In a modern democratic society, there is no sphere or institution of public life that can exist closed to the public or free from public control. As soon as the authority hides something from the society or starts to provide insufficient and impartial information, its activity is questioned. In turn, the transparency of state authorities is not only an obligation of the state to civil society, but also an important condition for the legitimacy of government activity in this society.
In a modern democratic society, there is no sphere or institution of public life that can exist closed to the public or free from public scrutiny. As soon as the authority hides something from the society or starts to provide insufficient and impartial information, its activity is questioned. In turn, the transparency of state authorities is not only an obligation of the state to civil society, but also an important condition for the legitimacy of government activity in this society.
Therefore, in order for the government to be legal (legitimate), its activities should be transparent (open) in the broadest sense: public, open and under public control. In this sense, it is important that the law "On public control in the Republic of Uzbekistan" was adopted, which created a systematic and effective legal mechanism for the implementation of civil society institutions and general public control over the enforcement of laws by state authorities and management bodies. is important.
The requirement to be legitimate in society (legal activity) applies equally to the activity of courts. The Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan "On Courts" does not contain a norm on public control. However, this does not mean that the activity of this state body is outside of public control.
As one of the important institutions of the state, the judiciary also needs public control. Every step of the court should be open and transparent for society. Article 4 of the Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan "On Courts" states that "Judges are independent and subject only to the law. It is not allowed to interfere in any way with the activities of judges in the administration of justice, and such interference is a cause of responsibility according to the law. "In the Republic of Uzbekistan, the judiciary operates independently of the legislative and executive authorities, political parties, and other public associations." However, this independence should not interfere with the legal work of the court, and should not prevent the public from monitoring the legality of its activity. Otherwise, this principle of independence, established by law, risks creating tyranny.
Article 5 of the law states that "Court documents are mandatory for all state bodies, public associations, enterprises, institutions and organizations, officials, and citizens and must be executed in the entire territory of the Republic of Uzbekistan." It can be seen that court documents, like laws, are binding for all state bodies, public associations, enterprises, institutions and organizations, officials, and citizens, and must be executed in the entire territory of the country. Therefore, in order to ensure the legality, fairness and impartiality of court documents, strict public control over the process of acceptance of these documents is necessary. It is precisely the openness and transparency of the judiciary that creates the possibility of establishing reasonable and effective public control over the activity of the courts. Therefore, on the one hand, the representatives of the state and, on the other hand, the judicial authorities should be interested in ensuring openness, transparency and transparency in their activities.
Acknowledging that the activity of the courts is varied, let's take a look at the following examples of the mechanism of public control of criminal cases by the courts in our current laws.
Article 21 of the Criminal Procedural Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan states that "In the course of investigating a criminal case and hearing the case in court, the investigator, the investigator, the prosecutor and the court shall determine the circumstances of the crime, search for and expose the culprits, and give a fair sentence." release, as well as the right to use public assistance within their powers to determine the reasons for the commission of the crime and the conditions that made it possible. "Representatives of public associations and communities have the right to participate in criminal proceedings as public prosecutors and public defenders." It can be seen that in the process of hearing a criminal case in court, representatives of civil society institutions or labor unions are the public prosecutor or
can participate as a public defender. Through such participation, the representative, whether he is a public prosecutor or a public defender, while fulfilling his procedural duties, exercises public control over the consideration of a criminal case by the court and the adoption of a fair, impartial and legal decision.
Another form of effective public control over the activity of the courts is the institution of "people's advisers".
People's councilors exercise all the rights of a judge in the administration of justice in accordance with the law. They have equal rights with the presiding officer in deciding all issues that arise during the hearing of the case and passing judgment. According to Article 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, judges and people's advisers are independent and subject only to the law in the administration of justice. Judges and people's advisers consider and resolve criminal cases based on the law. It can be seen that in the consideration of criminal cases, from the beginning to the end, people's advisers participate independently and obey the law, just like judges. Such participation creates an opportunity for effective public control over the activities of judges by people's councilors representing the people.
Another important issue is the adherence to the principles of legality, openness and fairness in the selection of court personnel and the formation of the jury. Due to the judicial reforms implemented in the country over the next four years, this task is also being successfully implemented. In particular, at the suggestion of the High Council of Judges, the High School of Judges under the High Council, and the proposal of the Supreme Council of Judges of the Republic of Uzbekistan, in order to increase confidence in the impartiality and transparency of the selection and appointment of judges, it is proof that commissions have been formed in each region to assist in the formation of the corps of judges. will take
At the same time, professional knowledge and practical skills of court employees are of urgent importance in protecting the rights of citizens without deviating from the law and ensuring their legal interests. It is known that judges should constantly improve their professional skills in order to be able to apply the current legislation in a fair and uniform manner. The "Code of Conduct for Judges" also states that a judge must maintain his qualifications at a high level, improve his theoretical knowledge and practical skills. Therefore, continuous education and improving one's skills are one of the main directions of the judge's activity in the administration of justice. In addition, judges should increase their knowledge and skills through independent education. Self-study of a judge is a part of his daily activities, in which he is required to improve his skills in his free time, at home, during his work. In the process of independent education, a judge should constantly search, regularly monitor and analyze the current legal documents and literature on their correct application in practice, as well as judicial practice. It is necessary for him to study the causes of mistakes and shortcomings, and to take measures not to repeat them in his work. After all, improving the qualifications of judges is an important factor in ensuring the effectiveness of justice.
In short, the more open and transparent the activity of the judiciary is under public control, the more the public's confidence in it increases. An increase in public confidence in the judiciary is one of the important conditions for the effectiveness of their work. One thing should not be overlooked here, that is, the level of public trust depends on how well the public is aware of the activities of this state body. In general, the improvement of public control over the activities of judicial bodies serves the interests of ensuring legality in the country, strengthening the protection of human rights and public interests.
Khudoyar MAMATOV,
Professor of the Legal Techniques and Anti-corruption Expertise Department of the Legal Training Center
