CRIMINAL JURIDICAL FEATURE OF LAW BREAKING AGAINST THE INDIVIDUAL
can. of j.sc. U.Ê. Sartbayeva, master Ì.Îshtanova
Human is basis of the society. Without human, when his rights and freedom are neglected, society doesn’t exist or isn’t called human society. As human lives in the society and is called “human” he must follow the rules of society and is worth to be called “human”.
The rights and freedom of the human as a citizen are protected by the state. The 2nd part of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan is directly devoted to this matter. The 1st chapter of the Constitution declares “the most valuable treasure is a citizen and the life, rights and freedom of the citizen”
Therefore all legal organizations of the Kazakhstan Republic, including criminal law are responsible to protect the human rights. The 2nd chapter of the Criminal Code of the Kazakhstan Republic shows as the main duty to protect the human and citizen’s rights, freedom and legal interests. All laws of the Kazakhstan Reublic always dominate to protect the individual, human rights and freedom. So the first chapter of the Special part of the Criminal code of the Kazakhstan Republic is devoted to the criminal offences against the individual. The group object of all crimes of this chapter is social relations maintaining the right activities of the indiviual. According to peculiarities of the direct objects crimes against the individual are divided in the following: criminal offences against the life: murder, murder of the newborn by the mother, murder in the affect condition; murder in the excess of the necessary protection; murder during the excess activities devoted to catch the criminal; reckless homicide; incitement to suicide.
Crimes against health: deliberate heavy harm to health, deliberate harm to health of moderate severity; deliberate harm to health of light severity; beating; violence; harm to health in the conditions of affect; heavy harm to health in excess of self-protection; heavy harm to health while arresting the criminal; harm to health by negligence; frightening; forcing or illegal act to take the human’s parts of body and tissues; venereal infection; AIDS infection; and other dangers to health;
Crimes against freedom of the individual: kidnapping, unlawful deprivation of liberty, unlawful placing into psychiatrical clinics, human trade, human cloning;
Criminal offences against personal dignity and feeling: slander, humiliation;
Sexual crimes: rape, violance activities of sexual character, sexual relations with the person under 16; other activities of sexual character; forcing to sexual activities, sexual activities of man with man, sexual activities of woman with woman, or other activities of sexual character, pushing minorities to commit immoral activities. 
As human is the basis of the society and future, the human health is put in the first place. Human is not an ideal animal in its development, there are mistakes in his doings.
Accordding to E.O.Alaukhanov’s opinion punishing and supporting affect to person’s behavior. Measures of punishing and supporting must be applied in the right way. The wrong way of their use, even they are directed of good will, they cause much harm to the society than benefit. 
There are some criminal ways among them too, for example: paying for muder.
Lots of people including teachers state that it is necessary to exclude the punishment in upbringing. These arguments have not appeared currently, they have been existing for a long time. Punishment measures are applied for not doing some activities (social behavior, rules of safety, etc.). People avoiding the punishment have to follow some requrements.
Punishing and encouraging are tightly connected with each other. Punishment doesn’t give right results when encouraging is used. It doesn’t mean one dominates in punishing and encouraging. Îëàðäû êåøåíä³ òүðäå қîëäàíó êåðåê. It is necessary to use them complexly.. They both must be used Îë åêåó³í îðûíäû æәíå á³ë³êò³ қîëäàíó êåðåê. At present the system of applying punishment has been developed, but supporting system hasn’t developed yet. Supporting measures need to systematyze. It is normal and therefore it must be first complex in the hierarchical level. Its system must be more complicated than punishment system. Second, supporting system must be involved in all public relations. It must encorage a person forward. Third, this system needs to be developed constantly. Fourth, while using the supporting measures it is necessary to pay attention on the induviduality of the person, his interests, tastes, age peculiarities, and etc. Fifth, supporting procedures must be devoloped thoroughly.
A person must feel his well doing helps him, but his wrong doing makes him bad.
As it mentioned above, supporting measures are one of the preliminary crime preventing activities.
It is important to determine first what we should understand in preventing crimes. There aren’t any opinions on the agreement given by scientists. Some authors explain it as measures of preventing crimes and eliminating their reasons causing crimes, others “putting objective and subjective reasons leading to commit crimes”. The statement of first authors doesn’t reveal the meaning of preventing measures. And second authors consider the system of preventing measures in general. However it is necessary to eliminate the subjective opinions, but they can’t be put against objective conditions. Because the subjective reasons don’t apear without objective reasons.
According to peculiarities of correctional facilities before the investigator finishes the investigating, there appears a need to start preventing measures. Even in some cases it is exercised during the investigation activities. This necessity appears for example: in breaking safety rules, orders of security and etc. They are defined in searching the crime place, the investigator gives instructions to fix gaffes.
When searching the convict money, weapons and other things prohibited in correctional facilities can be found. According to their necessity to the case they can be registered as evidences or the authorities of the correctional facilities can elliminate them or give to the state or presrve. In the correctional establishments confiscation of the prohibited things is one of the forms of punishment in preventing crimes against the individual.
After finishing the investigation there will be convenient conditions to prevent offences against individuals in the correctional establishments. By that time all circumstances will have been defined completely and comprehensively. In this case the investigator has several ways of preliminary preventing measures. The most important of them is suggestions. In correcting establishments everything is considered and agreed beforehand. Those not less have some incompetences. These incompetences allow to commit crimes.
In the investigator’s recommendation these incompetences must be indicated, concrete measures to eliminate them. Taking into account the special legal conditions of the convicted and the danger of them these suggestions must be execised immediately. In the opposite case individuals are to be responsible for this. Removing the above mentioned incompetences is one of scenes of prelemenary preventing measures of the crime.
