interests of another person;
• the presence of a financial or other pecuniary motive.

It is necessary to establish a substantive and causal connection between the violent acts and the agreement to commit them in exchange for remuneration.

2. The Place of Article 110 within the System of Criminal Offences Against the Person

Article 110 of the Criminal Code forms part of the system of criminal law protection of human life and health.

The primary direct object of the offence is a person's physical and mental health, as well as their physical and psychological integrity.

Additional protected interests include:

• human dignity;
• bodily integrity;
• psychological integrity;
• personal freedom from systematic or tormenting violence.

The constitutional basis for this protection is established primarily in Article 17 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan:

1. Human dignity shall be inviolable.
2. No one shall be subjected to torture, violence, or other cruel or degrading treatment or punishment.

Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan — ZakonPravo.kz

Consequently, Article 110 of the Criminal Code must be interpreted not in isolation, but within the following legal framework:

Constitution → International Treaties → Criminal Code → Criminal Procedure Code → Regulatory Resolutions of the Supreme Court → Other Regulatory Legal Acts.

3. The Current Version of Article 110: An Important Legislative Amendment

For a practising lawyer, it is particularly important to take into account the historical development of this provision.

Previously, part 2 of Article 110 contained subparagraph 4), which referred to the commission of torture using torture methods.

This subparagraph was removed by Law No. 212-VII of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 17 March 2023.

At the same time, the current version retains the following qualifying circumstances:

• subparagraph 1) — commission against a minor, a helpless person, or a person dependent on the perpetrator;
• subparagraph 2) — commission against two or more victims;
• subparagraph 3) — commission against a pregnant woman;
• subparagraph 5) — commission for hire;
• subparagraph 6) — commission on grounds of social, national, racial, or religious hatred or enmity.

Current version of Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Therefore, when qualifying an offence under the current legislation, earlier judicial documents referring to subparagraph 4) of part 2 of Article 110 must not be applied mechanically.

This is particularly important when relying on earlier judicial practice of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

4. Classification of the Criminal Offence

Article 11 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan classifies criminal offences according to the nature and degree of their public danger.

In particular, intentional offences are classified according to the maximum term of imprisonment prescribed by law:

• imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years — minor offences;
• imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years — offences of medium gravity;
• imprisonment for a term not exceeding twelve years — serious offences;
• imprisonment for more than twelve years or life imprisonment — especially serious offences.

Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Adilet Legal Information System

Accordingly:

Part 1 of Article 110

The maximum penalty is imprisonment for up to three years.

Since the offence is intentional and the maximum term of imprisonment exceeds two years but does not exceed five years, it falls within the category of offences of medium gravity.

Subparagraph 5) of part 2 of Article 110

The maximum penalty is imprisonment for up to seven years.

Consequently, it falls within the category of serious offences.

This classification has significant procedural implications for:

• preventive measures;
• limitation periods;
• the possibility of terminating criminal proceedings;
• reconciliation between the parties;
• sentencing;
• the application of specific procedural mechanisms.

5. The Objective Element of Torture

The objective element consists of inflicting the following upon the victim:

• physical suffering;
• mental suffering.

Such suffering must be inflicted through violent acts committed:

• with particular cruelty;
• with humiliation;
• for the purpose of causing torment to the victim.

At the same time, the basic offence under Article 110 contains an important limitation: the act must not result in grievous bodily harm or bodily harm of moderate severity.

This does not mean that the victim must have no bodily injuries whatsoever.

On the contrary, a regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court explains that torture may manifest itself, for example, through:

• beatings;
• the infliction of minor bodily harm;
• pricking;
• biting;
• pulling out hair;
• setting a dog on the victim;
• deprivation of food;
• deprivation of water;
• deprivation of warmth;
• other violent acts.

Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Therefore, the presence of bruises, abrasions, contusions, or minor bodily injuries does not, in itself, preclude the application of Article 110 of the Criminal Code.

However, where a forensic medical examination establishes bodily harm of moderate severity or grievous bodily harm, the correctness of the legal classification must be reconsidered.

6. Mandatory Elements of the Offence of Torture

The Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 7 dated 28 December 2009, entitled “On the Application of the Provisions of Criminal and Criminal Procedure Legislation Concerning the Observance of Personal Liberty and Inviolability of Human Dignity, and Combating Torture, Violence, and Other Cruel or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,” provides specific guidance on the elements of torture.

According to paragraph 31-2 of that regulatory resolution, the mandatory elements include:

1. Intentional violent acts.
2. Particular cruelty and/or humiliation.
3. The infliction of physical and mental suffering.
4. The purpose of causing torment to the victim.

Regulatory Resolution No. 7 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 28 December 2009

It is precisely the combination of these elements that makes it possible to distinguish torture from the ordinary infliction of physical pain.

7. What Does “For Hire” Mean?

The concept of “for hire” under Article 110 of the Criminal Code must not be confused with employment relationships.

In criminal law, it refers to a situation in which a person commits violent acts pursuant to an agreement with another person in exchange for property or other remuneration.

A typical model is:

Principal → Agreement → Perpetrator → Violence → Remuneration.

For example:

Person A approaches Person B and says:

“Find Person C and inflict torment on him so that he stops interfering in my affairs. I will pay you KZT 100,000 for this.”

Person B accepts the offer, locates Person C, and commits acts constituting the offence of torture.

If all the required elements are established, Person B's actions may be classified under subparagraph 5) of part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code.

8. Is Actual Payment of Money Required?

No.

For the purpose of establishing the qualifying circumstance of “for hire,” it is essential to prove the existence of an agreement concerning remuneration and that the person's actions were обусловлены by that agreement.

Accordingly, several scenarios are possible.

Scenario 1 — The money was paid

Person A promised to pay Person B KZT 200,000.

Person B committed the acts of torture.

Person A subsequently transferred the money.

This is a straightforward example of actual payment of remuneration.

Scenario 2 — Payment was promised but never made

Person A promised KZT 200,000.

Person B carried out the assignment.

Person A subsequently refused to pay.

The fact that payment was not made does not, by itself, exclude qualification as an offence committed for hire.

Scenario 3 — Only part of the remuneration was paid

For example:

• KZT 50,000 was paid in advance;
• the remainder was to be paid after completion of the assignment.

The qualifying circumstance of hire may still be established.

Scenario 4 — Non-monetary remuneration was promised

For example:

• a motor vehicle;
• property;
• repayment of a debt;
• the provision of a service;
• another form of financial or property benefit.

This issue must be resolved by examining the actual substance of the agreement and the circumstances of the case.

9. Is a Written Contract Required?

No.

An agreement to commit a criminal offence may be made:

• orally;
• in writing;
• through messaging applications;
• during a telephone conversation;
• through audio messages;
• through video messages;
• through an intermediary;
• via an internet platform;
• through an anonymous account.

Therefore, the absence of a written contract does not preclude the establishment of the qualifying circumstance of hire.

On the contrary, in contemporary criminal cases, proof of hire frequently relies on digital evidence.

10. Digital Evidence in Cases of Torture Committed for Hire

The following types of information may be particularly relevant in such cases:

• Telegram;
• WhatsApp;
• Signal;
• Instagram;
• TikTok;
• email correspondence;
• banking applications;
• money transfers;
• electronic wallets;
• call history;
• telecommunications service provider records;
• geolocation data;
• network connection records;
• IP addresses;
• mobile device data;
• photographs;
• video recordings;
• audio recordings.

However, the mere existence of correspondence does not, in itself, establish that the elements of the criminal offence have been proven.

