Comparative characteristics of constitutional and judicial law-making (on the example of Republic of Kazakhstan and USA)

Issue 55, 2024

Gulnar Sagynbekova, Aigul Ibraeva, Aidar Saitbekov, Soledad Dyussebaliyeva, Dauren Makhambetsaliyev

Received 08.11.2023, Revised 11.02.2024, Accepted 20.03.2024

10.54919/physics/55.2024.272ay9

Abstract

Relevance. The Republic of Kazakhstan experienced an authoritarian regime that shaped a bureaucratic approach to the rule of law. Therefore, the application of positive experience in the formation of a democratic society, the study of the constitutional law of the USA, should serve as a criterion for the formation of one’s own constitutional traditions.

Purpose. The purpose of the work is to identify the main tasks, ways and methods of law-making of the judicial branch of government in the law-making of the legal state of the Republic of Kazakhstan in comparison with the USA.

Methodology. With the help of methods of analysis and synthesis, the main functions of the country’s judiciary within the framework of constitutional law, which determine the vector of development of the constitutional state, were determined. Using a comparative analysis, the relevant aspects of the formation of a democratic state were considered.

Results. In the course of the study, examples of court decisions that created judicial practice and deepened experience in the field of judicial control over the constitutionality of laws in general and judicial control over amendments to the Constitution were considered. On the basis of common features, the main regularities of the evolution of law-making with the participation of the judiciary have been determined. The issue of the need to improve the mechanisms of courts’ participation in the processes of development of the institution of constitutionalism was raised.

Conclusions. The practical significance of the study lies in the identification of new forms of state regulation in the law-making system with the direct participation of courts of various branches of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as in the identification of shortcomings in the Constitution in terms of the regulation of court activities and their influence on the formation of legislative documents.

Keywords: rule of law; judicial power; constitutional system; legal practise; institution of constitutionalism

Suggested citation

Sagynbekova G, Ibraeva A, Saitbekov A, Dyussebaliyeva S, Makhambetsaliyev D. Comparative characteristics of constitutional and judicial law-making (on the example of Republic of Kazakhstan and USA). Sci Herald Uzhhorod Univ Ser Phys. 2024;(55):2729-2740. DOI: 10.54919/physics/55.2024.272ay9

