|
INFORMATION AND RESEARCH ON CONTEMPORARY KAZAKHSTAN| Home
About Us News Subscribe Publications News Archive Contact Us |
| Media Centre London, November 10th 2005 PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Use KAZAHSTAN’S PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: Monitoring role of OSCE criticised by independent experts The Caspian Information Centre, the London-based independent research organisation, has published a report, “Inquiry into the Preparations For a Free and Fair Presidential Election in the Republic of Kazakhstan December 4th 2005”, describing Kazakhstan’s legal and administrative framework ahead of the forthcoming Presidential election. The authors of the report, who will be available to answer media questions at a press conference at the Travellers Club (Castlereagh Room) at 12 pm on Thursday 10th November, are CIC General Director Gerald Frost, Professor Kenneth Minogue of the London School of Economics, Professor Dennis O’Keeffe of the University of Buckigham, and Mr David Ruffley, MP, Vice-Chair of the All-Party Group on Kazakhstan at Westminster. The following is the unabridged Executive Summary of the Report, the full text of which may be downloaded at the link above or by visiting CIC’s website at www.caspianinfo.org. (The full Russian language text will be available on the website from Monday 14th November.) Executive Summary 1. The task of observing elections is more complex and difficult than is recognised, and no organisation involved in this process has a monopoly on truth. Broadly speaking, there are two possible approaches. The first, which we may call "Abstract Model Observation", applies a universal standard without regard to the historical context. The second, "Developmental Observation", makes an assessment which allows for historical factors, in order to permit a judgement about whether the conduct of an election represents a positive step forward in terms of real political development. 2. In the production of this report following the Caspian Information Centre's fact-finding visit to Kazakhstan on 6th – 11th October (see p. 26), we have followed the second of these two approaches, although we recognise that both have their weaknesses. 3. The purpose of our visit was to inquire about the preparations that have been made to hold the Presidential Election on December 4th 2005. Our starting point is to note that democratic reform in Kazakhstan has been less rapid than economic change. Many political changes which followed Independence in 1991 have been of a pragmatic nature. The choice on offer from the two leading candidates in the Presidential election on December 4th 2005 is between the policy of the incumbent President, Nursultan Nazarbayev, who pledges to match economic decentralisation with a programme of gradual political reform, and that of his principle challenger, Zarmakhan Tuyakbai, leader of the "For Just Kazakhstan" bloc of parties, who promises to replace what he describes as a corrupt and authoritarian regime with an administration committed to democratic change, openness and the wider dispersal of wealth. 4. We accept the judgement of Professor Christopher Greenwood, QC, that if applied faithfully and properly, the Elections Law of 2004 is capable of producing elections which comply with the Copenhagen Principles of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation, 1990. A number of subsequent changes to the Law represent significant further improvements. In the report that follows, we have sought to address the question of whether the law will be faithfully and properly applied in the Presidential Election which will take place on December 4th 2005. 5. The contents and tone of the President's Decree of September 9th 2005 regarding the electoral rights of citizens (Appendix I) and the “Appeal to All Candidates” by the Central Election Commission (CEC) of October 11th (Appendix II) suggest that the authorities are serious about ensuring that the election complies fully and faithfully with the Elections Law. 6. We do not accept that an amendment to the Elections Law which prevents public demonstrations during the strictly limited period between the end of campaigning and the announcement of the result necessarily represents a denial of human rights or a step backwards in the development of Kazakhstan's democratic institutions, as the OSCE/ODIHR asserts in its Needs Assessment Mission (NAM) Report of September 28th 2005. Given the recent upheavals in former CIS states, the reasons for the ban are not difficult to discern. 7. We do, however, have questions about the prominence given by OSCE/ODIHR to its criticism of this amendment in its NAM Report, since it could encourage unlawful actions which could set back Kazakhstan's political development. In countries in which democratic institutions are new and possibly fragile, we believe that observers should take great care in ensuring that their own activities do not influence the conduct of elections. 8. The practical arrangements being made by the Central Election Commission of Kazakhstan prior to December 4th are encouraging. They display a greater degree of professionalism and openness than was the case during the elections to the Majilis on 19th September 2004, which in turn represented an improvement on earlier elections. 9. The large number of investigations into alleged violations of the Elections Law following the September 19th 2004 elections (857) and the 83 prosecutions that followed (see p. 23) suggest that the authorities are, again, making serious attempts to raise standards. 10. We understand the suspicions of Opposition candidates in relation to the limited use of electronic voting. However, we believe that these concerns may be allayed by the presence at the election of technically competent independent observers from the OSCE and by the CEC fully advertising the fact that voters are able to cast their votes in the traditional way, if they choose to do so. 11. Assessments about how far Kazakhstan has progressed in achieving its stated aim of transforming itself from a totalitarian republic of the former Soviet Union into a modern market-based democracy are bound to involve many complex judgements on a wide range of issues. What is clearly apparent is that remarkable and rapid changes have occurred in the economic sphere as the result of the successful exploitation of the country's energy resources. 12. We do not accept the judgement of some opposition candidates and journalists that only a relatively few people have benefited from the economic growth that has followed. This is contradicted not only by the obvious vibrancy of Kazakhstan's major cities but also by data from the IMF, the World Bank and other respected international organisations which shows that the number living below the poverty line has fallen considerably and the wider distribution of wealth has been more rapid than had previously been anticipated. For this reason, and others, we do not believe – as some have alleged - that Kazakhstan is on the verge of a 'coloured revolution.' 13. Opposition parties freely express their criticism of the government but have made little progress in establishing distinctive profiles in ideological or policy terms. It is striking that many of the government's fiercest critics, including prominent candidates in this election, are disaffected former members of the government. 14. The media is quite obviously freer now than prior to independence. The fact that 80 per cent of the media is privately owned may exaggerate the extent of media freedoms, but the print media clearly includes implacable opponents of the President and his government. During our visit we met journalists who complained that they were subject to intimidation and harassment; these charges are denied by ministers, some of whom have claimed that journalists with links to opposition parties regularly fabricate or exaggerate differences with the authorities in order to discredit the government. 15. What independent evidence there is does not seem to support claims that, having been relaxed in the wake of Independence, media freedoms are now being eroded; the facts would seem to suggest a steady if gradual growth of media freedoms. However, the issue of media ownership remains a vexed issue in Kazakhstan as in many other countries, including those with much longer traditions of democratic rule. 16. The absence of a television company sympathetic to the Kazakhstan opposition and the fact the President's daughter Dariga Nazarbayeva has substantial media holdings, including controlling interests in more than one television company, suggests that there may be a case for legislation to deal with this situation – as has been suggested by a recent delegation of European parliamentarians. 17. While the Government and the Central Election Commission may well live up to their promise to ensure equal air time and column inches for all candidates during the period of the election campaign (this legal requirement was respected during the September 19th 2004 parliamentary elections), steps to ensure balanced television coverage at other times also would be extremely welcome. 18. Uniquely for a Central Asian state, Kazakhstan has made substantial progress toward building democracy while maintaining stability and promoting ethnic and religious tolerance, and in some areas such progress has been remarkable. We would do well to remember, however, that key players in the political process are the products of a wholly different tradition and are necessarily inexperienced in the ways of democracy, while the institutions they have created are far from fully developed. 19. We believe that the forthcoming Presidential election provides the opportunity for all candidates, political parties and election officials to strengthen the country's democratic base and develop a brand of popular democracy that reflects Kazakhstan's unique history, culture and political tradition. The legal and administrative framework that has been put in place is, in our view, adequate for this purpose and should enable them to rise to this challenge. - ENDS - For further information please call contact: |