RESOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN

of July 10, 2000 No. 14/2

About idea of the North Kazakhstan regional court of recognition unconstitutional subitem 3) parts one of article 281 of the Code of the Kazakh SSR about administrative offenses

The constitutional Council of the Republic of Kazakhstan as a part of the Acting Chairman Shopin V. D., members of council Busurmanov Zh. D., Esenzhanov A., Kotov A. K. and Omarkhanova K. A. in open session considered the appeal of the North Kazakhstan regional court about compliance of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan of the subitem 3) to part one of article 281 of the Code of the Kazakh SSR about administrative offenses.

Having studied the available materials, having heard the message of speakers of Omarkhanov K. A. and Shopina V. D., the Constitutional Council of the Republic of Kazakhstan established:

1. In the Constitutional Council of the Republic of Kazakhstan idea of the North Kazakhstan regional court of recognition unconstitutional the subitem 3) of part one of article 281 of the Code of the Kazakh SSR about administrative offenses arrived on June 26, 2000 (further the Code).

Reason for the address was the civil case which is in production of the North Kazakhstan regional court according to the statement of the president of the Monolitstroy joint-stock company (JSC) for appeal of the decree of March 13, 2000 on imposing on it the administrative punishment issued by the chief state inspector of the North Kazakhstan regional management of environmental protection. According to articles 54-1 and 233 of the Code the penalty in the amount of 19875 tenges for failure to carry out of the obligatory instruction about taking measures to the correct storage and burial of source of radioactive radiation was imposed on the president of the joint-stock company.

According to the claim of the president of JSC Monolitstroy the Peter and Paul city court repealed on April 26, 2000 the resolution on imposing of penalty and stopped proceeedings. This judgment was appealed in cassation procedure by the state inspector in regional court.

Disclaimer! This text was translated by AI translator and is not a valid juridical document. No warranty. No claim. More info