KYRGYZSTAN TODAY Policy briefs on - Department of Geography

collectively are normally not involved in corruption cases. However, this does not mean
that corruption is not an issue at this stage; it just proves that it is more difficult to reach
an agreement with a few judges at the same time. In those cases when a judge works
single-handedly, he becomes more prone to corruption.
Another pattern is as follows. During their first term in office, judges try not to be
involved in corruption, since they want to be appointed for a second term without any
time limit (known as “appointment for life” in informal language). Indeed, if they have
any blemishes on their reputation, they run the risk of not being appointed for a second
term in office.
The Russian scholar Enyutina researched organizational and legal preconditions
of judicial corruption, which helped her generalize the violations committed by judges
who announced “ordered” decisions. The following circumstances may imply that a
case involves corruption:
– judges receive complaints or lawsuits outside working hours;
– cases are reviewed at the last minute, sometimes on the same day when all
materials get into court and legal proceedings officially begun;
– printing the decision on a standard form with handwritten date, case number,
name of the secretary and other required information;
– not notifying all those involved in legal proceedings, or not inviting those
individuals whose rights will be infringed upon by a judicial act to participate in
the proceeding;
– egregious procedural violations in the course of legal proceedings, such as:
refusal by one of the litigants to demand case evidence, a protracted refusal to
get familiar with the court transcript, deliberate omission of certain statements
by people involved in the proceedings in the court records which may seem
crucial for the litigation;
– courts take measures to secure a suit which seem inadequate to the claim;
– courts make decisions where the resolution part is different from another judicial
act, which leads to the discrepancy of executive sheets;
– unsubstantiated transfer of a certain civil or criminal case from one judge to
another;
– reviewing the case with violating jurisdiction rules stipulated by law;
– judges violate the rules of internal territorial location of judges set in the court
[5, p. 16].
These circumstances are also true of judicial corruption in Kyrgyzstan. One such
example can be the behavior of a judge from the Kara-Kulja rayon court who released a
woman, though she had no right to leave her domicile. Accused of storing and trading in
counterfeit currency, the woman had been a fugitive for a long time. The judge released
her without any court hearing, and in the absence of a prosecutor or an investigator
(whose participation is legally mandatory in such cases). In keeping with the decision of
the judicial council, this judge was dismissed from his position.
In another case that took place in February 2008, the Chairman of the Ton rayon
court was reprimanded for reversing the previous decision and releasing from custody
a detainee suspected of raping a 15-year-old. As a result, the suspect disappeared, and
the investigation was never finished.
Such actions on the part of judges should be analyzed thoroughly. In one of the
above-listed features, the reviewed criminal or civil case requires greater attention, and
the circumstances under which the decision was made should be analyzed. Furthermore,
148