THEORETICAL ANALYSIS OF THE GENERAL FOUNDATIONS OF SENTENCING
Keywords:
punishment, sentencing, a form of guilt, mitigating and aggravating circumstances of punishment, act, responsibility, principle, method of committing a crime, motive, amount of damage caused, degree of danger of the act, specific feature and other circumstances, etcAbstract
This article notes that the appointment of punishment is the final stage of the crime committed, which can only be distinguished by the differences between the parties involved in this process. Also, issues related to the general foundations of the imposition of punishment are indicated on the basis of examples from the works of our ancient national scientists. Particular attention was paid to examples of the appointment of only one punishment for a crime committed in matters related to the appointment of punishment, and it was noted that in accordance with the provisions of criminal law, each crime is obliged to require the application of only one basic punishment, the special resolution of this issue does not coincide with the principles. In addition, this article analyzes the general foundations of the imposition of punishment, and the theoretical views of foreign and national scientists on the circumstances to be taken into account in it. It is emphasized that the general basis for the appointment of punishment is the requirements of criminal law, which must be taken into account when applying coercive measures by the court. This article states the need to improve the norms of the general principles of sentencing, as evidenced by the materials of judicial practice and the need for a theoretical analysis of the general principles of sentencing today and the improvement of the norms of criminal law.
References
1. Muhiddinova F. Forobiyning huquqiy qarashlarida jinoyat va jazo masalalarining aks etishi [Reflection of the issues of crime and punishment in Farobiʻs legal views]. TSIL Bulletin, 2006, no. 1, p. 88.
2. Temur tuzuklari [Timurʻs rules]. Tashkent, Sharq, 2005, pp. 87–89.
3. Rustamboyev M.X., Toxirov F. Jinoyat huquqi [Criminal law]. General part. Tashkent, 2002, p. 76.
4. Usmonaliyev M. Jazo tayinlash [Punishment]. Tashkent, TSUL Publ., 2004, pp. 9–11.
5. Suyunova D.J., Akhrarov B.D. Problemy naznacheniya nakazaniya [Problems of sentencing]. Tashkent, TSIL, 2007, p. 25.
6. Jinoyat huquqi [Criminal law]. Tashkent, TSUL Publ., 2021, 111 p.
7. Skryabin M.A. Obshchiye printsipy naznacheniya nakazaniya i ikh primeneniye k nesovershennoletnim [General principles of sentencing and their application to minors]. Kazan, 1988, p. 14.
8. Duyunov V.K. et al. Kommentariy k Ugolovnomu kodeksu Rossiyskoy Federatsii (postateynyy) [Commentary on the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (article by article)]. Ed. L.L. Kruglikov. Moscow, Wolters Kluver, 2005, p. 52.
9. Kommentariy k Ugolovnomu kodeksu Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Commentary on the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation]. 2nd ed., revised. and added. Ed. A.I. Rarog. Moscow, TK Velby, Prospekt Publ., 2004, p. 53.
10. Pechnikov N.P., Chernyshov V.N. Ugolovnoye pravo [Criminal law]. Tambov, Tambov State Technical University Publ., 2006, pp. 30–31.
11. Bazhanov M.I. Naznacheniye nakazaniya po sovetskomu ugolovnomu pravu [Appointment of punishment under Soviet criminal law]. Kiev, 1980, pp. 23–24.
12. Gaverov G.S. Obshchiye nachala naznacheniya nakazaniya po sovetskomu ugolovnomu pravu [General principles of sentencing in Soviet criminal law]. Irkutsk, 1976, p. 7.
13. Veliyev S.A. Printsipy naznacheniya nakazaniya [Principles of sentencing]. Moscow, 2017, p. 382.
14. Rozimova Q. Some features of improving the penal institution for several crimes in the criminal law of Uzbekistan in the fight against corruption. Journal of Adv. Research in Dynamical & Control, 2020, vol. 12, iss. 02. DOI: 10.5373/JARDCS/V12SP2/SP20201071/.
15. Rozimova Q. Jazo tayinlash [Punishment]. Tashkent, TSUL, 2022, 104 p.
