Biys court in the Kazakh traditional society (based on the pre-revolutionary Russian historiography of the second half of XIX - early XX century)

Purpose. The article reviews the coverage of traditional Kazakh society in the works of prerevolutionary Russian researchers in the second half of XIX - early XX century. Results. The Russian literature and archives funds of Russia are the basic written sources about biy courts of XIX and the beginnings of XX centuries. Separate publications about legal culture of Kazakhs have begun publicated in Russia only in XIX century. The imperial government in Kazakhstan came to gradual understanding about significant and even about special roles of biy justice in the past and partly in XIX century in all systems of the Kazakh society. The authors note that after the political-administrative and legal reforms, enforced by Russian government, the institute of biys did not lose its significance in the Kazakh society and served a regulatory purpose in the social-economic life of nomadic community. The researchers state that political-judicial reforms hardly changed traditional Kazakh society since it deeply relied on its old-line pace. One of the long-living national customs was the court of biys. Many Russian researchers (F. Lazarevskiy, L. F. Kostenko, P. Y. Makovetskiy and others) of common (unwritten) law standards and their use in the biys’ court practice (including lawsuits) tried to interpret the authority and respect for biysjudges among nomads and use this knowledge in order to introduce the biys to public service on behalf of Russia. All of the authors, who were researching the traditional Kazakh society, agree that biys had impact on the resolution of both internal and intercommunal conflicts among Kazakhs. The researchers also noticed that solving cases, the biys were conducting different specific experiments, investigations, which subsequently transformed into specific forensic knowledge as a part of the procedural law. According to the scientists, one of the key elements of Kazakh imprescriptible law was the fact, that biys never commenced the claims and considered only the cases initiated by the complainant side. Moreover, the biys were not responsible for the court attendance of the complainant and defendant sides. The nomadic commune dealt with such issues. Prevailing tribal-patriarchal relations of the traditional society dictated their own laws and rules to be compulsorily obeyed by every member of the commune. Honor and dignity protection of the tribesman was a communal responsibility, since honor and dignity protection of the branch, sub-clans, clans and the tribe itself was maintained at the court. Conclusion. The court of biys, according to the authors, with all its simplicity and prominence helped to preserve stability in the society by finding a compromise and justice through the customary law. Openness, transparency and publicity of the court, respect for the authority of the biys among nomads established resilience, despite the changes in political and legal conditions arising from the occurrence of Kazakh society in the Russian Empire.