During the discussion of amendments to the Penal Enforcement, Criminal, and Criminal Procedure Codes, she noted that the innovations could exempt citizens from criminal liability if they voluntarily reported their actions and returned illegally obtained property.
Kozhokulova emphasized that this allows individuals who have used illegal property for many years to avoid punishment simply by returning it. "It turns out that a person who has used illegal property for decades can just return it and bear no responsibility," she said.
The deputy also pointed out that the proposed changes do not include mechanisms for compensation for damages.
Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs Erkebek Ashirkhodzhaev, in response to the criticism, explained that exemption from punishment applies only to cases where the crime does not involve other offenses. "If the property is returned voluntarily, the person will be exempt from liability," he added.
Kozhokulova expressed doubt that the wording "voluntarily returned property" clearly limits the application of this article. "Legalization already implies illegal acquisition. If a person simply returns the property, they will be exempt from criminal liability," she noted.
Ashirkhodzhaev also added that if an official has other criminal offenses, they will be considered separately. "Legalization confirms that the property was obtained illegally, for example, as a result of tax evasion," he explained.
The deputy referred to the position of the General Prosecutor's Office, where Deputy General Prosecutor Umutkan Konkubaeva supported her opinion, noting that the proposed changes contradict the principle of the inevitability of criminal responsibility.
Kozhokulova believes that there are significant contradictions in the bill. "Look, there are so many inconsistencies here that shouldn't exist. Yes, you introduce confiscation of property in some cases, but not in others. Wherever damage has been caused, there should be either confiscation or an alternative," she stated.
The Deputy General Prosecutor emphasized that confiscation of property is an additional measure of punishment that the court may apply at its discretion and pointed out the need for individual consideration of each case.
