Legislative,Regulation,of,Criminal,Liability,for,Environmental,Crimes

Yermek A.Buribayev,Zhanna A.Khamzina,Canzada Suteeva,Nurlan Zh. Apakhayev,Sergazy Zh. Kussainov,Kantkul Zh. Baitekova

1 Department of Law,Abai Kazakh National Pedagogical University,050000,13 Dostyk Ave.,Almaty,Republic of Kazakhstan

2 Department of History,Abai Kazakh National Pedagogical University,050000,13 Dostyk Ave.,Almaty,Republic of Kazakhstan

3 Department of Law,Kainar Academy,050000,7a Satpayeva Str.,Almaty,Republic of Kazakhstan

4 Department of Medical Law,Asfendiyarov Kazakh National Medical University,050000,94 Tole Bi Str.,Almaty,Republic of Kazakhstan

Keywords Environmental offenses Criminal liability Criminal law Economic damage Criminal encroachments Nature conservation

Abstract The only effective mechanism in the fight against global changes and processes is a conscious attitude to the problem of the planet’s population.The purpose of the study was to compare the national and international experience in combating environmental crime and offenses, to identify advantages and disadvantages, and to develop proposals for possible improvement of existing legislation and practical tools in the matter of environmental offenses in the field of nature conservation. As a result,the system of ensuring and compliance with the criminal environmental legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan,its weaknesses and strengths,advantages and disadvantages were considered.

One of the negative factors that lead to pollution, littering, and depletion of the environment in the Republic of Kazakhstan(RK)is environmental crime. The Strategic Plan for the Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan to 2025 (2018) states that the country “still has unresolved issues related to the state of the environment: land degradation, water scarcity, high levels of air pollution in cities, recycling of household wastes”. This points to one thing only,that environmental crime is developed in the country in various manifestations of this term,from the low-profile violations, which are punishable by fines,to the most severe penalties, namely the liability that should be punished according to articles of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan(2020). Environmental crime should be understood as the damage manifested in the commission of encroachment on the legal order established by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, environmental safety of society and causing significant damage to the environment or human health. Environmental crime also means “negative, complex socio-legal phenomenon consisting of a set of environmental crimes that undermine the biological basis of the very existence of humankind”. Environmental offenses(misdemeanours)differ from the administrative offenses(environmental offenses)with a higher degree of public danger, which can be manifested in the repeated violation of the law,the presence of direct intent, the extent and severity of the harm caused to the environment and human health.

Fig.1 Measures to address environmental pollution and combat environmental crime.

For more serious environmental offenses,a more severe penalty,namely criminal liability,should be applied.Criminal liability is applied only by the court for committing a crime and is declared in cases where other,softer measures of punishment are considered insufficient,ineffective,and the correction and re-education of violators of environmental legislation provides for the application of more severe criminal sanctions. The solutions to the above problems, including those identified in the Strategic Plan for the Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan until 2025, may lie in the plane of the measures and systematic processes that are presented in Fig.1.

Problems of legal regulation and qualification of criminal encroachments on the environment, including aspects of criminal legal protection of the environment were covered in the works of K.A.Bakishev(2016),Yu.A.Tymoshenko (2019), A.B.Baumstein (2006), M.I. Verevicheva (2004), M. Addanev (2018), Ya.R.Gusarenko and V.M.Bobrov(2019),A.Anisimov and Y.Kayushnikov(2019),S.Barrett and R.White(2017),T.Spapens(2018),S.F.Fatkulin and V.A.Grishhenko(2018),and other researchers and scientists.

Statistics in the Republic of Kazakhstan indicate that the proactive potential of criminal law measures to counter environmental criminal offenses is underutilized. Existing provisions of the Criminal Code are insufficiently used by law enforcement agencies and courts. Of the environmental offenses registered in 2017(Criminal liability...,2017),only one in four offenses was convicted. Three out of four environmental offenses registered were guilty of avoiding liability. Such enforcement practices reduce the efficiency of the criminal law fight against these offenses. Therefore,the law enforcement practice should be improved in terms of compliance with the principle of inevitability of responsibility and punishment for the commission of environmental criminal offenses.

