Criminal Liability for Intentional Insolvency: Legal Qualification and Detection Indicators (Experience of Uzbekistan and Comparative Perspectives)

Abstract

This article provides a comparative legal analysis of the legal nature, criminal qualification, and detection indicators of intentional insolvency, based on Article 181¹ of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan[1] and Resolution № 224 of the Cabinet of Ministers dated August 14, 2013[2]. The study compares Uzbekistan’s regulatory framework with the legal approaches of Germany, the Russian Federation, and the United States, identifying key challenges encountered in evidentiary and enforcement practice. The primary objective of the article is to evaluate the adequacy of existing normative criteria for establishing indicators of intentional insolvency and to develop scientifically grounded and practice-oriented recommendations for their improvement. The research employs formal legal, doctrinal, comparative legal, and case law analysis methods. The findings demonstrate that, in Uzbekistan, the subjective elements of this offence are insufficiently systematised, mechanisms for economic and forensic examination lack clarity, and the boundaries between intentional bankruptcy and legitimate entrepreneurial risk remain inadequately defined. Drawing on foreign experience, the study substantiates the necessity of introducing additional indicators related to financial performance, artificial asset dissipation, and conflicted-interest transactions. The article concludes by proposing specific measures aimed at enhancing the application of Article 181¹ of the Criminal Code, expanding the criteria for identifying intentional insolvency, and strengthening forensic and economic expert procedures.