FEATURES OF RECOGNIZING A CITIZEN AS MISSING AND DECLARING A CITIZEN DECEASED UNDER MODERN CONDITIONS

Multidisciplinary and Multidimensional Journal ISSN: 2775-5118 Vol.4 No.12 (2025) I.F. 9.1 362 FEATURES OF RECOGNIZING A CITIZEN AS MISSING AND DECLARING A CITIZEN DECEASED UNDER MODERN CONDITIONS Сaptain Mamadjonov Temurali Barotjon o’g’li, Head of the Criminal Investigation Division of the Chust district Department of Internal Affairs Abstract This article examines the legal features of recognizing a citizen as missing and declaring him or her deceased under modern conditions. Based on the provisions of the Civil Code and the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, the study identifies key theoretical and practical challenges in the application of this legal institution. Particular attention is paid to the effectiveness of search measures, the ambiguity of the concept of an “interested person,” the insufficient protection of creditors’ rights, and the lack of legal clarity in the mechanism of trust management of the missing person’s property. In addition, the article critically analyzes procedural obstacles to the restoration of property rights when a person declared deceased later returns. The study proposes scientifically grounded recommendations aimed at improving civil legislation and enhancing the protection of property rights. Keywords: missing person, declaration of death, interested party, creditors’ rights, trust management, property rights. Аннотация Ушбу мақолада фуқарони бедарак йўқолган деб топиш ва вафот этган деб эълон қилиш институтининг замонавий шароитдаги ҳуқуқий хусусиятлари таҳлил қилинган. Ўзбекистон Республикаси Фуқаролик кодекси ва Фуқаролик процессуал кодекси нормалари асосида мазкур институтни қўллашда юзага келаётган назарий ва амалий муаммолар очиб берилган. Хусусан, қидирув тадбирларининг самарадорлиги, “манфаатдор шахс” тушунчасининг ноаниқлиги, кредиторлар ҳуқуқларининг етарли даражада ҳимоя қилинмаганлиги, шунингдек, бедарак йўқолган шахс мол-мулкини ишончли бошқариш механизмининг ҳуқуқий аниқ эмаслиги масалаларига алоҳида эътибор қаратилган. Шунингдек, вафот этган деб эълон қилинган фуқаро қайтиб келганда унинг мулкий ҳуқуқларини тиклаш жараёнидаги процессуал тўсиқлар танқидий таҳлил қилинган. Мақолада амалдаги қонунчиликни такомиллаштиришга қаратилган илмий асосланган таклиф ва тавсиялар илгари сурилган. Multidisciplinary and Multidimensional Journal ISSN: 2775-5118 Vol.4 No.12 (2025) I.F. 9.1 363 Калит сўзлар: бедарак йўқолган фуқаро, вафот этган деб эълон қилиш, манфаатдор шахс, кредиторлар ҳуқуқлари, ишончли бошқарув, мулкий ҳуқуқлар. Аннотация В статье анализируются правовые особенности института признания гражданина безвестно отсутствующим и объявления его умершим в современных условиях. На основе норм Гражданского кодекса и Гражданского процессуального кодекса Республики Узбекистан раскрываются основные теоретические и практические проблемы применения данного института. Особое внимание уделяется эффективности розыскных мероприятий, неопределённости понятия «заинтересованное лицо», недостаточной защите прав кредиторов, а также отсутствию правовой определённости в механизме доверительного управления имуществом безвестно отсутствующего лица. Кроме того, критически рассматриваются процессуальные сложности восстановления имущественных прав гражданина в случае его возвращения после объявления умершим. По результатам исследования сформулированы научно обоснованные предложения по совершенствованию действующего гражданского законодательства. Ключевые слова: безвестно отсутствующий гражданин, объявление умершим, заинтересованное лицо, права кредиторов, доверительное управление, имущественные права. The institution of recognizing a person as missing and declaring a person deceased constitutes one of the fundamental foundations of civil law. Its primary purpose is to ensure the legal protection of the rights and interests of the missing person, persons dependent on him or her, as well as property-related interested parties (heirs and creditors). These legal relations are regulated by Articles 33–37 of the Civil Code 1 of the Republic of Uzbekistan and Chapter 30 of the Civil Procedure Code 2 . However, in the context of globalization, migration processes, and technological development, the practical application of this institution gives rise to a number of theoretical and practical problems. In particular, the scope of interested parties, the justification of statutory time limits, the effectiveness of trust management of property, 1 CIVIL CODE OF THE REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN dated December 21, 1995 No. 163-I. (As amended by the Laws of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated May 1, 1998 No. 621-I. Bulletin of the Oliy Majlis of the Republic of Uzbekistan, 1996, Supplement to No. 2; 1997, No. 2, Art. 56; 1998, Nos. 5–6, Art. 102, No. 1, Art. 20, No. 9, Art. 229; 2001, Nos. 1–2, Art. 23. https://lex.uz/docs/111181 [23] 2 Civil procedure code of the Republic of Uzbekistan/National Legal Database of Legislation, January 23, 