An increase in the number of environmental criminal offenses annually registered in the Republic of Kazakhstan testifies to the low efficiency of the provisions of the Criminal Code on liability for committing environmental criminal offenses. Therefore, the purpose of the study in this paper is to compare national and foreign experience in combating environmental crime and offenses, to identify advantages and disadvantages, and to develop proposals for possible improvements to existing legislation and practical tools in the matter of criminal offenses in the field of nature conservation. To achieve this purpose,the following tasks must be completed:

-to analyse the provisions of international law and criminal law of foreign states in the matter of responsibility for environmental criminal offenses;

- to consider the system of ensuring and compliance with the criminal environmental legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan;

-to develop proposals for possible improvement of the existing legislative mechanisms and practical means in the matter of combating criminal offenses in the field of nature conservation in the Republic of Kazakhstan based on world experience.

1.1 Literature review

An important stage of the research is the analysis of modern approaches, mechanisms, directions and scientific approaches to solving the issue of reducing the level of environmental crime, including the mechanisms of punishment for criminal offenses,which are offered by world scientists. The problems of nature protection have always attracted the attention of scientists. Clean development mechanism and nature conservation in developing countries are investigated in this paper(Addaney,2018).

The study(South,2015)presents approaches to defining the concept of“green criminology” and examples of environmental crime and damages. Furthermore, response approaches based on the principles of crime prevention and environmental justice are investigated. It considers the limitations of such approaches and gaps between law, legitimacy, and justice. In (Gusarenko and Bobrov, 2019), the author’s team describes the concept of environmental offenses. Environmental offenses are considered as administrative violations and criminal offenses. The study provides theoretical substantiation of concepts, their comparison and practical application according to the norms of law.

The authors of the article(El’cov and Shunjaeva,2018)were tasked with analysing the criminal-law aspects of environmental crimes at large, as well as addressing the problematic aspects of some of them. The authors noted that environmental crime has no stability,its growth and decline are ambiguous,which indicates the need to increase the effectiveness of criminal law to counteract this crime.

Studies on environmental liability in individual BRICS countries, namely Brazil, Russia, India, China,and South Africa were carried out by authors of works (Spadotto et al., 2017), and administrative regulation of nature conservation and the liability established in BRICS countries for offenses in this field were considered in the scientific article of A. Anisimov and Y. Kayushnikov (2019). The work (Barrett and White, 2017) covers the creation of organizations which, through their activities at the level with the law enforcement agencies of a particular country, will contribute to the identification of environmental crimes of various nature, including criminogenic.

The authors of(Faure and Partain, 2019) state that, although environmental law has achieved considerable success over the last 50 years,environmental criminal law is still not widely used in the jurisprudence of countries around the world. It was noted that the possibility of applying sanctions to environmental offenders other than financial punishment is a powerful tool which suggest corresponding criminal environmental legislation.As there is always the argument about deprivation of freedom,the potential risk of imprisonment can become a strong incentive if offenders ignore environmental legislation.

Article (Ipjek-Artamonova, 2016) deals with the criminal legal protection of environmental safety in the context of the analysis of the object of environmental legal violations. Based on the analysis of various doctrinal positions, the author has identified the main features of environmental safety as an object of environmental offenses. The author provides recommendations for improvement of the existing criminal legislation, which is primarily focused on the application of responsibility for environmental violations.

The study (Giuseppe, 2015) states that to study environmental crime from the standpoint of law and economy,it is necessary to determine the type of behaviour protected from an economic standpoint and at the same time to give a legal definition of this type of criminal behaviour. The author of the paper(Spapens,2018)states that criminal investigation of serious and organized transboundary environmental crimes requires effective cooperation with the police. However,achieving a concerted and systematic effort in this process is still a complex procedure. The main explanation,according to the author,is the lack of cross-border legal framework for mutual aid in criminal matters that could be applied on a global scale.

Article (Bakishev, 2016) considers the issues of legal regulation of offenses in the field of ecology in the criminal legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The regulatory peculiarities of the Supreme Court of the Republic’s decision on environmental crimes were analysed. Furthermore, the paper investigates the issue of criminalization of negligent actions in the field of ecology, the establishment of subjective side of offenses in which the form of guilt is not specified, the necessity of precise regulation of assessment features of environmental offenses in the criminal law is substantiated.

