The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
13
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
TYPE
Original Research
PAGE NO.
13-20
10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue07-03
OPEN ACCESS
SUBMITED
10 May 2025
ACCEPTED
06 June 2025
PUBLISHED
08 July 2025
VOLUME
Vol.07 Issue07 2025
CITATION
KOMILOV Avazbek Bokijonovich. (2025). Actual problems in the process of
regulating prosecutor’s inspection over the execution of laws and the ways
of eliminating them. The American Journal of Political Science Law and
Criminology, 7(07), 13
–
20.
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue07-03
COPYRIGHT
© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.
Actual problems in the
process of regulating
prosecutor's inspection
over the execution of laws
and the ways of eliminating
them
KOMILOV Avazbek Bokijonovich
The Law Enforcement Academy of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Head of
Department, PhD in Law, Associate Professor, Uzbekistan
Abstract:
This article explores actual problems in the
process of regulating prosecutor's inspection over the
execution of laws and the ways of eliminating them. The
author argues that developing and refining the legal
basis for prosecutorial inspections is of significant
importance today, and the issue remains highly
relevant. Uzbekistan's national legislation, along with
the internal regulatory documents of its prosecutorial
bodies, is in urgent need of comprehensive
improvement in this area. Presently, the legal regulation
of prosecutorial inspections is still in its early stages.
By adjusting the process for initiating and conducting
prosecutorial inspections
–
through the Law of the
Republic of Uzbekistan “On the Prosecutor’s Office” and
the directives of the Prosecutor General
–
several key
results can be achieved: a fundamental transformation
in how prosecutors approach inspections; the
prevention of unjustified interference in the operations
of inspected entities; the protection of the rights and
interests of those entities; the establishment of a formal
right to appeal prosecutorial actions and decisions; and,
importantly,
the
strengthening
of
personal
responsibility and accountability among prosecutors
regarding inspection-related decisions. Moreover, such
legal regulation would shift the focus of inspections
from quantity to quality, thereby significantly enhancing
their overall efficiency and impact. To address these
challenges, the author presents a set of scientifically
grounded and practically applicable proposals and
recommendations.
Keywords:
Prosecutor, prosecutorial inspection, legal
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
14
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
regulation of prosecutorial inspections, effectiveness
of prosecutorial inspections, dilemma, prosecutorial
acts, mandatory nature of prosecutor`s demands,
comparative-legal analysis, report on the results of the
inspection.
Introduction:
It is known that, the right to conduct an
inspection is one of the main powers of the prosecutor
to identify violations of the law, and the inspection is
the decisive legal tool of the prosecutor, and the issue
of its legal regulation is of great importance. Therefore,
for many years, researchers, scientists and
practitioners have expressed various opinions on the
need to regulate the procedures for organizing and
conducting
prosecutorial
inspections
of
the
implementation of laws by legislation. In particular,
among them are K.Amirbekov, O.Agapova ,
D.Belousova,
A.Yu.Vinokurov,
T.Voevodina
,
E.Dokuchaeva, O.Deyneko , Ye.Islamova, O.Kalugina,
O. Kapinus , O.Kozuseva, M.Zaprudskaya and
P.Gordynets, kazakh scientists S.Nurpeisov, A.Zeynulla
and others are especially distinguished.
It is worth noting that the study of about 100 scientific
and theoretical sources in the course of the research
showed that many scholars tried to justify the need for
its regulation by showing the positive results achieved
as a result of regulating prosecutorial inspections. For
example, as T.Voevodina notes, the strict definition of
the terms for conducting prosecutorial inspections in
the Law "On the Prosecutor's Office", the
requirements for adopting written decisions on
conducting an inspection and other types of decisions
(expanding the subject of the inspection, terminating
the inspection, etc.), taking into account the possibility
of interested persons to appeal these decisions to a
higher prosecutor or to the court, serves to strengthen
the responsibility of prosecutors for making decisions
. Similarly, O.Kalugina believes that the clear definition
of the procedure for organizing and conducting
prosecutorial inspections, as well as the terms of
inspections at the regulatory and legal level, will
ensure the protection of human rights and freedoms,
the legitimate interests of legal entities, and protect
them from arbitrary interference in their activities by
prosecutorial bodies . Also, the regulation of issues
related to prosecutorial inspections in the legislation
will protect prosecutorial bodies from unjustified and
illegal interference in the operational and economic
activities of the entities being inspected.
