The Agency for Strategic Reforms under the President of Uzbekistan proposed to review the current administrative fines to ensure they are proportionate to committed offense.

The Agency's analysis found a lack of mechanisms for determining the size of administrative fines, which is why fines are disproportionate to offenses. Thereby, the initiative bills by stakeholder government agencies to revise the size of fines has also become more frequent.

Based on the findings of the analysis, the Agency proposed to consider increasing fines for violations directly related to the life and health of citizens, and to conduct a comprehensive anti-corruption examination of the provisions of the Code of Administrative Liability.

The amount of the fine for tinting windows without licens now stands at 8.5 million soums (repeated punishment within a year is 13.6 million soums), the Agency gives an example. This amount was established when the cost of the permit was 11-13 million soums. Today, 2.7 million soums are paid for window tinting, but the amount of the fine has remained unchanged.

For reference: in Kazakhstan, the fine for tinting without permission is 468 thousand soums, in Russia - 60 thousand soums, in Belarus - 138 thousand soums.

Fines for violations related to the safety of the health and lives of the oublic should be of higher priority, the Agency for Strategic Reforms underscored. In particular, this applies to violations of traffic rules.

Fines directly related to the life and health of pedestrians should be reviewed and harshened, the Agency added. Now the fine for driving vehicles on sidewalks, as well as violating the rules for passing pedestrian crossings, is 170 thousand soums, crossing the roadway in an unspecified place - 113 thousand soums, etc.

For reference: the fine for not allowing a pedestrian to pass in Germany is 1.1 million soums, in the UK - 1.6 million soums, in France - 1.85 million soums, in the UAE - 1.7 million soums.

In a number of countries, in order to prevent offenses (for example, in Belarus, Latvia, Kazakhstan, Russia, Germany, Italy), the institution of “warning” has been adopted as a separate type of administrative punishment. A warning is used for violations that do not cause harm to the health, life and property of individuals and legal entities, or the environment.

The Code of Administrative Liability (Article 23) provides for 7 types of administrative penalties for administrative offenses, while a “warning” is not applied as a type of administrative penalty. The Agency believes that the “warning” should be adopted as a separate type of administrative penalty.