Unofficial translation
In accordance with subclause 32) of article 6 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated March 18, 2019 "On the defense industry and the state defense order" I HEREBY ORDER:
1. To approve the attached Rules for examining scientific research within a state defense order.
2. Department of Development of the Defense Industrial Complex of the Ministry of Industry and Infrastructural Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan, in accordance with the procedure, established by the legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan, shall ensure:
1) state registration of this order with the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
2) placement of this order on the Internet-resource of the Ministry of Industry and Infrastructural Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan after its official publication.
3. Control over implementation of this order shall be entrusted to the supervising Vice-Minister of Industry and Infrastructural Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
4. This order shall come into force upon expiry of ten calendar days after the date of its first official publication.
| Minister | B. Atamkulov |
"AGREED"
Ministry of Education and Science
of the Republic of Kazakhstan
"AGREED"
Ministry of Defense
of the Republic of Kazakhstan
"AGREED"
State Security Service
of the Republic of Kazakhstan
"AGREED"
National Security Committee
of the Republic of Kazakhstan
"AGREED"
Ministry of Internal Affairs
of the Republic of Kazakhstan
| Approved by the order of the Minister of Industry and Infrastructural Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated November 22, 2019 No. 876 |
Rules for examining scientific research within a state defense order
Chapter 1. General Provisions
1. These Rules for examining scientific research within a state defense order (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) have been developed in accordance with subclause 32) of article 6 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated March 18, 2019 "On the defense industry and the state defense order" (hereinafter referred to as the Law) and shall determine the procedure for examining scientific research (reports on research performed) within the framework of the state defense order (hereinafter referred to as the examining).
2. In these Rules, the following concepts are used:
1) the authorized body for the defense industry and the state defense order (hereinafter referred to as the authorized body) - the state body responsible for the management and inter-sectoral coordination in the field of the defense industry and the state defense order;
2) the expert opinion– an official conclusion of an expert of an expert council, compiled in accordance with Appendix 1 to these Rules, on the basis of summarizing points for each criterion for evaluating the object of examination;
3) expert councils – collegial bodies created in specialized scientific areas approved by the Defense Scientific and Technical Commission, the position and composition of which is approved in accordance with subclause 34) of Article 6 of the Law;
4) the conclusion of an expert council – a document signed by the chairman of the relevant expert council (hereinafter referred to as the chairman) or by a person replacing him and contains a list of scientific studies (reports on completed scientific research) ranked according to the value of the average score, indicating in it the declared amounts of funding in accordance with Appendix 2 to these Rules;
5) an expert of an expert council (hereinafter referred to as the expert) – an individual presenting an expert opinion, the requirements to whom are established in accordance with subclause 34) of article 6 and clause 6 of article 21 of the Law.
Chapter 2. Procedure for examining the scientific research ( reports on research performed) within the framework of the state defense order
3. Main tasks of examination shall be:
1) objective and comprehensive consideration of scientific research (reports on completed scientific research) in terms of substantive, organizational, material support, comparison of the results obtained with the stated objectives of scientific research (reports on completed scientific research);
2) generalization of expert assessments of the object of examination.
4. The examination shall be carried out by experts determined by the head of the authorized body in order to prepare an analytical assessment of scientific research (reports on completed scientific research) on the principles of independence, objectivity, competence, complexity, reliability, completeness and validity of expert opinions.
5. Within thirty calendar days, experts shall consider scientific research (reports on completed scientific research), prepare the expert opinion and send it to the authorized body.
In expert opinion, a score shall be assigned according to the System of expert assessments of the object of examination in accordance with Appendix 3 to these Rules.
6. The authorized body, within ten calendar days, shall consider the expert opinions signed by experts, displays an average score and forms a draft conclusion of the corresponding expert council.
7. The conclusion of the expert council shall be signed by the chairperson or his/her substitute.
8. In case of disagreement with the draft conclusion of the relevant expert council, the chairperson or his/her substitute shall convene a meeting of the expert council within five calendar days.
To hold a meeting, the presence of at least two-thirds of the composition of the relevant expert council shall be required.
The conclusion of the relevant expert council shall be considered valid if more than half of the votes of those present at the meeting are unanimously decided. The meeting is held in person and (or) through an online conference.
Following the results of the meeting, within five working days, the chairperson or his/her substitute signs the conclusion of the relevant expert council and sends it to the authorized body.
9. The expert shall not conduct an examination in the following cases:
1) there is a personal or financial interest in the result of the approval or rejection of the application;
2) the presence of joint publications with performers of scientific research, including co-authorship over the past three years, direct participation in the preparation of the application, planning joint publications based on the research results and application of these results over the past three years;
3) direct supervision over the performers of scientific research, being subordinate to him or providing him with consulting services over the past three years;
4) being in marriage (matrimony) or close relationship with the performers of scientific research;
5) on scientific research in case of inconsistency of a legal entity carrying out scientific and (or) scientific and technical activities, the requirements for which are determined by the rules for organizing and conducting scientific research within the framework of the state defense order approved by subclause 31) of article 6 of the Law;
6) reports on completed scientific research in case of non-compliance with the requirements and conditions of the agreement concluded between the recipient of the state defense order and the executor of the state defense order for the implementation of scientific research within the framework of the state defense order.
10. During the examination, the identity of the experts, who carry out the examination of scientific research (reports on the performed scientific research), during and after the issuance of the expert opinion, shall not be disclosed to the applicant.
| Appendix 1 to the Rules for examining scientific research within a state defense order |
Expert opinion
___________________________________________________
(name of the object of examination)
Name of assesment criteria* | Score (from 1 to 9) | Justification of the expert's assessment (required) | |
1 | The quality and prospects of using the results | ||
2 | Relevance | ||
3 | Feasibility | ||
4 |
The competence of the applicant (the adequacy of the level of competence of the supervisor and members of the research group for the implementation of the project. | ||
Total score (number of scores by assessment criteria) | |||
Final score threshold (low, medium or high) | |||
Strong points | |||
Weak points | |||
Surname, name, patronymic (if any) of the Expert
__________________________________________________________________________
Signature__________
Date "__" ________ 20 __.
* additional assessment criteria are established at the suggestion of the recipient of the state defense order.
| Appendix 2 to the Rules for examining scientific research within a state defense order |
Conclusion of the expert council
___________________________________________________________
(name of the object of examination)
List of scientific research (reports on completed scientific research) | Agerage score | Amount of financing | |
1 | |||
2 | |||
3 | |||
Surname, name, patronymic (if any) председателя
__________________________________________________________________________
Signature__________
Date "__"________20__.
| Appendix 3 to the Rules for examining scientific research within a state defense order |
System of Expert Assessments of the Object of Examination
Threshold assessment | Score | Mark | Description of assessments with strong and weak points |
High | 9 | Exceptional | Without weak points |
8 | Distinguished | With dismissive weak points | |
7 | Excellent | With some insignificant weak points | |
Average | 6 | Very good | With many insignificant weak points |
5 | Good | With some strong points and moderate weak points | |
4 | Satisfactory | With some strong points, but with one significant weak point | |
Low | 3 | Weak | With insignificant strong points and multiple weak points |
2 | Unsatisfactory | Without strong points and significant weak points | |
1 | Extremely unsatisfactory | Without strong points |