It is necessary to establish:

1. Who owns the account.
2. Who actually used the device.
3. Who owns the telephone number.
4. The authenticity of the correspondence.
5. Whether the correspondence has been edited or manipulated.
6. The context of the correspondence.
7. The connection between the correspondence and the specific incident.
8. The relationship between the principal and the perpetrator.
9. The existence of an agreement concerning remuneration.
10. The connection between the remuneration and the commission of the acts of torture.

11. The Subject of the Criminal Offence

As a general rule, criminal liability applies to a sane natural person who has reached the age of sixteen.

Article 110 is not included in the list of offences for which criminal liability begins at the age of fourteen.

Accordingly, the subject of the offence under Article 110 is a person who has reached sixteen years of age.

The following issues may also arise:

• criminal responsibility and mental capacity;
• age;
• complicity;
• mental condition;
• voluntary participation;
• the respective roles of the principal and the perpetrator.

12. The Subjective Element

Torture is an intentional criminal offence.

For the purposes of legal classification, it is necessary to prove that the person:

1. Understood the nature of their actions.
2. Was aware that they were using violence.
3. Understood that their actions were causing suffering.
4. Desired to cause such suffering.
5. Acted for the purpose of causing torment to the victim.

For qualification under subparagraph 5) of part 2 of Article 110, the circumstance of hire must also be established.

13. Motive and Purpose: A Fundamental Distinction

In cases of this category, it is necessary to distinguish between the following concepts.

Motive

The reason why a person commits an offence.

Examples include:

• revenge;
• jealousy;
• financial gain;
• hatred;
• a desire to force a person to leave;
• a desire to punish;
• personal hostility.

Purpose

The result that the person seeks to achieve.

Under Article 110, the purpose of causing torment to the victim is a mandatory element.

The qualifying circumstance of “for hire”

This concerns the conditions and circumstances under which the offence is committed: the acts are carried out pursuant to an arrangement involving remuneration.

For example:

Person A hires Person B to inflict torment on Person C.

For Person B, the circumstance of “for hire” is a direct qualifying element.

For Person A, the legal assessment must additionally address the person's role in the commission of the offence.

14. Criminal Liability of the Principal

The fact that the principal did not personally commit the acts of physical violence does not mean that the principal cannot incur criminal liability.

Depending on the circumstances established, the person may be recognised as:

• an organiser;
• an instigator;
• an accomplice;
• a co-perpetrator.

Accordingly, the structure of the case may involve:

Principal + Perpetrator + Intermediary.

The role of each person must be individually established.

A formal assertion that “the person was the principal and is therefore automatically guilty” is inadmissible.

It is necessary to prove the person's specific actions, intent, and connection with the criminal offence committed.

15. Complicity

Where several persons are involved, the provisions of the General Part of the Criminal Code concerning complicity must be applied.

The following issues are of particular importance:

• the allocation of roles;
• the existence of common intent;
• the point at which the intent arose;
• each participant's knowledge and awareness;
• the scope of the agreement;
• whether the perpetrator exceeded the scope of the agreement.

For example, if the principal agreed only to the infliction of several blows, but the perpetrator independently decided to inflict significantly more serious harm on the victim, the limits of each participant's criminal liability must be examined.

The court must establish not merely that the individuals knew each other or communicated, but also the precise content of their common intent.

16. Distinguishing Torture Committed for Hire from Intentional Infliction of Bodily Harm

This distinction is particularly important in legal practice.

If a person strikes a victim once and causes bodily harm of moderate severity, the conduct does not necessarily constitute torture under Article 110.

The relevant provision concerning the intentional infliction of bodily harm must be considered.

The principal distinguishing feature of Article 110 is the tormenting nature of the conduct.

Accordingly, counsel should examine:

• the number of acts;
• their duration;
• their intensity;
• the method of physical or psychological impact;
• the nature of the injuries;
• the victim's emotional state;
• the duration of the suffering;
• whether the conduct was repeated;
• the circumstances in which the victim was restrained;
• deprivation of water, food, or warmth;
• the humiliating or degrading nature of the conduct.

17. Distinguishing the Offence from Article 108-1 of the Criminal Code

Article 108-1 of the Criminal Code concerns the intentional infliction of minor bodily harm.

Where only an isolated incident of minor bodily harm is established, without evidence of tormenting or humiliating conduct and without the purpose of causing torment, the applicability of the relevant provision concerning minor bodily harm must be considered.

Not every incident of assault may automatically be classified as torture.

18. Distinguishing the Offence from Article 109-1 of the Criminal Code

Article 109-1 of the Criminal Code establishes criminal liability for battery.

The distinguishing feature of Article 110 is the infliction of physical or mental suffering through violent acts committed with particular cruelty or humiliation and for the purpose of causing torment to the victim.

Therefore, the legal classification must be based not only on the number of blows, but also on the content of the perpetrator's intent and the manner in which the conduct was carried out.

19. Distinguishing the Offence from Article 106 of the Criminal Code

Where grievous bodily harm has been inflicted, it is necessary to examine whether the elements of the offence under Article 106 of the Criminal Code are present.

The following principle is particularly important:

Article 110 must not be applied as a substitute for the provision concerning grievous bodily harm merely because the victim subjectively describes the conduct as torture.

One of the legally significant circumstances is the conclusion of the forensic medical examination. However, that conclusion must be assessed together with the other evidence in the case.

20. Distinguishing the Offence from Article 107 of the Criminal Code

Similarly, torture must be distinguished from the intentional infliction of bodily harm of moderate severity.

Part 1 of Article 110 expressly excludes cases in which the torture results in bodily harm of moderate severity or grievous bodily harm.

Consequently, determining the degree of bodily harm is one of the central issues in the proper legal classification of the conduct.

 21. Distinguishing Torture from Torment — Article 146 of the Criminal Code

This is one of the most important issues.

The following must not be treated as identical concepts:

torment and torture.

The Supreme Court has specifically clarified the need to distinguish Article 146 of the Criminal Code from the corresponding provision of Article 110.

Regulatory Resolution No. 7 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan — distinction between torture and torment

Torture presupposes specific purposes provided for by law, for example:

• obtaining information;
• obtaining a confession;
• punishment;
• intimidation;
• coercion;
• a discriminatory motive,

provided that a special subject or other conditions prescribed by law are present.

The Supreme Court indicates that where all the elements of the offence of torture are present, the act is classified under Article 146 of the Criminal Code, and no additional classification as torment is required.

22. International Standards

The Republic of Kazakhstan acceded to the UN Convention against Torture pursuant to Law No. 247 of 29 June 1998.

Law on Kazakhstan's Accession to the Convention against Torture

The Convention contains fundamental provisions prohibiting:

• torture;
• cruel treatment;
• inhuman treatment;
• treatment that is degrading to human dignity.

The following articles are of particular importance:

• Article 1 — definition of torture;
• Article 2 — obligation to prevent torture;
• Article 4 — criminal liability;
• Article 10 — personnel training;
• Article 11 — systematic monitoring;
• Article 12 — obligation to conduct an immediate and impartial investigation;
• Article 13 — right to lodge a complaint;
• Article 14 — compensation;
• Article 16 — other forms of cruel treatment.

The Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan directly links the Convention to the interpretation of national legal provisions. (Zakon i Pravo)

23. Optional Protocol

Kazakhstan has also ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture.

Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture — Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 48-IV

The Protocol provides for a preventive mechanism involving visits to places where persons deprived of their liberty are held.

In an ordinary private criminal offence under Article 110, it is not a direct procedural ground for initiating a case. However, it forms part of the broader international legal framework for protection against cruel treatment.

24. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights prohibits torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

Article 7 of the ICCPR and Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are specifically mentioned in the materials concerning Kazakhstan's accession to the Convention against Torture. (Zakon i Pravo)

Thus, national Article 110 must be applied taking into account the general international standard for the protection of human dignity.

25. Jurisdiction

A case under Article 110 of the Criminal Code is heard in accordance with the procedure for criminal proceedings.

Pursuant to Article 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, district and equivalent courts are courts of first instance and hear all criminal cases, except those assigned by law to specialised courts.

Article 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — criminal cases within the jurisdiction of district and equivalent courts

Consequently, an ordinary criminal case under subparagraph 5 of paragraph 2 of Article 110, in the absence of special grounds for jurisdiction, is heard by a district or equivalent court.

26. Territorial Jurisdiction

The basic principle is that a case is heard by the court at the place where the criminal offence was committed, subject to the rules of the Criminal Procedure Code governing territorial jurisdiction.

If a crime begins in one place and is completed in another, the special rules of the Criminal Procedure Code must be applied.

Particular difficulties arise in cases involving:

• an order placed via the Internet;
• the customer being located in one city;
• the perpetrator being located in another city;
• the victim being located in a third city;
• transfer of remuneration through an electronic system;
• violence being committed in a fourth location.

In such cases, the place where the crime was committed is determined not solely by the location of the customer.

27. Subject-Matter Jurisdiction

The term “subject-matter jurisdiction” has a conditional meaning in relation to Article 110.

This is a criminal-law dispute, not a:

• civil dispute;
• administrative dispute;
• labour dispute.

The main proceedings are conducted under the Criminal Procedure Code.

A civil claim for compensation for harm may be considered within the criminal proceedings.

Article 166 of the Criminal Procedure Code expressly provides for the consideration of civil claims for compensation for:

• pecuniary damage;
• non-pecuniary damage;
• medical treatment expenses;
• funeral expenses;
• insurance payments;
• benefits;
• legal representation expenses;
• other expenses provided for by law.

Article 166 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — civil claims considered in criminal proceedings

28. State Duty

The victim does not pay a state duty as for a civil claim in connection with the initiation and hearing of a criminal case under Article 110.

If the victim brings a civil claim for compensation for harm within the criminal proceedings, the current Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 18 July 2025, No. 214-VIII, which has been in force since 1 January 2026, must be taken into account.

Article 668 provides for exemption from state duty, in particular, for claimants:

• bringing claims for compensation for harm caused by bodily injury or other damage to health;
• bringing claims for compensation for material damage caused by a criminal offence.

Article 668 of the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — exemption from payment of state duty in courts

This is particularly important because some ZakonPravo materials concerning court costs refer to the previous numbering of the Tax Code. For cases arising in 2026, it is necessary to rely on the Tax Code dated 18 July 2025, No. 214-VIII.

29. The Victim's Civil Claim

The victim may claim:

Material Damage

For example:

• the cost of medical treatment;
• medicinal products;
• diagnostic examinations;
• rehabilitation treatment;
• transportation expenses;
• lost income;
• other documented expenses.

Non-Pecuniary Damage

The victim has the right to claim monetary compensation for non-pecuniary damage.

Legal Representation Expenses

Article 166 of the Criminal Procedure Code allows representation expenses to be included.

30. Is It Possible to Bring a Civil Claim After the Criminal Proceedings?

Yes.

If the victim:

• did not bring a claim;
• withdrew the claim;
• had the claim left without consideration,

the victim has the right to bring the claim under civil procedure.

This follows directly from Part 3 of Article 166 of the Criminal Procedure Code. (Zakon i Pravo)

Consequently, the absence of a civil claim in the criminal case does not necessarily deprive the victim of the right to seek compensation subsequently.

31. Pre-Trial Procedure

No special civil-law pre-litigation claim procedure is provided for classification under Article 110.

The proceedings commence in accordance with criminal procedure.

However, Article 110 has a particular feature relating to the form of criminal prosecution.

32. Private-Public Prosecution

Pursuant to Article 32 of the Criminal Procedure Code, cases under Part 1 of Article 110 are classified as private-public prosecution cases.

Article 32 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — cases of private, private-public and public prosecution and accusation

However, subparagraph 5 of paragraph 2 of Article 110 is not included in the list contained in Part 3 of Article 32.

Therefore, under the current version of Article 32, a case under subparagraph 5 of paragraph 2 of Article 110 falls under public prosecution.

This is a fundamental distinction.

33. Consequences of Public Prosecution

In cases involving public prosecution:

• criminal prosecution does not depend on the victim's wishes;
• withdrawal of the victim's complaint does not automatically terminate the proceedings;
• the victim's waiver of claims does not mean that the case is automatically terminated;
• the state, through the criminal prosecution authorities, continues the proceedings where grounds exist.

34. Reconciliation of the Parties

A fundamental question arises here.

Part 1 of Article 68 of the Criminal Code provides for exemption from criminal liability through reconciliation in cases involving criminal offences of minor or medium gravity, provided that:

1. reconciliation has taken place;
2. the harm has been made good;
3. the offence is not connected with death.

Article 68 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — exemption from criminal liability in connection with reconciliation

However, an offence under subparagraph 5 of paragraph 2 of Article 110 is a serious crime.

Consequently, Part 1 of Article 68 is not directly applicable.

35. Is Reconciliation Possible in Respect of a Serious Crime?

Part 2 of Article 68 permits exemption from criminal liability in certain cases involving a serious crime committed for the first time by persons belonging to specific categories, for example:

• minors;
• pregnant women;
• women who have or are raising a minor child;
• men raising a minor child alone;
• persons belonging to certain age categories.

However, the conditions prescribed by law must be satisfied.

Furthermore, Part 4 of Article 68 contains exceptions.

Nevertheless, Article 110 itself is not expressly listed as an absolute prohibition on the application of Article 68.

Therefore, the possibility of terminating a particular case requires verification of:

• the identity and personal circumstances of the accused;
• the category of the crime;
• whether it was committed for the first time;
• the absence of applicable exceptions;
• the nature of the consequences;
• the existence of genuine reconciliation;
• whether the harm has been made good.

36. What Does “Making Good the Harm” Mean?

The Supreme Court indicates that making good the harm must be real, must take place before reconciliation, and must have occurred before a decision on exemption from liability is made.

Regulatory Resolution No. 4 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the Application of Article 68 of the Criminal Code

For example:

• payment of compensation;
• payment of medical treatment expenses;
• compensation for property damage;
• another form of actual restoration of the rights that have been violated.

37. A Simple Statement That “I Have No Claims” Is Insufficient

The court must verify:

1. voluntariness;
2. the absence of pressure;
3. the genuineness of reconciliation;
4. whether the harm has been made good;
5. the existence of legal grounds for applying Article 68.

This is particularly important in cases involving violence.

The Supreme Court expressly indicates that the voluntariness of the victim's expression of will forms part of the subject matter of proof when Article 68 is applied. (Zakon i Pravo)

38. Mediation

Reconciliation may also take place through mediation.

However, a mediation agreement in itself does not replace the verification of the criminal-law requirements.

The court must establish:

• whether the victim genuinely consents;
• whether the consent is voluntary;
• whether the harm has been made good;
• whether legal grounds exist for terminating the proceedings.

39. Judicial Practice Under Article 68

In its regulatory resolution concerning Article 68, the Supreme Court emphasises the mandatory application of this provision where the combination of conditions established by law has been met.