The work(Faure, 2017) reveals changes in the legislation of the European Union countries on the issue of environmental protection and improvement of criminal liability for environmental offenses. In many countries,environmental codes are included in the criminal codes,and entire laws have been developed in some countries.Criminal liability is one of the basic measures of responsibility for violation of environmental legislation,which contributes to reducing the level of environmentally hazardous actions by the population of states.

The article (Tacconia et al., 2019) deals with the pressing problem facing Brazil and Indonesia in their development, namely the active illegal deforestation. The team of authors investigates the experience of both countries on the improvement of criminal environmental legislation and justice,since deforestation is not only a problem of the country,but also a global issue in the aspect of climate change in the format of the UN Framework Convention. The study (Stoett, 2015) considered the possibility of international organizations in conjunction with criminal legislation to effectively deal with transnational environmental crimes (TEC).International legal instruments can help stimulate additional measures in this direction. The author concluded that there is a need to step up the desire to fight TEC,as it will contribute to the fight of global community against climate change.

In (Kuznecova, 2018) the author considered the characteristics of social danger of environmental crime,determined specific features that distinguish it from other types of crime. The paper identifies and substantiates features of environmental crime,such as the increased level of social danger, the circle of victims, the deferred nature of the negative consequences,their transboundary nature,the irreversibility of the consequences,inflicting significant damage to the economic interests of the state, which is expressed in the removal of valuable natural resources. Based on the conducted research, the author proposes wide use of the integrated criminological approach to the investigation of the public danger of environmental crime with consideration of its quantitative and qualitative features.

Article(Gaevskaja, 2016)discusses the concept of environmental crime and criminality, means, and issues of counteracting environmental crimes, improving environmental legislation. The study (Shelemet’eva, 2019)analysed the state of the Russian criminal legislation in the aspect of forestry protection as an integral part of the natural environment. Aspects of legislation that need additional attention are identified and world experiences are analysed to improve it. The paper (Rednikova, 2018) explores the issue of organizing counteraction to environmental criminality. It is noted that the improvement of international legislation will allow to create a comprehensive system of measures to counteract organized environmental crime at the level of individual states.

The study(Fatkulin and Grishhenko,2018)investigates the issues of counteracting environmental crime that affects animals and forests. The relevance of the chosen subject is conditioned upon the fact that the number of crimes against the environment does not decrease,their public danger increases,the consequences of their harm become global. This is especially clear in the attacks on wildlife and forestry of the country and, accordingly,has a criminogenic component. The study gives analysis of the status of environmental crime, investigative and judicial practice,international practice of combating environmental crimes of a criminal nature,proposes to improve the criminal legislation and the organization of combating environmental criminality.

Article (Kopylov and Mishlanova, 2014) provides a comparative law analysis of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Codes of several countries of near and far abroad in terms of composition and punishment for environmental crimes. Article (Komissarov and Ensebaeva, 2015) presents an analysis of the legislative practice of combating organized and transnational organized criminal activity as exemplified by the updated version of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The official statistics on the number of registered crimes in the Republic of Kazakhstan,the creation of organized crime units,their management and participation in them were reviewed. Characteristic activities of criminal groups are shown. Examples of judicial practice are given concerning the application of provisions of criminal law of the Republic of Kazakhstan on responsibility for organized and transnational organized criminal activity.

Thus,the analysis of literary sources testifies to a constant scientific search for mechanisms for solving the problem of improvement of environmental legislation,including legislation that would allow to punish violators more strictly, that is, criminal legislation. Scientists of the world are constantly developing mechanisms that could be combined with the legislative and executive authorities to reduce the level of environmental criminality. Therefore, it can be said that the search for optimal solutions to the problem of reducing the level of environmental crime and environmental protection is ongoing, and the Republic of Kazakhstan is no exception in this process.

The methodological basis of scientific research is the system of general and special methods of scientific knowledge. The study is based on the general principles of scientific knowledge – objectivity, comprehensiveness,completeness, system analysis. The use of common scientific methods of formal logic was necessitated by the study of mechanisms of formation of criminal law provisions and identification of factors, the consequences of which may provoke the opening of criminal cases for dangerous actions that will affect the state of the environment.