In our opinion, a pressing issue related to prosecutorial
inspections and one that has aroused the interest of
many researchers and scholars is the dilemma
associated with determining the procedure for
organizing and conducting prosecutorial inspections in
the law or in an internal departmental document of the
prosecutor's office. In this regard, belarusian scientists
M.Zaprudskaya and P.Gordynets believe that since
prosecutorial control is unique in its activities from the
activities of control bodies, it is necessary to regulate
prosecutorial inspections on the basis of departmental
legislative acts and to introduce amendments and
additions to the Law "On the Prosecutor's Office" to
regulate inspections conducted by prosecutorial bodies.
S.Byvaltseva puts forward a proposal that it is necessary
to adopt a corresponding order of the Prosecutor
General, which would include norms regulating all the
main issues related to conducting inspections .
O.Kalugina believes that if the general standards for the
organization and implementation of control are
established at the legislative level, then the
methodological instructions should reflect the
methodology for implementing each direction of
control or recommendations for organizing control . In
our opinion, based on the fact that prosecutorial
inspections in the conditions of Uzbekistan are not
properly regulated either in the law or in departmental
documents, we conclude that it is expedient to regulate
important and primary issues related to them in the Law
"On the Prosecutor's Office", and in detail in a sectoral
order of the Prosecutor General.
It should be noted that another issue that has attracted
the attention of many scholars, especially practitioners,
is the question of what aspects of the organization and
conduct of a prosecutor's inspection should be
regulated. For example, according to O.Kozuseva, a
number of measures should be taken to improve the
legal mechanisms for conducting a prosecutor's
inspection. These include: first, to provide a unified
explanation of the concept of "prosecutor's inspection"
in the Law "On the Prosecutor's Office" ; second, to
define the types of prosecutor's inspections in the law;
third, to clarify the grounds and reasons for the
inspection in a separate article; fourth, to clarify what is
included in the prosecutor's inspection measures; fifth,
to clearly define the rights and obligations of experts
and specialists involved in the inspection; sixth, to
indicate the rights and obligations of bodies and officials
in charge of conducting the inspection in a separate
article; seventh, to strengthen the naming, form and
requirements of the documents to be formalized at the
end of the prosecutor's inspection .
In our opinion, the problem of obstruction of the
prosecutor's investigative activities, which is one of the
most important issues that should be regulated in the
legislation has been discussed in detail by Ye.Islamova
and D.Belousova . For example, Ye.Islamova writes that
although the Law "On the Prosecutor's Office of the
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
15
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
Russian Federation" states that obstruction of the
prosecutor's activities entails liability established by
law, it is not enough to simply establish liability
measures. The prosecutor must also be armed with
appropriate
means
to
overcome
obstruction/resistance during the inspection, but the
prosecutor does not have such means. Often,
prosecutors are also faced with cases of refusal to
enter the territory and premises of the object of
inspection, and despite this, there is no legal
mechanism for involving internal affairs officers in
prosecutorial inspections. Prosecutors also have
problems with ensuring that officials come to the
prosecutor's office to provide explanations. Therefore,
it would be advisable to enshrine in law the right to
make a decision to forcibly bring a person who is not
present to give an explanation to the prosecutor's
office and refer him to the internal affairs bodies for
execution.
It is worth noting that the respondents (prosecutors)
who participated in the social survey also admitted
that similar problems arise in the practice of
supervision. For example, 11 percent of them
encountered obstacles or refusals to enter the
territory and buildings of the object being inspected
during the inspection, 29 percent indicated that
persons summoned to the prosecutor's office to clarify
questions that arose during the inspection refused to
appear without good reason, and 46 percent
encountered obstacles to the inspection, such as
failure to provide documents and information at the
request of the prosecutor, or providing incorrect
information.