The investigator’s legal upringing in the correctional establishments is particular important in preventing the crimes against the individual and other crimes. Legal education can be exrcised in the following ways: local TV, delivering lectures, talking in groups or alone, complex measures held by the workers of the correcting establishments (showing films, quiz show).
Thus the investigator’s measures in the correcting establishments preleminary preventing offences consist of clerical and non clerical measures, in the frame of its business it is combined with other state authorities, preventing the relapses, destroying the effective cases to commit crimes and activities directed to raise the citizens’ legal culture and the important duty of the investigator.
We don’t make mistakes if we consider very significant that offenders who commited crimes angainst individuals should be under the control of administrative authorities.
Administrative control is different from other preliminary measures; it is state forced measure. It is exercised during the definite term. The main goal of this measure is to prevent the convicted from commiting the crime again. Administrative controlling is a forced measure and it is also an educational activity. During the administrative control forcing and upbringing are exercised through inter harmony.
Upbringing and forcing measures are in some cases related to each other. Their combination are in the base of their applying: the opportunity of the convicted to commit a new crime it is actual basis, and legal basis is resolution of administrative supression of the police. The main objective of the upbringing and forcing measures is the same, to prevent the controlled ones from commiting new crimes.
Upbringing and forcing measures are linked in definite relations. Their cooperation is in their use mainly: the opportunity of the convicted doing another crime, it is a factual argument, and the legal basis is the resolution on administrative controlling of police organizations. Upbringing and forcing measures have been aimed not to allow the controlled ones to commit another crimes. The term of their use is the same.
The difference of upbringing and forcing, forcing limits some rights of the individual, and upbringing does not concern any interests. Law enforcement bodies can just use measures stipulated by law as forcing measures. But upbringing activities are not limited.
Upbringing process is based on the rules of pedagogy.
It is not obligatory to apply forcing measures to all controlled ones. But administrative procedures must be followed by everyone. In some extent law enforcement bodies can strengthen the forcing measures or on the contrary make them lighter. For example, if the controlled one behaves wrong he will be applied all forcing measures, otherwise all forcing measures are not used. 
One of the actual preventive measures of criminal offense against individual is preventing the relapse, and it has some reasons. First, relapse crime is more often. Second, it is proved theoreticaly and practicaly that the former convicted can change the criminal atmosphere. Third, relapse has not been researched thoroughly from the social, psychological and statistic nature.
Preventive measures of relapse criminal offense against individual give psychological effect. And it is difficult to affect psychologicaly to those who were trialed and know what the prison looks like and make them not to commit other crimes. Those who commited a crime and jailed have definite experiences. And they think when they make other offences they can’t be caught.
Another way of preventive measures of relapse crimes is the business of law enforcement bodies. When they do the business properly lots of crimes are prevented. However experienced criminals are not easyly caught in the eyes of law enforcement bodies.
Above mentioned matters of preventive measures of relapse criminal offense against individual have not been researched and developed.
To my mind such psychology does not have affect, we should consider the conditions that pull them to commit another crime. Thus it is more important to think about their sattisfation with their material conditions. For example, a convicted man who commited ordered murder , could return to his business to feed his family and would try not to make his last mistakes. Second, the society must not turn back from these persons, otherwise all forcing measures will be applied. Third, the convicted must be adopted to work during their cnviction. 
The proverb “labour makes human a human” is the right example to it.
Crimes against the individuals one of the common subjects for the society and for philosophy, religion, psychology, ethics, and juridical studies.
In our state offenses against individual can be viewed in all parts of our life, in the family, work and policy.
There have been lots of crimes such as contract killing, beating, violance. These frequent offences are the result of decreasing of spiritual culture and increasing of rude behavior.
We aware that all spheres of our life don’t work properly and there are unforgivable mistakes in the ethical education. In some cases we notice there is absense of such kind of education.
During the soviet times everybody knew that his neighbours never became richer than they. Now there are a lot of rich people, there are people who became rich suddenly. Our state might be not ready for such phenomenon.
Our people understood there had been lots of interests. Beautiful shops in the streets encourage people to commit “exploits” in order to reach material benefits and please their passion.
The investigator has two objectives in his investigating business: first, preliminary investigations, second, preventive measures. The immediate excite investigation and completely reveal the crime in time stop the crime and contribute preventing relapse. The aim of explaining to others who commits a crime will be punished, is exercised.
In preventive measures it is also important the events held by other people. The aims of these events are different. For example, the investigator while questioning the accused finds out that the other one is intending to commit a crime. In such case the investigator has the right just to explain the law and what his wrong intentions may result in.
Therefore, we should change the conciousness of the society, including the lawyers. With the criminals there are some people who assist them to avoid the punishment, it means some lawyers contribute the increase of the crimes.
Our aim was to realize the nature and reasons of the crimes commited against the individual and prevent them. It is not only our social but also civil duty.
The list of literature:
1. A.N. Agybayev, Explanation to Criminal Code of the Republic Kazakhstan, General and Special parts, Almaty: Zheti Zhargy, 2015, 768 p.
2. E.O. Alaukhanov, Criminology, Almaty: Zheti Zhargy, 2005.
3. E.I.Kayrzhanov, Criminal law, general part, Almaty, Zheti Zhargy, 1999.
4. “About the Code of Honour of the State Clergy of the Republic Kazakhstan” of President of the Republic Kazakhstan, 2005, May 3, Order ¹1567// Soveregn Kazakhstan, 2005, May 5, ¹ 94.
5. E.R. Rossinskaya, T.V. Averyakova, Encyclopedia of court expertise, Ì,1999.