Court Allows Retrial of Bakiyev’s Cases with Personal Participation
The Constitutional Court of Kyrgyzstan has recently made a significant decision after reviewing a petition submitted by the lawyer of former president Kurmanbek Bakiyev. The lawyer, Ikramidin Aytkulov, raised concerns about the constitutionality of certain provisions in the Criminal Procedure Code in relation to the case against Bakiyev.
Aytkulov did not challenge the verdicts themselves but rather questioned the fairness of the Criminal Procedure Code norms that were applied during Bakiyev’s criminal proceedings. Specifically, he argued that the inability to review a sentence in absentia with the direct participation of the convicted person goes against the constitutional right to a fair trial and the principle of equality in legal proceedings.
In response, the Constitutional Court of the Kyrgyz Republic stated that criminal prosecution in absentia is permissible in certain cases where the individual intentionally evades justice and efforts to detain them have been unsuccessful. The court emphasized that proceedings in absentia serve an important role in maintaining law and order, protecting the rights of victims, and ensuring the accountability of individuals evading justice.
However, the court also acknowledged that the absence of the accused at trial diminishes the level of competition and equality in legal proceedings. It stressed the importance of allowing individuals convicted in absentia the opportunity to review their case with their direct participation if they choose to return to the country.
Ikramidin Aytkulov clarified that his aim is not to challenge the legality of the sentences but rather to ensure that due process and constitutional rights are upheld. He expressed his readiness to work towards overturning the sentence if the Constitutional Court rules in their favor.
It was also revealed that Kurmanbek Bakiyev himself expressed a desire to return to Kyrgyzstan, indicating a willingness to engage with the legal proceedings in person. The Constitutional Court’s decision highlights the delicate balance between upholding the rule of law and ensuring fair justice in the legal system.