At the same time:

• the existence of a dispute concerning the amount of compensation may indicate that reconciliation has not occurred;
• the harm must be made good in real terms;
• the victim's statement must be made freely;
• if any of the required conditions is absent, termination under Article 68 is impermissible.

(Zakon i Pravo)

40. Persons Participating in the Case

The main participants are:

Court

Administers justice and adjudicates the criminal case.

Prosecutor

Conducts the public prosecution and exercises supervisory powers in the forms prescribed by law.

Defendant

A person whose criminal case has been referred to the court.

Defence Counsel

A lawyer who exercises the right to defence.

Victim

A person who has directly suffered:

• non-pecuniary harm;
• physical harm;
• property damage,

as a result of a criminal offence.

Article 71 of the Criminal Procedure Code regulates the status of the victim in detail. Article 71 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Victim

Victim's Representative

May participate in the case and exercise the rights granted by law.

Civil Claimant

A person who has brought a civil claim.

Civil Defendant

A person involved where the case contains the relevant civil-law element.

Witnesses

Persons who have knowledge of circumstances relevant to the case.

Expert

Engaged, in particular, to conduct forensic medical and other specialised examinations.

Specialist

May participate in work involving digital evidence, video recordings, audio recordings, technical objects, and other materials.

 41. Victim

Article 71 of the Criminal Procedure Code establishes a broad set of rights of the victim.

In particular, the victim has the right to:

• know about the suspicion and the accusation;
• give testimony;
• submit evidence;
• file motions;
• file challenges;
• use an interpreter;
• have a representative;
• bring a civil claim;
• demand compensation for harm;
• appeal procedural decisions.

(Law and Law)

42. Particular Importance of the Victim’s Representative

In torture cases, the victim’s representative may:

• seek proper legal classification;
• file motions for the appointment of examinations;
• ensure the preservation of digital evidence;
• participate in interrogations;
• put questions to the expert;
• seek recognition as a victim;
• bring a civil claim;
• appeal the investigator’s inaction;
• appeal rulings;
• monitor the completeness of the investigation.

43. Proof

The general rules of proof are established by the Criminal Procedure Code.

In the case, the following must be proven, in particular:

• the event of the criminal offense;
• the person who committed the act;
• guilt;
• the form of guilt;
• motive;
• purpose;
• the nature and amount of harm;
• circumstances affecting liability.

In the case of torture for hire, it is additionally necessary to prove the fact of hiring.

44. Subject Matter of Proof under Subparagraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110

In practice, it is advisable to divide the subject matter of proof into 10 blocks:

Block 1. Event

When, where, and how the violence was committed.

Block 2. Victim

Who exactly was subjected to the impact.

Block 3. Perpetrator

Who directly performed the actions.

Block 4. Nature of the Violence

What specific actions were committed.

Block 5. Suffering

Why these actions caused physical/mental suffering.

Block 6. Purpose

The purpose of inflicting torment.

Block 7. Particular Cruelty/Abuse

Specific facts confirming this element.

Block 8. Consequences

What harm was caused.

Block 9. Hiring

Who placed the order, what was offered, and what remuneration was promised.

Block 10. Subjective Connection

Why the perpetrator acted specifically within the framework of the hiring arrangement.

45. Medical Examination

In such cases, a forensic medical examination is of key importance.

It must answer, in particular, the following questions:

• what injuries are present;
• the mechanism by which they were caused;
• their age;
• their number;
• their location;
• the degree of harm to health;
• whether the injuries could have occurred under the stated circumstances;
• whether the injuries could have arisen simultaneously or at different times.

However, the expert must not substitute for the court or provide a legal classification.

The expert answers medical questions.

The court decides:

whether the totality of the established circumstances constitutes torture.

46. Psychological and Psychiatric Evidence

Mental suffering may have independent significance.

Depending on the circumstances, the following may be examined:

• psychological trauma;
• fear;
• humiliation;
• prolonged stress;
• consequences of systematic violence.

However, it is necessary to avoid conflating:

moral suffering and a medical mental disorder.

These are different categories.

47. Video

Video may have exceptional significance.

For example:

• a store camera;
• an entrance camera;
• a vehicle dashcam;
• a courtyard camera;
• an office camera;
• a phone recording;
• a Telegram recording;
• a witness’s recording.

However, the following must be established:

• source;
• integrity;
• date;
• time;
• location;
• continuity;
• absence of editing.

48. Witness Testimony

The following witnesses are particularly important:

• eyewitnesses;
• neighbors;
• relatives;
• colleagues;
• persons present when money was transferred;
• intermediaries;
• persons who knew about the order;
• persons to whom the accused spoke about the order.

However, witness testimony must be assessed together with other evidence.

49. Correspondence Between the Client and the Perpetrator

This is potentially one of the strongest pieces of evidence of the element of “for hire.”

For example:

“Make sure he cannot forget this for more than a month.”

However, the court must examine:

• who owns the account;
• who wrote the messages;
• who received the messages;
• what device was used;
• when the correspondence arose;
• whether the original file exists;
• whether the messages are corroborated by other evidence.

50. Bank Transfers

If, after the violence is committed:

• the client transfers money to the perpetrator;
• the perpetrator receives payment;
• the purpose of the payment is connected with the agreement,

this may confirm the element of hiring.

However, a single transfer is insufficient in itself.

Its purpose must be established.

For example:

a transfer of 100,000 tenge to a relative does not automatically become payment for a crime.

51. Cash

The transfer of cash may be proven through:

• testimony of the participants;
• witness testimony;
• video recording;
• audio recording;
• correspondence;
• subsequent messages;
• data on cash withdrawals;
• operational measures.

52. Admissibility of Evidence

Article 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code establishes the grounds for declaring factual data inadmissible.

The following is particularly important:

factual data must be recognized as inadmissible if it was obtained in violation of the Criminal Procedure Code in a manner that affected or could have affected its reliability.

Data obtained through the following are specifically identified:

• torture;
• violence;
• threats;
• deception;
• other unlawful actions;
• cruel treatment.

Article 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Inadmissible Evidence

53. The “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” Rule

In the criminal proceedings of Kazakhstan, the issue of the admissibility of evidence has independent significance.

If the initial evidence was obtained unlawfully, derivative evidence must also be analyzed.

For example:

unlawful interrogation → information about a phone was obtained → correspondence was extracted from the phone.

The defense has the right to raise the issue of the admissibility of the relevant derivative materials, taking into account the specific circumstances under which they were obtained.

54. Application of Measures of Procedural Coercion

Article 155 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides for other measures of procedural coercion, including:

• an undertaking to appear;
• compulsory appearance;
• temporary suspension from office;
• seizure of property;
• a prohibition on approaching.

Article 155 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Other Measures of Procedural Coercion

55. Prohibition on Approaching

This is particularly relevant in a torture case.

If there is a risk of:

• repeated violence;
• pressure;
• contact with the victim;
• threats;
• destruction of evidence;
• influence on witnesses,

the application of restrictions provided for by the Criminal Procedure Code may be considered.

56. Preventive Measures

Article 136 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides for the grounds for applying preventive measures.

The Criminal Procedure Code expressly includes Article 110 in the list of criminal offenses for which detention may be applied on the grounds of the gravity of the crime and/or its legal classification.

Article 136 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Grounds for Applying Preventive Measures

This is a significant feature.

However, the mere existence of Article 110 does not mean automatic detention.

The court must assess the procedural risks.

57. A Less Restrictive Preventive Measure

Article 136 provides for the need to consider the possibility of applying a less restrictive preventive measure if one is available.