It should also be noted that there are few, but not all,
scholars who oppose the legal regulation of
prosecutorial inspections. For example, such views are
found in the scientific works of researchers and
scholars such as D.Belousova and K. Amirbekov. For
example, according to K.Amirbekov, excessive
formalization of prosecutorial inspection activities
contradicts the legal nature of the prosecutor’s
function of supervising the implementation of laws
outside the criminal law sphere . However, in our
opinion, the above opinions are controversial and
cannot be fully agreed with. In particular, our views on
the need to regulate issues related to the procedure
for organizing and conducting an inspection in the Law
"On the Prosecutor's Office" and the sectoral order of
the Prosecutor General can be justified by the
following: firstly, the regulation of issues related to
prosecutorial
inspections
in
legislative
and
departmental documents increases the personal
responsibility of prosecutorial officers in organizing
and conducting an inspection and their approach to
the inspection several times; secondly, the regulation of
the prosecutorial inspection procedure serves to fully
ensure the rights and legitimate interests of the subjects
being investigated; thirdly, as a result of legal regulation,
unjustified interference by prosecutorial bodies in the
operational and economic activities of the subjects
being investigated is prevented; fourthly, Legal
regulation reduces the likelihood of future complaints
by the subjects under inspection against the
prosecutor's actions and decisions related to the
inspection; fifth, and most importantly, the regulation
of inspections leads to a stronger sense of desire by
prosecutorial bodies to conduct qualitative inspections
rather than to chase after quantity, which in turn
increases the efficiency and effectiveness of
inspections.
In addition, during the research, the study of the
national legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan and
internal documents of the prosecutor's offices on the
legal regulation of the procedure for organizing and
conducting prosecutorial inspections showed that there
is still much work to be done in this regard, or rather, it
would not be an exaggeration to say that work on this
issue is still at its initial stage.
As is known, some issues related to the prosecutor's
inspection are also covered by Article 21 of the Law of
the Republic of Uzbekistan "On the Prosecutor's Office"
(Inspection of the Implementation of Laws) and Section
4 of the "Regulations of the Prosecutor's Office of the
Republic of Uzbekistan", approved by Order No.172 of
the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Uzbekistan
dated 05.12.2017. In particular, according to Article 21
of the Law, the inspection of the implementation of laws
is carried out in the manner established by law on the
basis of applications and other information about
violations of laws, as well as in cases where legality
requires measures to be taken by the prosecutor. That
is, this article only indicates the grounds for the
prosecutor's inspection. Many important issues related
to the organization and conduct of an inspection,
including the concept and types of a prosecutor's
inspection, the purpose and subject of the inspection,
the terms of the inspection, the rights and obligations of
the investigating and investigated entities, the
participation of specialists in the inspection, the
suspension and resumption of the inspection, the
obligation of relevant persons to appear at the
prosecutor's office upon the prosecutor's summons and
provide explanations on questions related to the
inspection, the documents to be drawn up and decisions
to be made based on the results of the inspection , the
procedure for appealing against the actions (inaction)
and decisions of the prosecutor related to the
inspection, and other such issues are completely outside
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
16
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
the scope of regulation of the Law.
Similarly, the orders of the Prosecutor General of the
Republic of Uzbekistan do not fully regulate issues
related to prosecutorial inspections. For example,
Section 4
of the “Regulations of the Prosecutor General
of the Republic of Uzbekistan”, approved by the order
of the Prosecutor General No. 172 dated 05.12.2017, is
devoted only to conducting inspections on the
implementation of legislation (the purpose, grounds
for inspection, issues studied during the inspection,
actions taken by the employee responsible for the
inspection), formalizing the results of the inspection,
and
preparing
documents
on
prosecutorial
supervision.
In addition, the research also examined the legislation
of the Organization of Commonwealth Countries (CIS),
where the function of control over the implementation
of laws is preserved. It should be noted that a number
of important issues related to prosecutorial
inspections are regulated in more detail in the special
laws of the Russian Federation, Kazakhstan and
Turkmenistan than in Uzbekistan. For example, issues
related to the prosecutor's inspection of the Republic
of Kazakhstan It is expressed in Articles 17-19 and 26
of the Constitutional Law "On the Prosecutor's Office".
In Article 17 of the Law, this Constitutional Law, the
laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the documents
of the Prosecutor General are recognized as the legal
bases of the procedure for appointing and conducting
the prosecutor's inspection regarding the observance
of laws.
According to Article 18, paragraph 4 of the Law, the
authorized prosecutor shall adopt a decision to
conduct an inspection of compliance with the laws and
register it with the state div for legal statistics and
special accounting. The inspection period shall not
exceed thirty working days. This article also specifies
the grounds for extending the inspection period and
suspending the inspection.