Using the system-structural method the place of criminal law provisions in the system of legal regulation of environmental protection and nature management was determined, the necessity for elaboration of theoretical grounds for the construction of criminal law provisions was determined,and the place of the theory of construction of criminal law provisions on responsibility for environmental crimes was determined in the general theory of legislative technique.

Upon studying the criminological parameters of environmental crime and identifying factors that influence the criminalization of unlawful encroachments on the environment, special methods were used, which include formal legal,statistical, and specific sociological methods (study of documents, included observation, etc.). In addition,we used the method of transition from abstract to concrete, as well as the method of comparison. The material and original base of the study was formed by the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan,extracts from the criminal codes of the countries of the world, administrative legislation, regulatory acts that govern the nature management and environmental protection, and the Strategic Development Plan of the Republic of Kazakhstan until 2025.

The theoretical basis of the study was formed by the works of Russian and foreign scientists in the field of law,ecology, criminal environmental law and environmental management. The empirical basis of the study consists of data obtained from the analysis and generalization: information contained in the forms of statistical reporting,including the state control authorities on the number of detected offenses. Thus,proceeding from the above methodology, it is possible to create a system module of the research algorithm(Fig. 2).

Fig.2 System model of research algorithm.

We will analyse the experience of implementing the effective environmental legislation of the developed countries,namely Germany,Austria,Spain,Poland,Great Britain,the United States of America,China,and Japan. In the Criminal Code of Germany(2010)responsibility for environmental crimes is provided for in Chapter XXIX,“Environmental Crimes”. This section is one of the last,found after Section XXVIII“Dangerous Crimes”. The paragraphs that should be highlighted are: §324“Water Contamination”, §324A“Soil Contamination”, §325“Air Contamination”,§325a“Generation of Noise,Shocks,and Release of Ionizing Radiation”,§326“Permissible Treatment of Hazardous Waste”, § 327 “Unauthorized Operation of Installations”, § 328 “Unauthorized Management of Radioactive Substances and Other Hazardous Substances and Resources”, § 329 “Danger to Areas in Need of Protection”,§330“Serious Threat by Release of Poisons”. In Germany,intentional encroachment on environmental safety most often results in imprisonment for up to 5 years. Imprisonment of up to 10 years is used in a small number of cases.

According to the Austrian Criminal Code(Serebrennikova and Krylova,2001),section 7“Generally dangerous criminal actions and criminal actions against the environment”covers environmental crimes. Environmental threats can be classified into three groups: the first, general environmental crimes. This relates to the tort described in§180: “Deliberate damage to the environment”. The second group is crimes against water sources,soil, and air as environmental components. They are reflected in § 181 “Negligent environmental damage”, §181a“Noise-related severe damage”,§181b“Deliberate disposal of waste”. The third group includes the crimes described in§182“Creating threats to the fauna and flora”.

In the Criminal Code of Spain(Kuznecova and Reshetnikova, 1998)two structural components of this law at once regulate environmental crimes–Chapter III“On crimes against natural resources and the environment”and Chapter IV“On crimes related to the protection of flora and fauna”. Both specified chapters are located in section XVI “On crimes related to the management of territories and the protection of historical heritage and the environment”,and are placed after Chapter I“Crimes in connection with the management of territories”and Chapter II“On crimes related to the historical heritage”. Liability for crimes against natural resources and the environment is set forth in Chapter III “On crimes against natural resources and the environment” of Section XVI of this Law. Offenses against flora and fauna are described in the regulatory provisions of Chapter IV“On crimes related to the protection of flora and fauna”. In Spain,the following types of criminal penalties are envisaged for committing environmental offenses: fine,arrest,restraint of liberty,imprisonment for a term up to 3 years; deliberate offenses in the event of damage are punishable by imprisonment from 6 months to 4 years,or a fine,at the same time,in cases where the crime was committed by a special subject,an additional penalty is mandatorily applied in the form of deprivation of the right to hold certain posts for up to 5 years.