Consequently, the defense has the right to substantiate:

• the absence of a risk of absconding;
• the existence of a permanent place of residence;
• the existence of a family;
• employment;
• the absence of a criminal record;
• positive character references;
• the absence of attempts to exert pressure;
• voluntary appearance;
• admission of certain circumstances;
• other circumstances.

58. Compulsory Appearance

Article 157 of the Criminal Procedure Code allows compulsory appearance to be applied when a person fails to appear upon a summons without valid reasons.

Article 157 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Compulsory Appearance

Compulsory appearance may be applied to:

• a suspect;
• an accused person;
• a defendant;
• a witness;
• a victim.

At the same time, the law establishes restrictions, in particular, with respect to:

• minors;
• pregnant women;
• sick persons;
• persons below a certain age.

59. Monetary Penalty

Article 160 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides for the possibility of imposing a monetary penalty.

Article 160 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Procedure for Imposing a Monetary Penalty

The maximum amount of the penalty under the cited provision is up to 50 monthly calculation indices.

It is applied in cases provided for by the Criminal Procedure Code when procedural obligations are violated.

60. Seizure of Property

If there are grounds to believe that property may be:

• concealed;
• alienated;
• destroyed;
• used to secure a civil claim,

a seizure of property may be imposed.

For the victim, this is particularly important where the property claim is substantial.

61. Securing a Civil Claim

Where a civil claim exists, the victim should promptly consider the issue of:

• imposing a seizure;
• securing property;
• identifying bank accounts;
• establishing what property the accused owns;
• other measures provided for by law.

The objective is to ensure the actual enforceability of a future court decision.

62. Limitation Period for Criminal Prosecution

Under Article 71 of the Criminal Code, the limitation periods are:

• 1 year — criminal misdemeanor;
• 2 years — minor offense;
• 5 years — medium-gravity offense;
• 10 years — serious offense;
• 15 years — particularly serious offense.

Article 71 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Limitation Periods for Criminal Liability

Since Subparagraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 concerns a serious offense, the general limitation period is 10 years.

63. Specific Feature: Torture and Limitation Periods

Part 6 of Article 71 provides that limitation periods do not apply, in particular, to torture.

However, it is necessary to distinguish between:

torture under Article 146 of the Criminal Code

and

torture under Article 110 of the Criminal Code.

The mere fact that both acts are associated with cruel treatment does not mean that the exception under Article 71 automatically extends to every instance of torture.

If the act is classified exclusively under Subparagraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110, the limitation regime established for the relevant category of offense applies.

64. Time Limit for Bringing a Civil Claim

It is necessary to distinguish between two concepts:

1. The limitation period for criminal prosecution;
2. The limitation period for a civil claim.

These are different periods.

The general limitation period for civil claims under the Civil Code is three years. Article 178 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — General Limitation Period

However, Article 187 of the Civil Code establishes an exception for claims for compensation for harm caused to life or health.

The limitation period does not apply to such claims.

At the same time, if the claim is brought after a significant period of time, compensation for the relevant harm is limited to the three years preceding the filing of the claim.

Article 187 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Claims to Which the Limitation Period Does Not Apply

65. Restoration of the Limitation Period

Caution is necessary here.

If the claim concerns a matter to which the limitation period genuinely applies, Article 185 of the Civil Code allows the period to be restored in exceptional cases where circumstances relating to the claimant’s person exist, for example:

• serious illness;
• a helpless condition;
• illiteracy;
• other circumstances that prevented the timely protection of the right.

ZakonPravo’s practical materials reflect the application of this mechanism. Example of a Motion to Restore the Limitation Period on ZakonPravo.kz

However, in claims for compensation for harm to health, it is first necessary to determine whether the claim falls under Article 187 of the Civil Code.

66. Practice Regarding the Restoration of Procedural Time Limits

It is necessary to distinguish between:

Limitation Period

This is a substantive-law institution.

Procedural Time Limit

This is a time limit for performing a procedural act.

Under the Civil Procedure Code, a court may restore an expired procedural time limit where valid reasons exist.

In ZakonPravo’s practical materials, the following are considered examples of valid reasons:

• illness;
• improper notification;
• late receipt of a judicial act;
• a business trip;
• other objective circumstances.

ZakonPravo Commentary on the Restoration of Procedural Time Limits

However, these rules of the Civil Procedure Code should not be mechanically applied to the limitation periods for criminal prosecution under Article 71 of the Criminal Code.

67. Supreme Court Practice Regarding Torture

The key regulatory source is Regulatory Resolution No. 7 of the Supreme Court dated December 28, 2009.

It contains clarifications concerning:

• protection of dignity;
• the inadmissibility of torture;
• the admissibility of evidence;
• medical examination;
• complaints about violence;
• the distinction between Article 146 and Article 110;
• compensation for harm.

Full Text of Regulatory Resolution No. 7 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan

For a lawyer, this is the principal regulatory act of the Supreme Court on this issue.

68. Significance of Paragraph 31-2 of the Supreme Court’s Regulatory Resolution

Paragraph 31-2 is directly relevant to Article 110.

It effectively establishes the following algorithm:

violent acts → intent → particular cruelty/abuse → physical/mental suffering → purpose of inflicting torment.

The absence of any one of the mandatory elements raises the question of whether the legal classification is correct.

69. Significance of Supreme Court Case Law on the Admissibility of Evidence

The Supreme Court consistently proceeds from the position that evidence obtained in violation of human rights may be declared inadmissible.

The following are of particular importance:

• unlawful interrogation;
• violence;
• threats;
• coercion;
• absence of defense counsel in cases where counsel is mandatory;
• violation of the procedure for conducting an investigative action.

This follows both from Article 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code and from Regulatory Resolution No. 7.

70. Supreme Court Case Law: Civil Claim

Published Supreme Court case law includes cases in which judicial acts were amended with respect to civil claims following the termination of criminal proceedings.

For example, in one of the Supreme Court’s published materials, a civil claim was left without consideration after the criminal case was terminated on the relevant grounds, while the victim was informed of the right to apply under the civil procedure rules. (Law and Law)

This confirms the practical significance of Article 166 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

71. New Supreme Court Practice Regarding Representation Expenses

In a published ZakonPravo article concerning the review of a civil case involving compensation for moral harm and losses, the Supreme Court drew attention to the fact that representation expenses incurred in criminal proceedings may be the subject of a civil claim.

The appellate court mistakenly considered that failure to submit the claim in the criminal proceedings precluded subsequent recovery through civil proceedings.

The Supreme Court indicated the need to take Article 166 of the Criminal Procedure Code into account. Material on the Supreme Court’s Position Regarding Representation Expenses and Civil Claims

This is of direct practical significance for torture cases.

72. Practice of Appellate Courts

For appellate proceedings in torture cases, the following matters are the most significant:

1. Correctness of the legal classification;
2. Sufficiency of the evidence;
3. Admissibility of the evidence;
4. Observance of the right to defense;
5. Individualization of the actions of each accomplice;
6. Correct assessment of the expert’s opinion;
7. Justification of the punishment;
8. Correct resolution of the civil claim.

The appellate court should not limit itself to a formal review of the conclusions reached by the court of first instance.

73. A Typical Error of the Court of First Instance

One of the typical procedural problems in criminal cases is insufficient specification of the criminal act.

The court must establish:

• date;
• time;
• place;
• specific actions;
• the role of each person;
• the method of commission;
• the form of guilt;
• motive;
• purpose;
• consequences.

In the published Supreme Court case law concerning other categories of criminal cases, the lack of specification of these circumstances has served as grounds for setting aside judicial acts.

(ZakonPravo Mail)

This approach is also applicable to torture cases.