In our opinion, one of the positive aspects of the above
Law is that it fully reflects the rights and obligations of
the prosecutor and the inspected entities during the
inspection process. In particular, according to
paragraph 5 of Article 18 of the Law, the prosecutor,
during the inspection of compliance with legislation,
has the right to: 1) demand the provision of documents
and information if they are not related to the subject
of the inspection; 2) exceed the established deadlines
for checking compliance with legislation; 3) impede the
normal activities of the inspected entity.
Article 26 of the law gives a special place to the legal
guarantees of the prosecutor's activity, which states
that no one has the right to disclose inspection
materials and cases without the permission of the
prosecutor in which they are working.
Similarly, it is important to emphasize, 21 of Chapter 1
of the Law “On the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian
Federation” (Control over the Execution of Laws) fully
regulates the prosecutor’s inspection and important
issues related to it. In particular, in accordance with
paragraph 3 of this article, the decision to conduct an
inspection is made by the prosecutor or his deputy and
is communicated to the head of the div (organization)
being inspected or another authorized representative
no later than the date of commencement of the
inspection. The decision to conduct an inspection must
indicate the goals, grounds and subject of the
inspection. If, during the inspection, the prosecutor
receives information about the existence of other
violations of the law in the activities of the div
(organization) being inspected that cannot be
confirmed or denied without conducting an inspection,
the prosecutor or his deputy shall make a reasoned
decision to expand the subject of this inspection or
conduct a new inspection and shall notify the div
(organization) being inspected of the decision made no
later than the date of its adoption.
Paragraph 4 of the above article establishes the terms
of the inspection, and the term of the inspection should
not exceed 30 calendar days from the date of the start
of the inspection. In exceptional cases related to the
need to conduct additional investigative measures
within the framework of the inspection conducted by
the prosecutor, the term of the inspection may be
extended by decision of the prosecutor or his deputy.
The term of the inspection may be extended for a period
not exceeding 30 calendar days. If necessary, the
decision on a subsequent extension for a period not
exceeding 30 calendar days shall be made only by the
Prosecutor General or the Deputy Prosecutor General
authorized by him. Another positive aspect of the law is
its strict regulation of issues related to the suspension
and resumption of an inspection. The total period for
which the prosecutor or his deputy may suspend the
inspection shall not exceed six months. The most
important point is that the actions (inaction) and
decisions of the prosecutor related to the conduct of the
inspection may be appealed in accordance with the
procedure established by law (Article 15) .
In addition, as a result of the comparative legal analysis,
it was also revealed that there are many other advanced
experiences in the legislation of some CIS countries.
First of all, this is related to the issue of ensuring the
mandatory fulfillment of prosecutorial requirements. In
our opinion, it is precisely in the national legislation of
the Republic of Belarus, the Kyrgyz Republic,
Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan that this issue
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
17
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
is regulated along with the mechanism for its
implementation, while such norms are not found in the
legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan at all. For
example, Article 6 of the Law of the Republic of
Uzbekistan “On the Prosecutor's Office” establishes
that it is mandatory for all citizens and legal entities to
fulfill the requirements of the prosecutor within the
scope of his powers to submit documents, materials
and
other
information,
conduct
inspections,
inspections, assign specialists, come to the
prosecutor's office and provide explanations on
identified violations, eliminate violations, the causes
and conditions that create opportunities for them, as
well as comply with the law, but its mechanisms have
not been fully clarified. Since the requirement of
mandatory nature of prosecutorial demands is not
provided with mandatory enforcement force, in many
cases this norm remains a declaratory norm.
For comparison, in criminal proceedings (Articles 97,
261 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of
Uzbekistan), the obligation to appear upon summons,
the procedure for submitting a summons and its
delivery to the person summoned, and the
consequences of failure to appear without an excuse
are established, but the regulation of the above issue
in the direction of prosecutorial control over the
implementation of laws is still neglected. However, it is
no secret that in practice there are many cases of
unexcused failure to comply with or evasion of the
prosecutor's request to appear at the prosecutor's
office upon summons and provide explanations on
issues related to the ongoing inspection. In particular,
almost 30 percent of respondents stated that they had
encountered exactly this problem during prosecutorial
inspections.