Download article

References

  1. Tуshchуk B.Constitution of the United States of America 1787 – The first active constitution in the world (to the 230th anniversary of the main law of the USA). Visn Lviv Univ Ser Law. 2017;65:56–65.
  2. Bell J, Paris ML, editors. Rights-Based Constitutional Review. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2016. Chapter 1, Rosenfeld M, The United States of America; p. 29-62.
  3. Rechytskyi V. Informal constitutionalism, the US effect [Internet]. Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group; 2019 [updated 2019 Oct. 4; cited 2024 Feb. 18]. Available from: https://khpg.org/1570181149.
  4. Taitorina BA, Baisalova GT, Assanova AA, Bogatyreva LB. State control: Issues of constitutional and legal regulation. Bull Karaganda Univ Ser Law. 2020;1(97):6–11.
  5. Baktybekov MB, Kaibzhanov MZh, Yessenzholov NE, Seidanov AB, Nurlin AK, Shagiyeva GT. Changes Impact assessment on national legislation development in international law. Balt J Law Politics. 2022;15(1):1763–74.
  6. Beisbekova GK, Konussova VT, Ismagulov KE, Saktaganova I, Mukasheva AA. Problems of concretization of legal norms in Kazakhstan. J Adv Res Law Econ. 2019;39:52–7.
  7. Turlayev A, Akhmetova N. The role and principles importance of the biys court activity as an institution of Kazakh customary law for modern legal relations. Bull Karaganda Univ Ser Law. 2020;1(97):44–50.
  8. Yessetova S. Improvement of the law-making role of courts as a factor of youth immigration from the Republic of Kazakhstan. PalArch J Archaeol Egypt/Egyptol. 2020;17(7):8862–77.
  9. Musaev UM. The role of court decisions as a legal source in the criminal legislation of foreign countries. Am J Political Sci Law Criminol. 2022;4(4):7–10. DOI: 10.37547/tajpslc/Volume04Issue04-02.
  10. Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan [Internet]. 1993 [cited 2024 Feb. 18]. 1993 January 28. Available from: https://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/K930001000_.
  11. President of the Republic of Kazakhstan. “About the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan” [Internet]. 1992 [cited 2024 Feb. 18]. Law No. 1378-XII. 1992 June 5. Available from: https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=1001172.
  12. Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan [Internet]. 1995 [cited 2024 Feb. 18]. 1995 August 30. Available from: https://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/K950001000_.
  13. President of the Republic of Kazakhstan. “On the Constitutional Council of the Republic of Kazakhstan” [Internet]. 1995 [cited 2024 Feb. 18]. Constitutional Law No. 2737. 1995 December 29. Available from: https://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/U950002737_.
  14. Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan. “On ASTANA International Financial Center” [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2024 Feb. 18]. Constitutional Law No. 438-V. 2015 July 12. Available from: https://adilet.zan.kz/eng/docs/Z1500000438.
  15. Silkenat JR, Hickey JEJr, Barenboim PD, editors. The Legal Doctrines of the Rule of Law and the Legal State (Rechtsstaat). Cham: Springer; 2014. Chapter 16; Charlow R; American constitutional analysis and a substantive understanding of the rule of law; p. 251-266. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-05585-5_16.
  16. Jihad АRA. Amendments to the Constitution and the extent to which the constitutional judiciary has power over them. Soc Sci J. 2023;13(2):4735–51.
  17. Rubin АB. Judicial review in the United States. La Law Rev. 1979;40(1):67–82.
  18. Makogon BV, Markhgeym MV, Novikova AE, Nikonova LI, Stus NV. Constitutional justice in circumstances of public authority limits. J Hist Cult Art Res. 2018;7(2):722–8.
  19. Aryn АA. The role of the US Supreme Court in the legal system. J Act Probl Jurisprud. 2020;4(96):110–9.
  20. Florczak-Wątor M. Constitutional law and precedent: International perspectives on case-based reasoning. London: Routledge; 2022.
  21. Boutilier SW. Simplistic structure and history in Seila Law. NYU Law Rev. 2021;96:1582.
  22. Beerman JM. Seila Law: Is there a there there? Chicago: University of Chicago Law School; 2022.
  23. Hollingsworth, et al. v. Virginia [Internet]. U.S. Supreme Court; 1978. [cited 2024 Feb. 19]. Available from: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/3/378.
  24. Waldron J. The rule of law and the role of courts. Global Constitut. 2021;10(1):91–105.
  25. Akhmetova NS, Starozhilova NP. Development of the system of sources of Kazakh law. Bull Karaganda Univ Ser Law. 2020;4(100):25–38.
  26. Williams NW, Hanson М. Captured courts and legitimized autocrats: Transforming Kazakhstan’s Constitutional Court. Law Soc Inquiry. 2022;47(4):1201–33. DOI: 10.1017/lsi.2021.85.
  27. Abaydeldinov Y. Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan: Continuity and innovation. Bull LN Gumilyov Eurasian Natl Univ Ser Law. 2023;142(1):11–9.
  28. Akhmetov YB, Abdrasulov YB. What we talk about when we talk about the principle of the active role of the court in administrative procedure. Krytyka Prawa. 2023;15:81-100.
  29. Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan. “On the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan” [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2024 Feb. 19]. Constitutional Law No. 153-VII ZRK. 2022 November 05. Available from: https://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/Z2200000153.
  30. Lazorenko EYu. Precedent decisions of the court of cassation in criminal jurisdiction: Types and significance (Comparative-legal characteristics). Act Probl Native Jurisprud. 2022;4:167–75.
  31. Sweet AS, Shapiro M. On Law, Politics, and Judicialization. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2002. Chapter 6, Abstract and concrete review in the United States; p. 347-375. DOI: 10.1093/0199256489.001.0001.