74. Court of First Instance Practice: The Kostanay Case of 2026

In 2026, there is an illustrative published example.

Court No. 2 of the city of Kostanay considered a criminal case against a person charged under Subparagraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code.

According to the published information:

• the accused registered on Telegram;
• engaged in searching for “orders”;
• received an assignment to establish the whereabouts of the victim;
• was supposed to use physical violence;
• remuneration of approximately 100–200 dollars was promised for carrying out the assignment;
• the victim was found;
• multiple blows were inflicted on the victim;
• the accused admitted guilt;
• the victim stated that they had no claims;
• the court sentenced the accused to four years of imprisonment.

At the time of publication, the judgment had not entered into legal force.

(Ak Zhaiyk)

This example is of particular interest specifically for analyzing the element of “for hire.”

75. What the Kostanay Case Demonstrates

The published circumstances make it possible to identify the evidentiary model:

Telegram → search for orders → receipt of an assignment → identification of the victim → physical violence → promised remuneration.

This is practically a classic structure of a crime committed for hire.

It is particularly important that the victim’s statement that they had no claims did not automatically exclude criminal liability.

This logically corresponds to the public nature of the prosecution under Subparagraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110.

76. Absence of Claims by the Victim

The phrase:

“I have no claims”

does not in itself mean:

• absence of the elements of a crime;
• absence of guilt;
• mandatory termination of the case;
• impossibility of imposing a punishment.

It may be relevant when considering:

• the assessment of the victim’s position;
• the civil claim;
• sentencing;
• the issue of reparation for harm;
• the application of Article 68, if its conditions are met.

However, Article 32 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 68 of the Criminal Code must be applied together.

77. Appeal in the Kostanay Case

At the time of the available publication, the judgment of Court No. 2 of the city of Kostanay had not entered into legal force.

Therefore, it is not possible to draw conclusions about the position of the appellate court in this particular case.

For a legal commentary, it is important not to turn a report about a judgment of the court of first instance into a final judicial position.

78. Practice Regarding Digital Orders

The Kostanay case is particularly interesting from the perspective of modern forms of criminal activity.

An order may be placed through:

• Telegram;
• private chats;
• anonymous accounts;
• cryptocurrency;
• electronic transfers;
• intermediaries.

Consequently, during the investigation, it is necessary to establish not only the perpetrator but also the digital trail of the client.

79. The Client May Remain Unidentified

The following situation is possible:

• the perpetrator has been identified;
• the client used an anonymous account;
• the money was transferred through a third party;
• the client has not been identified.

This does not automatically prevent the charge against the perpetrator from being considered.

However, the issue of legal classification must be resolved on the basis of evidence directly relating to the perpetrator.

80. Entrapment into a Crime

If the matter involves an operational experiment or another special measure, the defense has the right to raise the following questions:

• who initiated the crime;
• whether intent arose before the intervention of law enforcement authorities;
• whether there was inducement to commit a crime;
• whether the criminal intent was artificially created.

 81. Operational-Search Measures

Where operational development is being conducted, the following must be examined:

• the grounds for conducting operational-search measures;
• authorization;
• the limits of powers;
• the lawfulness of audio/video recording;
• the recording procedure;
• the transfer of money;
• monitoring of actions;
• preservation of originals.

A violation of the established procedure may give rise to the question of the admissibility of the relevant evidence.

82. Examination of a Phone

When a phone is seized, it is important to establish:

• the model;
• IMEI;
• SIM card;
• user;
• method of extracting information;
• software;
• file hash sums;
• data integrity;
• whether the original is available.

The defence is entitled to raise the issue of ordering a repeated or additional examination.

83. Judicial Examination of Correspondence

A WhatsApp or Telegram screenshot should not be considered in isolation.

It is necessary to establish:

• who took the screenshot;
• from which device;
• whether the correspondence has been preserved in its original form;
• whether a backup copy exists;
• whether the number matches;
• whether the account belongs to the accused;
• whether metadata is available;
• whether the content is corroborated by other materials.

84. Confrontation

A confrontation may be significant where there are contradictions:

• the person who commissioned the act claims that no money was promised;
• the person who carried it out claims the opposite;
• the intermediary provides a third version;
• the victim describes the events differently.

However, a confrontation must not be used as a means of exerting pressure.

85. Psychological Pressure

During the investigation of a case involving violence, the following are impermissible:

• threats;
• coercion;
• unlawful influence;
• manipulation;
• pressure on the victim;
• coercion to reconcile.

Regulatory Resolution No. 7 of the Supreme Court directly directs courts to protect human dignity and prevent unlawful treatment.

Law and Legal Affairs

86. Complaints Against the Actions of an Investigator

Participants in the proceedings are entitled to appeal:

• a refusal to recognise a person as a victim;
• a refusal to conduct an examination;
• a refusal to include evidence in the case file;
• the investigator's inaction;
• an unlawful search;
• an unlawful seizure;
• a refusal to question a witness;
• a refusal to conduct a confrontation;
• a refusal to allow access to the case materials;
• other procedural decisions.

At the pre-trial stage, the investigating judge plays an important role.

87. A Separate Court Ruling

If the court establishes serious violations of the law, it may issue a separate ruling in cases provided for by law.

Regulatory Resolution No. 7 provides for the court's duty to respond to established unlawful actions by officials that degrade human dignity.

Law and Legal Affairs

88. Judicial Sentencing

Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 provides for:

imprisonment for a term of 4 to 7 years.

Consequently, if the current version of Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 is applied, the court cannot impose the following as the principal punishment instead of the sanction prescribed by that provision:

• corrective labour;
• community service;
• restriction of liberty.

89. Minimum Sentence

The minimum term is 4 years.

However, this does not mean that a four-year sentence must automatically be imposed.

The court applies the general rules for sentencing, taking into account:

• the nature and degree of public danger;
• the personality of the offender;
• the circumstances of the case;
• mitigating circumstances;
• aggravating circumstances;
• consequences;
• the person's role in the crime.

90. Admission of Guilt

An admission of guilt may be taken into account as a circumstance characterising the defendant's conduct.

However:

an admission of guilt does not relieve the court of the obligation to examine the evidence.

The court must establish the objective circumstances of the crime.

91. The Victim Cannot “Order” a Legal Classification

The victim is entitled to state:

“They tortured me.”

Or:

“They tortured me for hire.”

However, the legal classification is determined by:

• the investigative authority;
• the prosecutor;
• the court.

Therefore, the victim's lawyer must prove the factual circumstances rather than merely repeat the legal formulation.

92. Defence in a Case of Torture for Hire

The main lines of defence may include:

1. Absence of an act of torture

The violence was of a different nature.

2. Absence of an intention to cause suffering

For example, a single incident of conflict.

3. Absence of particular cruelty

The nature of the actions does not correspond to Article 110.

4. Absence of hiring

There is no evidence of an agreement concerning remuneration.

5. Absence of a proper subject of the offence

Age or legal insanity.

6. Error in identifying the perpetrator.

7. Inadmissibility of evidence.

8. Absence of a causal link.

9. A different legal classification.

93. Defence Regarding the “For Hire” Element

The most effective question is:

How exactly has the fact of hiring been proven?

The investigation must answer the following questions:

• who hired the person;
• when;
• where;
• by what method;
• what was promised;
• to whom it was promised;
• when it was promised;
• in what form;
• who was present;
• how it is corroborated;
• whether remuneration was paid;
• what establishes the connection between the money and the crime.

If these questions remain unanswered, the qualifying element requires particularly careful examination.