In the above-mentioned countries, this issue is
regulated by law. For example, the Law “O
n the
Prosecutor's Office of Turkmenistan” According to
Article 9, officials and citizens are obliged to appear at
the prosecutor's office upon the prosecutor's
summons and provide explanations on issues related
to the prosecutor's inspection. Failure of officials and
citizens to comply with the prosecutor's lawful
requests without good reason, as well as refusal to
appear upon summons, shall entail liability established
by the legislation of Turkmenistan. If a person
summoned in accordance with the established
procedure refuses to appear at the prosecutor's office
without good reason, he may be forcibly brought by
the prosecutor's decision.
A similar provision is found in Article 8 of the Law “On
the Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Tajikistan”.
According to it, officials and citizens who do not appear
at the prosecutor’s office without a valid reason upon
summons shall be forcibly brought by the internal affairs
bodies based on the decision of the prosecutor or
investigator. Similarly, according to Article 6 of the Law
“On the Prosecutor’s Office of the Kyrgyz Republic”,
officials and citizens are obliged to appear at the
prosecutor’s office at the time specified by them upon a
written request from the prosecutor or investigator of
the military prosecu
tor’s office to provide explanations
or give testimony. The written request must indicate the
issue on which the person or citizen is being summoned.
The prosecutor has the right to issue a decision on
compulsory appearance in relation to officials and
citizens who do not appear or evade appearing without
a valid reason, which shall be executed by law
enforcement agencies within 24 hours. Article 26 of the
Constitutional Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On
the Prosecutor’s Office” establishes the categori
es of
persons who cannot be forcibly brought and that
forcibly brought shall not be carried out at night. Article
10 of the Law “On the Prosecutor’s Office of the
Republic of Belarus” even stipulates that persons
summoned to the prosecutor’s office during
working
hours shall be guaranteed to retain their job and
average salary, and that the fact that a person was
summoned to the prosecutor’s office during working
hours and the period of his stay at the prosecutor’s
office shall be confirmed by a summons or other
document issued by the prosecutor . Based on
advanced foreign experience, it is proposed to establish
in the law the authority to forcibly bring persons who
refuse to give an explanation or appear at the
prosecutor’s office on another necessary issu
e, based
on the prosecutor’s decision. 20 percent of respondents
noted that this proposal would be sufficiently effective
in eliminating problems arising in the activities of
control over the implementation of laws.
A comparative legal analysis of internal departmental
documents of prosecutors' offices in some CIS countries
has shown that most of the relevant issues related to
the organization and conduct of prosecutorial
inspections, which are not regulated by special laws, are
strictly regulated by orders of the Prosecutor General,
which, in turn, is considered an advanced practice
compared to Uzbekistan.
Without exaggeration, the experience of the
prosecutor's offices of Kazakhstan can be cited as an
example in this regard. It should be noted that the
procedure for organizing and conducting prosecutorial
inspections in Kazakhstan is regulated by a special order
of the Prosecutor General. For example, by the order of
the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Kazakhstan
dated 17.01.2023 No. 32 “On certain is
sues of
organizing prosecutorial supervision”, the “Rules for the
appointment and conduct of inspections by
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
18
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
prosecutorial offices of compliance with laws, the
analysis of the state of legality, as well as the
assessment of documents that have entered into legal
force” were approved. These Rules determine the
procedure for conducting inspections by prosecutorial
offices of compliance with laws, the analysis of the
state of legality, as well as the assessment of
documents that have entered into legal force.
According to paragraph 4 of these Rules, the basis for
the appointment of an inspection is: 1) an order of the
President of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 2) an order of
the Prosecutor General; 3) decisions of the Deputy
Prosecutor General, Chief Military and Transport
Prosecutors, prosecutors of regions, cities of
republican significance and the capital , districts, cities,
interdistrict, specialized prosecutors, as well as military
prosecutors of territorial and garrisons, interregional
transport prosecutors, on the grounds provided for in
paragraph 7 of the Rules (5 categories of persons:
persons unable to exercise the right to self-defense
due to physical disabilities, mental disorders or other
circumstances, minors, private entrepreneurs, etc.); 4)
decisions of the Chairman of the Committee for Legal
Statistics and Special Accounting of the Prosecutor
General's Office and the heads of its territorial bodies.