In the Republic of Poland for the commission of criminal offenses in the field of ecology, the Criminal Code stipulates: for the commission of unintentional offenses by a person –imposition of a fine, restriction of liberty, imprisonment for a term up to 2 years; for an intentional offense by applying a considerable damage –imprisonment from 3 months to 5 years,in some cases from 6 months to 8 years,the maximum sentence reaches up to 12 years of imprisonment; substantial damage–fine,restriction of liberty, imprisonment for a term up to 2 years.

Unlike many European countries, the UK has never clearly suffered from transboundary pollution due to geographical location (Faure,2017). There are three main areas of concern in current UK environmental legislation: 1)Interest in the conservation of the countryside and access to its amenities; 2)Improving urban living conditions by combating air and water pollution; 3) State control over land use. Regarding criminal liability for environmental damage, liability in the form of a fine or imprisonment applied through criminal courts by public agencies prevails here. In English law,some types of noise are prohibited. Violation of the prohibition entails criminal penalties. For example, the use of a loudspeaker in the street is prohibited, except in particular cases provided for by law. Authorities warn the offender about the termination or reduction of noise,and when a person does not respond to the warning, then criminal case is initiated against such person according to the respective statement.

The system of laws of the United States of America is quite specific. There are nationwide laws and state laws. Therefore, in general, we can say that for the crime that was committed for the first time–intentional or negligent violation of rules,standards, entire laws,imprisonment is stipulated for a term up to 1 year and a fine of up to 25,000 USD for each day of violation, and the repeated commission of these crimes can result for a person in imprisonment for up to 2 years and a fine of up to 50,000 USD for each day of violation(Baranivs’kyj,2015).

Criminal justice for the environment in China(Korobeev, 1999) comes down to two key issues: protection against soil erosion and protection against environmental pollution. It is noteworthy that the Chinese legislator imposes severe criminal liability for environmental crimes. Paragraph 6 of the Criminal Code of the People’s Republic of China provides for the unlawful placement,storage or release of contaminants containing sources of infectious diseases,waste,poisonous or other hazardous waste into the atmosphere,soil or water to be punishable by imprisonment for a term of seven to three years;qualified illegal importation of solid waste into the country from abroad for its storage, disposal, and placement entails punishment in the form of imprisonment for a term of 5 to 10 years and a fine;the same actions, which entail particularly grave consequences, shall be punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 10 years and a fine; illegal hunting, killing of the rare and endangered wildlife(Art. 325); import or release of non-native plant or animal species, which entails damage to biological equilibrium(Art. 333).

In Japan, the Criminal Code provides for the liability of legal entities, along with the same liability for individuals, for hazardous activities in relation to the state of the environment. The Law on Punishment for Environmental Pollution Related to Human Health provided an opportunity to punish persons, both individuals and legal entities,who intentionally or negligently created a threat to the life and health of members of Japanese society. The enforcement measure is imprisonment with forced physical labour for up to 5 years,or a fine of up to three million yen(Baranivs’kyj,2015).

After analysing the foreign legislative support of the issue of combating environmental crime,it is necessary to investigate the place of environmental component in the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Fig.3), in order to further compare it with the legislation abroad and to formulate possible recommendations for improving the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Having made a structural comparison of the provisions of the environmental component in the criminal codes of other states and the Republic of Kazakhstan, we can state that at the first glance they are similar and try to cover the maximum number of natural systems and possible types of impacts(atmosphere, water,nature reserve, fauna and flora, waste management, noise, vibration, electromagnetic pollution), and in some articles of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, theoretical liability has a stricter threshold (Article 339,where the maximum sentence may reach 12 years),compared to China(10 years).

However, the analysis of statistical data (Table 1) shows that the potential of environmental legislation in the Republic of Kazakhstan to counter environmental criminal offenses is not fully used. Considering 2017 as an example, we can state that only one out of four offenses was convicted. There is a considerable number of criminal offenses where offenders avoided liability, which only confirms the insufficient use of the legislation and inefficiency of criminal law enforcement against offenders.

Fig.3 Structure of environmental component in the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Analysing these statistics and comparing them with the practice of foreign countries, first and foremost China, Japan, USA, and Germany (where the percentage of penalties for environmental criminal violations is over 90%),we can state that there is a need to improve the enforcement judicial practice in the Republic of Kazakhstan,especially in terms of compliance with the principle of inevitability of responsibility and punishment for committing environmental criminal offenses.