94. Defence Against an Allegation of Hiring Where a Money Transfer Exists

For example:

A transferred 100,000 tenge to B.

The investigation claims:

“This is payment for torture.”

The defence is entitled to establish:

• the basis for the payment;
• the parties' previous relationship;
• whether a debt existed;
• whether there was a loan agreement;
• whether a purchase was made;
• whether services were provided;
• the date of payment;
• the purpose of the payment;
• the connection with the crime.

A single bank transfer must not be considered outside its context.

95. Classification Where There Are Multiple Victims

If there are two or more victims, the question of applying Paragraph 2 of Part 2 of Article 110 may also arise.

If the crime was committed for hire against two persons, the issue of classification based on the aggregate of qualifying elements arises.

The court must precisely determine:

• one offence comprising several qualifying elements;
• a concurrence of offences;
• a single criminal intent;
• separate episodes.

96. Torture of a Pregnant Woman for Hire

If the victim is a pregnant woman and the offender knowingly knew about the pregnancy, Paragraph 3 of Part 2 of Article 110 additionally becomes relevant.

It is necessary to prove:

1. The fact of pregnancy;
2. the offender's awareness of it;
3. the causal link with the act committed.

The objective fact of pregnancy alone is insufficient if the accused did not know about it and this is relevant to the subjective element of the qualifying circumstance.

97. Torture of a Minor for Hire

Where the victim is a minor, the relevant qualifying element applies.

It is necessary to establish:

• the victim's age;
• the offender's awareness of that age;
• the nature of the violence;
• the purpose;
• particular cruelty.

If the person who commissioned the act hired someone to torture a child, the role of each participant must be established individually.

98. Compensation for Non-Pecuniary Damage

In cases of torture, non-pecuniary damage may be associated with:

• physical pain;
• fear;
• humiliation;
• a sense of helplessness;
• prolonged emotional distress;
• disruption of the usual way of life;
• consequences for the family.

The amount of compensation is determined by the court, taking into account the circumstances of the particular case.

The legislation does not establish an automatic fixed amount.

99. Evidence of Non-Pecuniary Damage

The following may be used:

• medical documents;
• expert opinions;
• the victim's testimony;
• testimony from relatives;
• information about treatment;
• information about the consequences;
• documents concerning expenses;
• other evidence.

It is necessary to distinguish between evidence of the fact of non-pecuniary suffering itself and evidence establishing the amount of monetary compensation.

100. Legal Fees

If the victim uses the services of a lawyer, the expenses may be claimed as part of the costs associated with participation in criminal proceedings, provided that the requirements of the law are met.

Article 166 of the Criminal Procedure Code expressly provides for representation expenses.

Law and Legal Affairs

101. Main Regulatory Legal Acts

For a comprehensive analysis of a case under Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the following sources should primarily be used.

1. Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan

In particular:

• Article 13;
• Article 14;
• Article 16;
• Article 17;
• Article 18;
• Article 75;
• Article 77.

Article 17 is the fundamental provision concerning the inviolability of human dignity and the prohibition of violence.

Law and Legal Affairs

2. Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Key provisions:

• Article 1 — criminal legislation;
• Article 3 — basic concepts;
• Article 10 — criminal offences;
• Article 11 — categories of crimes;
• Article 15 — age of criminal liability;
• Articles 28–31 — complicity;
• Articles 52–64 — punishment;
• Article 68 — reconciliation;
• Article 71 — limitation periods;
• Article 102 — driving a person to suicide;
• Article 106 — grievous bodily harm;
• Article 107 — bodily harm of medium severity;
• Article 108-1 — minor bodily harm;
• Article 109-1 — battery;
• Article 110 — torture;
• Article 146 — torture.

Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on ZakonPravo.kz — Article 110

102. Criminal Procedure Code

Key provisions:

• Article 24 — comprehensiveness, completeness and objectivity;
• Article 32 — types of criminal prosecution;
• Articles 35–36 — termination;
• Article 64 — suspect;
• Articles 65–70 — accused/defendant and defence;
• Article 71 — victim;
• Article 99 — motions;
• Articles 105–106 — complaints;
• Article 112 — inadmissible evidence;
• Article 113 — circumstances subject to proof;
• Article 125 and subsequent articles — evidence;
• Article 136 — preventive measures;
• Article 137 — types of preventive measures;
• Article 140 — procedure for application;
• Article 155 — other procedural coercive measures;
• Article 157 — compulsory appearance;
• Article 160 — monetary penalty;
• Article 166 — civil claim;
• Article 306 — jurisdiction;
• provisions governing appellate proceedings.

103. Tax Code

For matters concerning state duty in 2026, the new Tax Code must be taken into account:

Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 214-VIII dated 18 July 2025.

Article 668 provides for the relevant exemptions from payment of state duty.

Article 668 of the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on ZakonPravo.kz

104. Civil Code

For a civil claim:

• Article 917 — general grounds of liability for causing harm;
• Article 951 — compensation for non-pecuniary damage;
• Article 952 — amount of compensation for non-pecuniary damage;
• Article 178 — limitation period for claims;
• Article 185 — restoration of the limitation period;
• Article 187 — claims to which the limitation period does not apply.

Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Article 178 on ZakonPravo.kz

Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Article 187 on ZakonPravo.kz

105. Regulatory Resolution No. 7 of the Supreme Court

This is the central subordinate regulatory source for the subject under consideration.

It governs:

• torture;
• cruel treatment;
• dignity;
• admissibility of evidence;
• medical examination;
• distinction between torture and the infliction of torment;
• compensation for harm.

Regulatory Resolution No. 7 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 28 December 2009

106. Supreme Court Regulatory Resolution on the Application of Article 68

It is relevant when analysing reconciliation.

Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the Application of Article 68 of the Criminal Code

107. International Regulatory Framework

The following must be taken into account:

1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 5.

2. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Article 7.

3. United Nations Convention against Torture

Articles:

1, 2, 4, 12, 13, 14, 16.

4. Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture.

5. Convention on the Rights of the Child

Where the victim is a minor.

108. Regulatory Resolutions as Part of the Law in Force

A distinctive feature of Kazakhstan is that regulatory resolutions of the Supreme Court have a special legal status.

The Criminal Code itself expressly states that regulatory resolutions of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court form an integral part of criminal legislation.

Adilet

Therefore, Regulatory Resolution No. 7 cannot be treated merely as a “recommendation.”

It is binding in terms of ensuring uniform application of criminal law.

109. Practical Algorithm for the Victim's Lawyer

When handling a case under Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, it is recommended to check the following:

Step 1

Obtain the decision recognising the person as a victim.

Step 2

Obtain the decision on the legal classification.

Step 3

Check the factual description of the accusation.

Step 4

Check the forensic medical examination.

Step 5

Obtain all photographs and video recordings.

Step 6

Ensure the preservation of digital data.

Step 7

Check banking transactions.

Step 8

Identify intermediaries.

Step 9

Prove the fact of hiring.

Step 10

File a civil claim.

Step 11

Submit a motion for securing the claim.

Step 12

Examine the issue of the preventive measure.

110. Practical Algorithm for the Defence

The defence must systematically check:

1. The lawfulness of registering the criminal case;
2. the lawfulness of the initial detention;
3. whether actual detention took place;
4. compliance with the right to legal counsel;
5. medical examination;
6. admissibility of confessional statements;
7. lawfulness of the seizure of the phone;
8. lawfulness of the digital forensic examination;
9. ownership of the accounts;
10. authenticity of the correspondence;
11. source of the money;
12. the fact of hiring;
13. the purpose of causing suffering;
14. the degree of harm to health;
15. the legal classification;
16. complicity;
17. circumstances mitigating the punishment;
18. the possibility of applying Article 68 of the Criminal Code;
19. the civil claim.