2018, No. 02/18/GPK/0612; October 12, 2018, No. 03/18/496/2043. https://lex.uz/docs/3517334 [49] Multidisciplinary and Multidimensional Journal ISSN: 2775-5118 Vol.4 No.12 (2025) I.F. 9.1 364 and mechanisms for restoring the rights of a person who has returned remain pressing issues of academic debate. Recognizing a citizen as missing is an initial procedural act that serves as a legal basis for declaring that citizen deceased. According to Article 33 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan: “If there is no information about the whereabouts of a citizen at his or her place of residence for a period of one year, the court may, upon the application of interested persons, recognize such citizen as missing.” A one-year period is considered sufficiently short to protect a citizen’s property rights, including the management of property, repayment of debts, and provision of maintenance. However, academic sources indicate that there are cases in which a person deliberately conceals his or her whereabouts or evades the court, which may nevertheless serve as grounds for recognizing the person as missing. In our view, although the primary purpose of recognizing a citizen as missing is to determine his or her legal status, this process should be inextricably linked to effective search measures. Article 306 of the Civil Procedure Code authorizes a judge, when preparing a case for trial, to request “available information” from internal affairs bodies. However, this provision does not establish clear requirements regarding the scope or results of search measures. Therefore, in order to ensure the substantiation of judicial decisions, it is proposed to supplement the first part of Article 306 of the Civil Procedure Code as follows: “The judge shall also require internal affairs bodies to submit a certificate on the results of the search measures conducted in respect of the citizen and on their official suspension.” Such a requirement would allow the court to base its decision not on the interests of the applicant (such as managing the property), but on the actual fact of disappearance, and would prevent the emergence of incorrect legal consequences in cases of deliberate concealment. Under the legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan (Articles 33 and 36 of the Civil Code and Article 305 of the Civil Procedure Code), the right to initiate proceedings for recognizing a citizen as missing or declaring a citizen deceased is granted to “interested persons.” However, the legislation does not establish a specific list or clear criteria for defining the concept of an “interested person.” As also noted in academic sources, due to the absence of a clearly defined list of interested persons in civil legislation, applicants who are not close relatives are required to substantiate their Multidisciplinary and Multidimensional Journal ISSN: 2775-5118 Vol.4 No.12 (2025) I.F. 9.1 365 “interest.” 3 . Such ambiguity complicates the exercise of the right and, in some cases, even obstructs its realization. One of the most significant issues within this legal institution is the protection of the rights of creditors of a missing person. In practice, if a missing person has outstanding debts, their relatives (heirs) may deliberately refrain from filing a petition to declare the person missing or deceased in order to continue exercising ownership and use of the property. This situation seriously infringes upon the legitimate rights of creditors. For this reason, the debate on whether a creditor should have the right to initiate proceedings as a party interested in recovering debts from the property of a missing person remains highly relevant. This would enable them to place the property under reliable management and resolve the debts in a lawful manner. To address the issues outlined above, ensure legal clarity, and strengthen the protection of creditors’ rights, it is proposed to introduce the following amendment to the relevant articles of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Amendment to Articles 33 and 36 of the Civil Code: "Among the interested parties referred to in these articles, the creditors of a person who is petitioned to be declared missing or deceased shall also be included if the person’s financial obligations have been affected." This proposal provides creditors with a procedural basis to lawfully enforce their claims against the property of a missing person, thereby enhancing the fairness and validity of court proceedings. One of the primary legal consequences of declaring a person missing or deceased is the determination of the legal status of their property. Once a person is declared missing, a mechanism of reliable management is applied to preserve and utilize their property (Article 34, Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan). In the current Article 34, the necessity to place property under reliable management is defined by the vague expression "if it is necessary to manage it on a permanent basis." The legal clarity of this phrase is low, and in practice there is no uniform criterion regarding which types of property— such as commercial assets, shares, production equipment, or securities—require “permanent management.” This leads to differing approaches by guardianship and trusteeship authorities. To 3 Гаркуша И.