Criminal Procedure and Civil Procedure Law Applicable to Forensic Examinations
Criminal and Civil Procedure
This domain tests procedural differences: who appoints, who may ask questions, what warnings apply, and how the conclusion is evaluated. Criminal examinations follow the CPC RK 2014; civil examinations follow the Civil Procedure Code RK 2015; administrative proceedings have their own code. The same expert may work in both, but the procedural safeguards differ.
Core rules
- Criminal: the investigator issues a postanovlenie; the expert is warned of criminal liability for a knowingly false conclusion; the defence may petition for questions and for an additional or repeat examination; the expert may attend investigative actions.
- Civil: the court issues a ruling; parties propose questions, may challenge the expert, and may ask for repeat; the court defines the final question list; costs are allocated procedurally.
- In both: the conclusion is not binding; the court evaluates it by internal conviction, checking competence, method, and consistency.
- A specialist (spetsialist) gives consultation or assistance, not a formal conclusion.
Worked example
In a civil construction dispute, the defendant seeks a repeat examination after an unfavourable report. The court refuses because the report is reasoned, the expert was qualified, and no procedural defect is shown. Mere disagreement is not a ground. The defendant may still cross-examine and submit a specialist opinion, but that does not automatically replace the expert conclusion.
Traps
- Assuming a civil expert is warned identically to a criminal expert.
- Missing the deadline or procedure to challenge.
- Treating a specialist opinion as a conclusion.
- Forgetting that the court, not the party, appoints the examination.