111. The Most Vulnerable Element of the Accusation

In cases under Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110, the key issue is often not the violence itself, but precisely this:

Has the fact of hiring been proven?

Physical violence may be obvious and corroborated by medical documents and video recordings, whereas the agreement between the person commissioning the act and the person carrying it out may remain concealed.

Therefore, the prosecution must prove not only that:

“B. beat K.”

but also that:

“B. committed the acts specifically within the framework of an agreement for hire.”

112. The Second Key Issue — Whether the Elements of Torture Are Present

Even if the fact of hiring has been proven, it is necessary to establish:

Why does this constitute torture?

For example:

A. hired B. to strike V. once.

If a certain degree of bodily harm results, this does not automatically mean that Article 110 applies.

The mandatory elements of torture must be established.

113. The Third Key Issue — The Degree of Harm

If the victim has suffered:

• grievous bodily harm;
• bodily harm of medium severity,

it becomes necessary to examine the legal classification under other provisions of the Criminal Code.

Therefore, in such cases, the forensic medical examination has not merely evidentiary significance but significance for legal classification.

114. The Fourth Key Issue — Purpose

For Article 110, it is necessary to establish the purpose of:

causing suffering to the victim.

If the person acted with a different purpose, it is necessary to examine whether the actual conduct corresponds to the wording of Article 110.

115. The Fifth Key Issue — Particular Cruelty and Abuse

The phrase:

“inflicted several blows”

does not, by itself, disclose this element.

The investigation and the court must specify:

• how many blows were inflicted;
• where they were inflicted;
• by what method;
• with what instrument;
• for how long;
• whether the victim was restrained;
• whether pain was intentionally inflicted;
• whether there was abuse;
• whether there was humiliation;
• whether the victim was deprived of the ability to defend themselves.

116. The Court Decision Must Be Specific

The conviction must individually identify:

• the actions of each accused person;
• the circumstances;
• the evidence;
• the legal classification;
• the finding of guilt;
• the punishment.

It is not permissible to limit the reasoning to the general formula:

“The defendant, acting jointly with other persons, committed torture for hire.”

It is necessary to specify:

• who;
• did what;
• when;
• where;
• against whom;
• for what remuneration;
• by what method;
• with what intent.

117. Appellate Strategy

The arguments in an appeal must be structured.

Section 1. Violation of criminal law

For example:

• incorrect legal classification;
• absence of the element of hiring;
• absence of a mandatory element of Article 110.

Section 2. Violation of the Criminal Procedure Code

For example:

• inadmissible evidence;
• violation of the right to defence;
• incomplete examination of the evidence;
• absence of reasoning.

Section 3. Assessment of Evidence

Separately:

• medical documents;
• video recordings;
• correspondence;
• banking transactions;
• testimony.

Section 4. Punishment

Only after analysing guilt and the legal classification.

118. Practical Table of Legal Classification

119. Particular Attention to Terminology

Procedural documents must use the exact wording:

“Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan”

rather than:

• “Article 110, Part 2, for hire”;
• “Article 110, Paragraph 5”;
• “Part 5 of Article 110.”

The correct reference for a legal document is:

Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

120. Conclusion

Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan constitutes an aggravated form of torture in which the basic elements of torture are supplemented by a special circumstance — commission of the crime for hire.

For correct legal classification, it is necessary to prove not only the fact of violence but also the combination of the following elements:

Intentional violence

• physical/psychological suffering;
• particular cruelty/abuse;
• the purpose of causing suffering;
• absence of grievous/medium bodily harm for the basic offence;
• an agreement for hire;
• a causal link between the hiring and the acts committed.

At the same time, Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 is a serious crime, since the maximum penalty is imprisonment for 7 years.

Adilet

The proceedings are conducted under the public prosecution procedure, since Part 3 of Article 32 of the Criminal Procedure Code classifies Part 1 of Article 110 as an offence subject to private-public prosecution, but does not include Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 in that category.

Law and Legal Affairs

A civil claim may be filed within the criminal proceedings in accordance with Article 166 of the Criminal Procedure Code, including claims for compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and representation expenses.

Law and Legal Affairs

Under the current Tax Code, claims for compensation for harm to health and material damage caused by a criminal offence are exempt from state duty.

Law and Legal Affairs

Regulatory Resolution No. 7 of the Supreme Court is of particular importance for legal classification. It explains the mandatory elements of torture, the requirements for the admissibility of evidence, the distinction between torture and the infliction of torment, as well as issues concerning compensation for harm.

Law and Legal Affairs

Among the available published judicial practice as of 3 October 2026, particular interest is presented by a case heard by Court No. 2 of the city of Kostanay, in which Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code was applied. The case established that an order had been received through Telegram, the victim had been located, and violence had been used against the victim in exchange for promised remuneration. The court of first instance imposed a sentence of 4 years' imprisonment; at the time of publication, the judgment had not entered into legal force.

Ak Zhaiyk

Thus, proof of the “for hire” element must constitute an independent subject of proof, rather than being inferred automatically from the existence of financial relations between the persons involved. At the same time, the court must establish all the mandatory elements of torture itself, since merely causing physical pain or having a financial interest does not, in itself, constitute the offence provided for in Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code.

Main ZakonPravo.kz References

• Article 110 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Torture
• Article 11 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Categories of Crimes
• Article 68 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Release from Criminal Liability in Connection with Reconciliation
• Article 71 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Release from Criminal Liability Due to Expiry of the Limitation Period
• Article 32 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Cases of Private, Private-Public and Public Prosecution and Accusation
• Article 71 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Victim
• Article 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Factual Data Inadmissible as Evidence
• Article 136 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Grounds for Applying Preventive Measures
• Article 155 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Grounds for Applying Other Procedural Coercive Measures
• Article 157 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Compulsory Appearance
• Article 160 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Procedure for Imposing a Monetary Penalty
• Article 166 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Civil Claims Considered in Criminal Proceedings
• Article 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Criminal Cases Within the Jurisdiction of District and Equivalent Courts
• Article 668 of the Tax Code — Exemption from Payment of State Duty
• Article 178 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Limitation Periods
• Article 187 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan — Claims Not Subject to Limitation Periods
• Regulatory Resolution No. 7 of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 28 December 2009
• Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the Application of Article 68 of the Criminal Code
• Article 17 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan
• Accession of the Republic of Kazakhstan to the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
• Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture

Important Note on Judicial Practice

As of 3 October 2026, among publicly indexed sources, it was possible to reliably confirm the above-mentioned case heard by Court No. 2 of the city of Kostanay specifically under Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 of the Criminal Code, as well as the Supreme Court's regulatory positions concerning the distinction between torture and the infliction of torment, admissibility of evidence, and reconciliation.

I deliberately do not attribute specific conclusions concerning Paragraph 5 of Part 2 of Article 110 to the Supreme Court or appellate panels where a published judicial act containing such a conclusion could not be reliably identified. This avoids conflating judicial practice under previous versions of Article 110 with the version in force in 2026.

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. 

Constitution Law Code Standard Decree Order Decision Resolution Lawyer Almaty Lawyer Legal service Legal advice Civil Criminal Administrative cases Disputes Defense Arbitration Law Company Kazakhstan Law Firm Court Cases Declaration Decree Order Resolution Decision Report Conclusion Statement Conclusion Convention Contract Memorandum Methodology Norms Note Rules Program Charter Charter Article Commentary Resolution Regulations Protocol Draft Program Rules Messages