  32. Pankevich ОZ. State law foreign countries. Lviv: Lviv State University of Internal Affairs; 2018.
  33. Piera MA, Buil R, Ginters E. State space analysis for model plausability validation in multi agent system simulation of urban policies. In: 25th European Modeling and Simulation Symposium, EMSS 2013 (pp. 504–9). 25-27 September, Athens, Greece; 2013.
  34. Colón-Ríos JI. Constitutional experimentation. Int J Constitut Law. 2021;19(3):970–3.
  35. Piera MA, Buil R, Ginters E. State space analysis for model plausibility validation in multi-agent system simulation of urban policies. J Simul. 2016;10(3):216–26.
  36. Vázquez CM. The Constitution as a source of remedial law. Yale Law J. 2023;132:1061–85.
  37. Kerimkhulle S, Koishybayeva M, Alimova Z, Baizakov N, Azieva G. Created and Realization of a Demographic Population Model for a Small City. Proceed Engin Sci. 2023;5(3):383–90 DOI: 10.24874/PES05.03.003.
  38. Pavlov SV, Sander SV, Kozlovska TI, Kaminsky AS, Wojcik W, Junisbekov MS. Laser photoplethysmography in integrated evaluation of collateral circulation of lower extremities. Proceed SPIE - Int Soc Optic Engin. 2013;8698:869808. DOI: 10.1117/12.2019336.
  39. Kerimkhulle S, Dildebayeva Z, Tokhmetov A, Amirova A, Tussupov J, Makhazhanova U, Adalbek A, Taberkhan R, Zakirova A, Salykbayeva A. Fuzzy Logic and Its Application in the Assessment of Information Security Risk of Industrial Internet of Things. Symmetry. 2023;15(10):1958. DOI: 10.3390/sym15101958.
  40. Buil R, Piera MA, Ginters E. Multi-agent system simulation for urban policy design: Open space land use change problem. Int J Model, Simul, Sci Comp. 2016;7(2):1642002. DOI: 10.1142/S1793962316420022.
  41. Dickson B. Writing the United Kingdom Constitution. Manchester: Manchester University Press; 2020. Chapter 4, The protection of rights and a written Constitution; p. 55-73. DOI: 10.7765/9781526158734.
  42. Loughlin M. The contemporary crisis of constitutional democracy. Oxf J Legal Stud. 2019;39(2):435–54.
  43. Ginters E, Mezitis M, Aizstrauta D. Sustainability simulation and assessment of bicycle network design and maintenance environment. In: 2018 International Conference on Intelligent and Innovative Computing Applications, ICONIC 2018 (article number: 8601225). Plaine Magnien: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; 2018. DOI: 10.1109/ICONIC.2018.8601225.
  44. Eggett C. The role of principles and general principles in the “Constitutional processes” of international law. Neth Int Law Rev. 2019;66:197–217. DOI: 10.1007/s40802-019-00139-1.
  45. Buil R, Piera MA, Gusev M, Ginters E, Aizstrauts A. Mas simulation for decision making in urban policy design: Bicycle infrastructure. In: International Conference on Harbour, Maritime and Multimodal Logistics Modelling and Simulation (pp. 95–102). Bergeggi: I3M Conference; 2015.
  46. Kukharchuk VV, Kazyv SS, Bykovsky SA, Wójcik W, Kotyra A, Akhmetova A, Bazarova M, Weryńska-Bieniasz R. Discrete wavelet transformation in spectral analysis of vibration processes at hydropower units. Przegl Elektrotechn. 2017;93(3):65–8. DOI: 10.15199/48.2017.03.16.
  47. Obeng-Odoom F. The purpose of constitutional political economy. Challenge. 2022;65(3-4):106–12.
  48. Osadchuk AV, Osadchuk VS. Radiomeasuring microelectronic transducers of physical quantities. In: 2015 International Siberian Conference on Control and Communications, SIBCON 2015 - Proceedings (article number: 7147167). Omsk: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; 2015. DOI: 10.1109/SIBCON.2015.7147167.
  49. Osadchuk AV, Osadchuk IA, Smolarz A, Kussambayeva N. Pressure transducer of the on the basis of reactive properties of transistor structure with negative resistance. Proceed SPIE - Int Soc Optic Engin. 2015;9816:98161C. DOI: 10.1117/12.2229211.
  50. Alasti S, Fakhravar A. Constitutional comparativism: How a flawed constitution can benefit from the U.S. Constitution. Int Relat Dipl. 2022;10(3):108–23. DOI: 10.17265/2328-2134/2022.03.002.
  51. Timchenko LI, Pavlov SV, Kokryatskaya NI, Poplavska AA, Kobylyanska IM, Burdenyuk II, Wójcik W, Uvaysova S, Orazbekov Z, Kashaganova G. Bio-inspired approach to multistage image processing. Proceed SPIE - Int Soc Optic Engin. 2017;10445:104453M. DOI: 10.1117/12.2280976.
  52. Shahini S, Shahini E, Koni B, Shahini Z, Shahini E, Bërxolli A. Enhanced Tomato Yield via Bumblebee Pollination: A Case Study in Durres, Albania. Int J Des Nat Ecodyn. 2023;18(4):905–14. DOI: 10.18280/ijdne.180417.
  53. Ginters E, Dimitrovs E. Latent Impacts on Digital Technologies Sustainability Assessment and Development. Adv Intell Syst Comp. 2021;1365 AIST:3–13. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-72657-7_1.
  54. Aizstrauta D, Ginters E. Using Market Data of Technologies to Build a Dynamic Integrated Acceptance and Sustainability Assessment Model. Proced Comp Sci. 2016;104:501–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2017.01.165.
  55. Nurov SM. National court system of the Republic of Kazakhstan on its path to reforms. Probl Law Econ. 2016;8(1):85–9.
  56. Kerimkhulle S, Obrosova N, Shananin A, Tokhmetov A. Young Duality for Variational Inequalities and Nonparametric Method of Demand Analysis in Input–Output Models with Inputs Substitution: Application for Kazakhstan Economy. Math. 2023;11(19):4216. DOI: 10.3390/math11194216.
  57. Kerimkhulle S, Saliyeva A, Makhazhanova U, Kerimkulov Z, Adalbek A, Taberkhan R. The input-output analysis for the wholesale and retail trade industry of the Kazakhstan statistics. E3S Web Conf. 2023;376:05023. DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/202337605023.
  58. Leontyev A, Ketners K. The improvement of decision-making in the Latvian tax system: cases of irreducible incompatibility taking into account reliability, equity and efficiency criteria. Intell Econ. 2023;17(2):322–43. DOI: 10.13165/IE-23-17-2-04.
Make a Submission

Indexing

info@physics.uz.ua