В. Особенности признания гражданина безвестно отсутствующим или объявления гражданина умершим в современных реалиях // Вестник ТИУиЭ. 2024. №2 (42). URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/osobennosti-priznaniya-grazhdanina-bezvestno-otsutstvuyuschim-ili-obyavleniyagrazhdanina-umershim-v-sovremennyh-realiyah (дата обращения: 27.11.2025). [43] Multidisciplinary and Multidimensional Journal ISSN: 2775-5118 Vol.4 No.12 (2025) I.F. 9.1 366 prevent depreciation of the property and ensure its effective preservation, it is necessary to establish a legally defined list of such types of property. After a person is declared deceased, their property may pass to heirs or third parties. If the person returns, the court annuls the previous decision and initiates the process of restoring their property rights (Article 37, Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan). Under the current procedure, the restoration of property rights for a returning person is directly connected with the norms of vindication—lawfully reclaiming property from unlawful possession by another. If the property is not returned, the person is compelled to file a vindication claim in court2. In particular, the rule established in Article 37 of the Civil Code regarding contracts concluded for consideration requires that a returning person prove that the new purchaser acquired the property knowing that the original owner was alive. This burden of proof, in practice, poses a significant procedural obstacle for the returning individual. Such an approach excessively protects the interests of the bona fide purchaser while hindering the effective restoration of the returning person’s rights. In the practice of some countries, the death of a person who perished due to military actions is registered not by a court decision, but based on a certificate issued by the relevant state authority 4 . According to Article 1146 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, the general term for entering into inheritance is six months, counting from the day the inheritance is opened (the date of death or the date the court decision becomes legally binding). If the death is registered based on an administrative document rather than a court decision, ambiguity arises in calculating the term for opening the inheritance. In such cases, heirs may miss the deadline and be forced to apply to the court to restore their inheritance rights, which significantly delays the inheritance process and infringes on the rights of the heirs. There are no strict legal requirements to verify the effectiveness of search activities in the process of declaring a person missing. This can reduce the validity of court decisions and lead to incorrect legal consequences in cases of deliberate concealment of a person. 4 Об утверждении Правил выдачи справки об обстоятельствах исчезновения гражданина и справки об обстоятельствах исчезновения или возможной гибели гражданина, Правил выдачи справки о смерти гражданина, формы справки об обстоятельствах исчезновения гражданина, формы справки об обстоятельствах исчезновения или возможной гибели гражданина, формы справки о смерти гражданина. https://normativ.kontur.ru/document?moduleId=1&documentId=469806 [104] Multidisciplinary and Multidimensional Journal ISSN: 2775-5118 Vol.4 No.12 (2025) I.F. 9.1 367 The broad and vague concept of “interested person” hinders the effective protection of creditors’ lawful property rights. The lack of clarity in property management—specifically, the undefined notion of “property that needs to be managed on a permanent basis”—impedes the effective application of the reliable management mechanism. When a person declared deceased returns, the burden of proof for reclaiming property from a bona fide purchaser complicates the restoration process and contradicts the principle of effective protection of human rights. To address the above issues and enhance the legal effectiveness of this institution, it is appropriate to introduce the following key amendments and additions to the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Amendment to Articles 33 and 36: Include creditors of a person petitioned to be declared missing or deceased within the scope of “interested persons.” Amendment to Article 34: Specify the notion of “property that needs to be managed on a permanent basis” by referring to concrete objects such as commercial assets, securities, and production equipment. Amendment to Article 37: Facilitate the burden of proof regarding the bad faith of the purchaser when a person declared deceased returns, or strengthen mechanisms for the restoration of rights. Implementation of these proposals will strengthen the civil rights protection system, enhance the validity of court proceedings, and comprehensively safeguard the property interests of missing persons.