The decision to conduct an inspection shall be
registered with the state div for legal statistics and
special accounting before the start of the inspection.
The decision to conduct an inspection shall be handed
over to the inspected entity for familiarization upon
arrival at the object of inspection or shall be sent
through the procedural information system of the
Prosecutor General 's Office (paragraph 11). One of the
important requirements is set out in paragraph 12 of
the Rules, according to which the inspection shall be
carried out only by the persons specified in the
decision to conduct an inspection.
Also, according to paragraph 13 of the Rules, the
period for conducting an inspection shall not exceed
thirty working days from the date of the order to
conduct it. Provided that if there is a need to request
additional materials, as well as due to the large volume
of the inspection, the period for conducting it may be
extended for a period of no more than thirty working
days. The period for conducting the inspection shall be
extended by the person who issued the decision to
appoint the inspection or his/her substitute.
Paragraphs 16-17 of the Rules cover the issues of
involving specialists in the inspection and conducting
operational-search measures. In particular, in
necessary cases, specialists from state and law
enforcement agencies, organizations regardless of
their form of ownership, may be involved in the
inspection, upon the request of the prosecutor, in order
to draw up a conclusion. The procedure for involving
specialists from private organizations in the inspection
shall be carried out in accordance with the procedure
established by the Civil Code of the Republic of
Kazakhstan or other legislative acts. In the event of a
threat to the life and health of the prosecutor, as well as
obstruction of the prosecutor's lawful activities, law
enforcement officers may be involved to ensure the
safety of persons conducting the inspection (paragraph
16).
During the inspection, the question of the need to
conduct operational search measures is resolved if
there are no other possibilities to identify hidden
violations of the law that are important for the
inspection. The decision shall indicate the grounds for
conducting search and rescue operations, the form and
terms of submission of the results obtained (paragraph
17).
In addition, the report on the results of the inspection
and the requirements for its formalization are also
reflected in a separate paragraph 25 of the Rules.
According to it, after the completion of the inspection, a
report on the results of the inspection (hereinafter
referred to as the report ) will be drawn up, in which: a)
the date, place and grounds of inspection of the report;
b) the name of the inspected subject, the subject of
inspection; c) general information on the subject of the
inspection; d) assessment of compliance with the
legislation on the subject (subject) of the inspection; e)
analysis of reasons contributing to the commission of
violations; f) the mechanism for eliminating the
determined violation of the law, its causes and the
conditions that make it possible; g) conclusions and
proposals based on the results of the inspection; h) the
signature of the official (persons) who conducted the
inspection is indicated.
The report shall be issued to the person being inspected
within five working days after the completion of the
inspection. Information on the receipt or refusal to
receive the report by the head (representative) of the
inspected entity shall be reflected at the time of
issuance of the report. If there are objections to the
report, the audited entity has the right to submit them
in writing within three working days from the date of
submission of the report.
In conclusion, based on the study of the necessity and
importance of regulation of the prosecutor's review of
law enforcement in the legislation, the following
conclusions and proposals are presented:
firstly, the need to develop and improve the legal
framework regulating prosecutorial inspections is of
paramount importance today, and this problem has not
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
19
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
lost its relevance. In this regard, the national legislation
of the Republic of Uzbekistan and internal
departmental documents of the prosecutor's offices
require serious improvement. The processes related to
the legal regulation of prosecutorial inspections are
still at their initial stage;
secondly, as a result of regulating the issues related to
the procedure for organizing and conducting
prosecutorial inspections by the Law of the Republic of
Uzbekistan "On the Prosecutor's Office" and the Order
of the Prosecutor General: the approach of
prosecutorial officers to organizing and conducting
inspections
will
radically
change,
unjustified
interference by prosecutorial officers in the activities
of the entities being inspected will be prevented, their
rights and interests will be ensured, the entities being
inspected will have the right to appeal the prosecutor's
investigative actions and decisions, and naturally, this
will strengthen the prosecutorial officers' sense of
personal responsibility and accountability for making
decisions related to the inspection, and most
importantly, the fact that prosecutorial officers pay
attention to quality, not quantity, in organizing and
conducting inspections will automatically increase the
efficiency and effectiveness of inspections;
thirdly, today, Article 21 of the Law of the Republic of
Uzbekistan
“On the Prosecutor's Office” and the
“Regulations of the Prosecutor General's Office of the
Republic of Uzbekistan”, approved by Order No. 172 of
the Prosecutor General dated 05.12.2017 does not
allow for full regulation of all issues related to the
organization and conduct of a prosecutorial inspection.
