PROSPECTS FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT IN THE LEGAL APPLICATION OF CIRCUMSTANCES PRECLUDING PROCEEDINGS

This article examines the prospects for strengthening judicial oversight in the application of grounds excluding criminal proceedings within the criminal justice system of the Republic of Uzbekistan. The study analyzes existing procedural mechanisms governing decisions to refuse the initiation of criminal proceedings or to terminate criminal cases without resolving the issue of guilt, as well as the legal consequences arising from such decisions. Particular attention is paid to the shortcomings of the current model, in which prosecutorial supervision remains the primary form of review over decisions adopted by pre-investigation, inquiry, and preliminary investigation bodies. Through comparative legal analysis of the legislation and practices of Russia, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Finland, and other foreign jurisdictions, the research substantiates the necessity of expanding judicial control over procedural decisions affecting individual rights and freedoms. The article argues that the absence of effective judicial review may lead to repeated cancellation and reinstatement of criminal cases, prolonged procedural uncertainty, and unjustified restrictions on constitutional rights. The author proposes introducing a judicial procedure for reviewing complaints against decisions refusing to initiate criminal proceedings, suspending investigations, or terminating criminal cases, thereby ensuring greater legality, transparency, and protection of human rights during pre-trial proceedings. Furthermore, the study addresses issues related to criminal-legal statistics, archival storage of procedural materials, preventive registration practices, and the participation of defense counsel in proceedings terminated on non-rehabilitative grounds. The findings demonstrate that strengthening judicial oversight would enhance procedural guarantees, prevent arbitrary interference with individual rights, improve public confidence in the justice system, and contribute to the development of a more balanced and rights-oriented criminal procedure framework.