Page 1 of 10

European Journal of Business &

Social Sciences

Available at https://ejbss.org/

ISSN: 2235-767X

Volume 07 Issue 05

May 2019

Available online:https://ejbss.org/ P a g e | 742

The Use Of The Institution Of Consignation Of Testimony As A

Proceduralguarantee To Protect The Rights And Legitimate Interests Of

Participants In Criminal Procedure

Dildora Bazarova

Acting Professor at Department of Criminal Procedure law andcriminalistics

Tashkent state universityof law, Republic of Uzbekistan PhDin Law

Annotation: The article deals with the institution of consignation of evidence

in criminal procedures. The author discloses the purpose and grounds for consignation

testimony, gives the experience of such countries as the USA, Estonia and

Kazakhstan. In the article, the author makes proposals on the feasibility of introducing

the institution of consignation of evidence in the criminal process in Uzbekistan.

Keywords:consignation, testimony, witness, victim, evidence, safety, research,

derivative evidence, procedural guarantee, principle of immediacy and oral

investigation of evidence.

In recent years, large-scale reforms have been carried out in the Republic of

Uzbekistan to improve all spheres of life. The Strategy of Action adopted in 2017 in

the five priority areas of the country's development in 2017–20211

is aimed at moving

to a qualitatively new level of development. Among the priority directions of

development of the country, the priority directions of development of the country in

2017–2021 also indicated ensuring the rule of law and reforming the judicial legal

system, aimed at strengthening the true independence of the judiciary and guarantees

reliable protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens, improving administrative,

criminal, civil and economic legislation, improving the effectiveness of the system of

combating crime and crime prevention, the full implementation of the principle

adversarial litigation, improving the system of legal aid and legal services.

1

Decree of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan of February 7, 2017, No. UP-4947 “On the strategy for further development of the Republic of

Uzbekistan” // Collected Legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan, 2017, No. 6, Art. 70, No. 20, Art. 354, No. 23, Art. 448, No. 29, Art. 683, art. 685,

No. 34, Art. 874, No. 37, Art. 982; National database of legislation, 10.16.2017, No. 06/17/5204/0114, 07/31/2018, No. 06/18/5483/1594.

Page 2 of 10

European Journal of Business &

Social Sciences

Available at https://ejbss.org/

ISSN: 2235-767X

Volume 07 Issue 05

May 2019

Available online:https://ejbss.org/ P a g e | 743

The Resolution of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On measures

for cardinal improvement of the system of criminal and criminal procedure

legislation”2

(May 14, 2018) was adopted into the framework of the named Strategy.

This Resolution approved the Concept for the improvement of the criminal and

criminal procedure legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Note that in the field of

criminal procedure legislation, the Concept defines the following main areas and

tasks: ensuring effective and reliable protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens,

the interests of society and the state; systematization and harmonization of criminal

procedure legislation; the improvement of mechanisms for the reliable provision of

guarantees of individual rights and freedoms in criminal procedures; introduction of

new forms and procedures of the criminal process.

Among the directions for improving criminal procedural legislation is the need

to improve mechanisms for ensuring reliable guarantees of individual rights and

freedoms in criminal procedures. In this regard, the approved Concept also identifies

such a task as the introduction of the institution for consignation evidence from

witnesses and victims, mainly in cases where it is impossible to interrogate them

later due to objective reasons3

.

What is the institution of consignation? Consider the etymology of this term.

Consignation (translated from English as consign) is used in different semantic

meanings: to depose, overthrow, shift; argue, testify (about something); testify under

oath, etc.4

. In the context of the legal definition, the use of the term “consignation”

means witnessing, giving written evidence against someone under oath, interrogating

a person under oath.5

This is due to the fact that the courts in criminal cases are faced

2

Resolution of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated 14.05.2018 N PP-3723 "On measures to radically

improve the system of criminal and criminal procedure legislation" // "Collected legislation of the Republic of

Uzbekistan", May 21, 2018, N 20, art. 420

3

The concept of improving the criminal and criminal procedure legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan (Annex No. 1

to the Decree of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan 14.05.2018 N PP-3723) // "Collection of Legislation of the

Republic of Uzbekistan", May 21, 2018, N 20, art. 420

4

Consign (remove, overthrow, depose, argue, testify, testify under oath) // https://translate.academic.ru.

5© Mail.Ru, 1999—2013 ABBYY Lingvo © ABBYY 2009, English-Russian Law Dictionary. Consignation: 1) affidavit; oath

testimony 2) adherence to case materials 3) evidence, testimony, statement attached to case files 4) deposition,

overthrow, dismissal • consignation de beneesse - a written testimony of the witness under oath selected in the court

hearing process with the aim of use it as evidence if it is not possible to interrogate the witness orally; consignation in

evidence - admission to the case file as evidence; to take consignation - take the affidavit.

Page 3 of 10

European Journal of Business &

Social Sciences

Available at https://ejbss.org/

ISSN: 2235-767X

Volume 07 Issue 05

May 2019

Available online:https://ejbss.org/ P a g e | 744

with ensuring the appearance at the court hearing of witnesses for their interrogation

under oath.

The institution of consignation of evidence is familiar to Anglo-Saxon law for

many years. As a rule, such persons as the consignor, his attorney, the judicial

stenographer and other parties to the process, who may be represented in person or by

means of representatives, take part in the consignation process. Each participant in the

process and his lawyer have the right to be at the consignation and ask questions.

Before the beginning of the consignation, the consignee, with the help of the

stenographer, takes the oath that he would have taken if he had testified in court. Then

begins the direct and cross-examination of the consignee, shorthand or otherwise

recorded by the shorthand writer6

.

In certain legal systems, the consignation of evidence, in particular testimony,

is applied in different legal regimes: 1) the consignation of evidence in pretrial

procedures in order to identify evidence in a case; 2) the consignation (storage) of

evidence in order to familiarize them with the court; 3) the consignation of evidence

on the basis of the impossibility of their presentation in court; 4) consignation of

testimony based on the security of the witness.7

The consignation of testimony in criminal cases began on the basis of the

Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, 1946 (United States). The purpose of the

consignation is to preserve the testimony of the witness for the court when the witness

is unable to testify before the court. Currently, the institution of consignation of

testimony is known by the laws of many European and post-Soviet countries.

Please note that there are doubts regarding the consignation of testimony. So, if

you refer to paragraph “e” part 3 of art. 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and

Political Rights of 1966, this provision regulates that everyone, on the basis of full

equality in the consideration of any criminal charge against him, is guaranteed the

right to interrogate witnesses against them or the right to be interrogated as well as to

have the right to testify and challenge and interrogate his witnesses under the same

6

Avetisyan A.G. Issues of judicial control over pre-trial proceedings. Yerevan: EHU, 2010.

7

Gambaryan A.S. Legal regimes of deposition of evidence (evidence) and their specificity in the criminal process of the

Republic of Armenia // Judicial power and criminal process. - 2016. - No 1. - p. 159.