Most important and relevant issues related to the
organization and conduct of an inspection, including
the forms of prosecutorial control measures, the
concept and types of prosecutorial inspection, the
purpose and subject of the inspection, the terms of the
inspection, the rights and obligations of the
investigating
and
investigated
entities,
the
participation of specialists in the inspection, the
suspension and resumption of the inspection, the
involvement of law enforcement officers in the
inspection process to ensure the safety of the
investigating persons, the documents issued as a result
of the inspection, the decisions taken, the procedure
for appealing against investigative actions and
decisions, should be covered in detail in the Law "On
the Prosecutor's Office" and in a sectoral order of the
Prosecutor General;
fourthly, recognizing as a good practice the fact that in
some CIS countries, in particular the Russian
Federation and Kazakhstan, where the function of
control over the implementation of laws is retained,
the procedure for organizing and conducting
prosecutorial inspections is regulated in legislation, as
well as in Kazakhstan by a separate special order of the
Prosecutor General, and its implementation in national
legislation and law enforcement practice will lead to
positive results;
fifthly, based on some problems arising in the
investigative activities of the prosecutor's offices of
Uzbekistan
(obstruction
of
the
prosecutor's
investigative actions, evasion of appearance upon
summons by the prosecutor, etc.) and advanced foreign
experience (Russian Federation, Belarus, Kyrgyz
Republic, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan), the
following proposals are made:
1) strengthen the authority in the Law "On the
Prosecutor's Office" to make decisions on the
compulsory appearance of persons who, upon the
prosecutor's summons, fail to appear before the
prosecutor's office without good reason to provide
explanations in order to clarify questions arising during
the inspection;
2) Supplement the disposition of Article 197 of the
Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan
(Obstruction of the lawful activities of the Prosecutor
and failure to comply with his requirements) with a
norm providing for liability for obstruction or unjustified
refusal of unhindered access to the territories and
premises of ministries, departments, enterprises,
institutions, organizations, military units.
REFERENCES
Агапова О.А. Понятие и некоторые особенности
прокурорской проверки в досудебных стадиях
уголовного процесса // Национальная ассоциация
ученых (НАУ), № III (8), 2015 / Юридические науки. –
C. 94.
Воеводина Т.Г. К вопросу о правовом регулировании
проведения прокурорской проверки исполнения
законов // Пробелы в российском законодательстве,
2017, № 6. –
C. 338.
Дейнеко О.В. Необходимость совершенствования
правового
регулирования
“общенадзорных”
проверок
органов
прокуратуры
//
Северо
-
кавказский юридический вестник, 2014, № 2. –
C. 61-
62.
Капинус О.В., Рябцев В.В. Перспективы развития
правовой регламентации статуса прокуратуры
Российской Федерации // Вестник Академии
Генеральной прокуратуры Российской Федерации,
2012, № 3. –
C. 23.
Воеводина Т.Г. К вопросу о правовом регулировании
проведения прокурорской проверки исполнения
законов // Пробелы в российском законодательстве,
2017, № 6. –
C. 338.
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
20
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
Калугина
О.В.
Прокурорский
надзор
за
исполнением
земельного
законодательства
Российской Федерации: Дисс. ... канд. юрид. наук. –
М.:
Федеральное
государственное
казенное
образовательное
учреждение
высшего
профессионального
образования
“Академия
Генеральной прокуратуры Российской Федерации”,
2013.
–
С. 165.
Докучаева Е.Н. Вопросы организации прокурорской
проверки: правоприменительная практика //
Вестник университета прокуратуры Российской
Федерации, 2020, № 1 (75). –
C. 18.
Уголовная юстиция в свете интеграции правовых
систем и интернационализации криминальных
угроз: сб. науч. тр., приуроч. к 90
-
летию д.ю.н.,
проф. И.И.Мартинович / Белорус. гос. ун
-
т, юрид.