According to the data presented in Table 1 we shall provide a more detailed description of the penalties that could be applied in criminal cases initiated under the respective articles of the Criminal Code (Table 2).Detailing was made for articles according to which 2 or more criminal cases were initiated in 2017. Table 2 presents the sanctions of the lowest and the highest levels of punishment,respectively,for unintentional offenses and offenses resulting in significant losses and fatalities.

The analysis proved that in several paragraphs of the Criminal Code (Art. 325, 332, 335), the maximum punishment in the form of imprisonment for causing less serious consequences exceeds the minimum punishment for more serious consequences. Water contamination, clogging, or depletion that caused or threatened to cause major environmental damage is punished with imprisonment for up to 3 years. However,a similar process that led to the deaths or mass incidence of a large population entails imprisonment for a term of 2 to 7 years. According to such legislative approach,the perpetrator of a less serious offense can be punished more severely than for the qualified type of offense. Such cases are well known in the judicial practice in the republic. In criminal law on environmental issues in Germany,Spain,China,Japan,there is a strict differentiation of the punishmentaccording to the severity of the consequences. Therefore, these features of environmental legislation also need improvement.

Table 1 Information on the number of environmental criminal offenses registered in the Republic of Kazakhstan in 2017 and the further movement of criminal cases by type of such offenses.

Another significant difference is the absence of the liability of legal entities for environmental criminal offenses in the Republic of Kazakhstan. It is obligatory to include it into the criminal legislation of the state. This paragraph is a prerequisite for the country to perform its international obligations concerning the ratification of several international conventions. This is,primarily,the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime,and the UN Convention against Corruption. For comparison, the United States, China, the United Kingdom,Germany,and Japan established the criminal liability of legal entities in their legislation and have successfully used this institution to combat crime,including environmental crime. The elimination of this gap in the legislation will help prosecute the heads of the organization, who avoid the provisions of good faith and integrity for environmental criminal offenses in their activities, and commit them within the framework of their production activities.

In China,the USA,and Spain there is a responsibility for the illegal movement(transportation) of fish and animals,as well as their parts during illegal fishing and hunting. In other words,there are articles on poaching.The Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan does not detail the responsibility for poaching,which is why this is a significant difference between our legislation and its foreign analogues,and this issue also requires study and,accordingly, amendments to the Criminal Code.

The legislation of foreign countries (Germany, Poland, Spain) actively protects the depletion of water resources. The Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan has an article (Article 328) that protects water objects,but they are of a large scale(such as the sea,groundwater shelf,rivers of national importance). Accord-ing to world experience, it would be advisable to extend this list to all existing water bodies and territories of Kazakhstan. There is still a significant amount of waste landfills in Kazakhstan,primarily solid waste,in many regions the population continues to spontaneously transport waste to unauthorized waste landfills. In Germany,Spain, and Japan, these processes are punished much more severely than in the Republic of Kazakhstan, and therefore this issue also needs to be studied and improved within the framework of environmental legislation.

Table 2 Sanctions and liability for violation of the provisions of articles of Chapter 13 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

As a general comparison of the criminal legislation of environmentally conscious countries and our country,which stands in the way of the development of environmental consciousness, it is worth mentioning that the environmental legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan requires improvement,especially in the aspect of sanctions for all environmental offenses,including maximization of publicity of such cases for the population of the state to understand what punishment every person (natural or legal) can receive for insensible treatment of the environment.

To increase the efficiency of criminal liability for environmental crimes, first of all, it is necessary to introduce criminal liability of legal entities that cause enormous damage to the environment and, accordingly,commit criminal offenses, but unfortunately due to the imperfection of the criminal legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan,they cannot be prosecuted.

Secondly,it is necessary to improve some articles of the Criminal Code,to oblige environmental authorities to more rigorously check the activities of individuals and businesses that may have an environmental impact;to actively involve law enforcement agencies in inspections and to make full use of all possible sanctions of environmental criminal law to punish those guilty of environmental pollution. Further development of the study is seen in the study of the codified acts and environmental laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the identification of possible ways to improve them in accordance with the global challenges to the environment.

推荐访问:Criminal Regulation Legislative