Whether to abolish the military court has become a focus of debate in Kyrgyzstan. Consider
this report:
Chairman of the Military Court opposed liquidation of the department. Nurlan Ashybekov said today at a meeting of the Parliamentary Committee on International Affairs, Defense and Security.
According to him, exactly the Military Court considers high-profile criminal cases, including the events of April 7, 2010. It considers civil cases involving military personnel. Besides, the Military Court has its own specifics and work rules. He noted that it is easy to destroy the system, but it is extremely difficult to recreate it.
He was supported by the deputy Bakhadyr Suleymanov. He believes that first it is necessary to reform the civil procedure, and then to take up for military courts.
"We have not put things in order in the civil proceedings, and already deal with the military courts. Did they drown in corruption? Would not it end in . . . chaos?" the MP said.
One of the initiators of the bill Maksat Sabirov noted that there is nothing terrible in the liquidation of the Military Court. Civil judges also can deal with military affairs. In addition, it is not necessary to focus on the experience of neighboring Russia and Kazakhstan, where there are military courts and disciplinary battalions. The Kyrgyz Republic has no disciplinary battalions, so there is no need for the Military Court, the MP believes.
Bakhadyr Suleymanov said that Russia and Kazakhstan do not have, for example, the same financial police, and proposed to eliminate this structure in Kyrgyzstan. He concluded that it was necessary to approach very closely to the issue of military operation not to get additional problems with the country's security.
Query: why is a military court needed to try civil cases?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are subject to moderation and must be submitted under your real name. Anonymous comments will not be posted (even though the form seems to permit them).