фак., каф. уголовного процесса и прокурорского
надзора; ред. кол.: А.А.Данилевич (отв. ред.),
О.В.Петрова, В.И.Самарин. –
Минск: Изд. центр БГУ,
2017.
–
С. 137; Надзорно
-
правоохранительная
деятельность прокуратуры в условиях глобальной
трансформации
систем
обеспечения
национального правопорядка: сб. материалов
Межд. науч.
-
практ. конф., посвящ. 100
-
летию со дня
образования органов прокуратуры Республики
Беларусь (Минск, 14 июня 2022 г.) / ГУ «Науч.
-
практ.
центр
проблем
укрепления
законности
и
правопорядка
Ген.
прокуратуры
Республики
Беларусь»; редкол.: В.В.Марчук (гл. ред.) [и др.]. –
Минск: изд. Центр БГУ, 2022. –
С. 175.
Бывальцева С. Прокурорская проверка: правовой и
практический аспекты // Законность, 2021, № 9. –
C.
33, 36.
Калугина
О.В.
Прокурорский
надзор
за
исполнением
земельного
законодательства
Российской Федерации: Дисс. ... канд. юрид. наук. –
М.:
Федеральное
государственное
казенное
образовательное
учреждение
высшего
профессионального
образования
“Академия
Генеральной прокуратуры Российской Федерации”,
2013.
–
С
. 165.
Козусева О.А. Пути совершенствования правового
регулирования
проведения
прокурорской
проверки // Вестник Университета прокуратуры
Российской Федерации, 2019, № 2 (70). –
C. 130,
132-133.
Белоусова Д.С. Дальнейшая процессуализация
прокурорской проверки: блажь или необходимость
// Вестник университета прокуратуры Российской
Федерации, 2021, № 5 (85). –
C. 50-53.
Исламова Э.Р. Преодоление противодействия
прокурорской проверке исполнения законов:
теоретические,
правовые
и
организационно
-
методические аспекты // Вестник университета
прокуратуры Российской Федерации, 2020, № 1 (75).
–
C. 33-34.
Белоусова Д.С. Дальнейшая процессуализация
прокурорской проверки: блажь или необходимость
// Вестник университета прокуратуры Российской
Федерации, 2021, № 5 (85). –
C. 55.
Энциклопедия “Прокурорская деятельность” /
Университет прокуратуры Российской Федерации;
под общ. ред. О.С.Капинус. –
М.: ООО «Компания
полиграфмастер», 2021. –
С. 407.
Constitutional Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On
the
Prosecutor’s Office” // Electronic source:
https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=31771762
&pos=599;-57#pos=599;-57. (time of application:
27.02.2025). Federal law of Russian Federation “On the
Prosecutor’s Office of Russian Federation” // Electronic
source:
https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW
_262/?ysclid=m8yr6z9f63262442322. (application time:
27.02.2025).
Белоусова Д.С. Дальнейшая процессуализация
прокурорской проверки: блажь или необходимость
// Вестник университета прокуратуры Российской
Федерации, 2021, № 5 (85). –
C. 53..
The law of Turkmenistan “On the Prosecutor’s Office”
(new
edition)
//
Электрон
манба:
https://mejlis.gov.tm/single-law/144?lang=ru.
//
(application time: 27.02.2025).
Constitutional Law of the Republic of Tadjikistan “On
the
Prosecutor’s Office of Republic of Tadjikistan” //
Electronic
source:
https://www.prokuratura.tj/legislation-rus/49-the-
constitutional-law-of-the-republic-of-tajikistan.html.
(time of application: 27.02.2025).
Constitutional Law of the Kyrgyz Republic "On the
Prosecutor's Office of the Kyrgyz Republic" // Electronic
source:
https://cbd.minjust.gov.kg/112293/edition/1380/ru
?ysclid=lu58dp30za22410383. (time of application:
27.02.2025).
Constitutional Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On
the Prosecutor
’s Office” // Electronic source:
https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=31771762
&pos=599;-57#pos=599;-57. (time of application:
27.02.2025).
Law of Republic of Belarus " On the Prosecutor's Office
of the Republic of Belarus" // Electronic source:
https://pravo.by/document/?guid=3871&p0=H107002
2 0. (time of application: 27.02.2025).
