Kazakhstan’s latest constitutional and parliamentary reforms came under scrutiny in Strasbourg this week, as lawmakers, Council of Europe officials and policy analysts examined the country’s evolving institutional model, its cooperation with European bodies, and the practical test that now lies in implementation.
Kazakhstan’s constitutional and parliamentary reforms were the focus of a Strasbourg conference on 22 April, where Kazakh officials, Council of Europe representatives and European parliamentarians discussed what was presented as a new stage in the country’s political transformation.
The side-event, organised by the Consulate General of the Republic of Kazakhstan in Strasbourg, examined the country’s shift away from what speakers described as a super-presidential system towards a model based on a “strong president, influential parliament, and accountable government”. Moderated by Consul General Anel Bakytbekkyzy, the discussion brought together representatives of Kazakhstan’s Senate, the Council of Europe, PACE and European policy institutes.
Opening the event, Yevgeniy Bolgert, member of the Senate of the Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan and Secretary of the Committee on Constitutional Legislation, Judicial System and Law Enforcement Agencies, said the reforms marked “a new phase of political transformation” in Kazakhstan. He said the objective was to move towards a more balanced institutional order, strengthen checks and balances, encourage civic participation and reinforce the rule of law.
In his more detailed remarks, Bolgert said the constitutional reform process had affected “over 84%” of previous constitutional provisions and had drawn on some 12,000 proposals reviewed by a special constitutional commission involving 129 citizens. He highlighted several core changes, including the transformation of the legislature into a unicameral body of 145 members, the creation of the People’s Council of Kazakhstan with the right to initiate legislation, and stronger powers for judicial and human rights institutions. “The defining feature of the new constitution is its focus on the individual, their life and freedoms,” he said.
Birutė Vėsaitė, Vice-Chairperson of PACE’s Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group, said constitutional reform could not be judged simply by institutional design. “Constitutional and parliamentary reform is never just about division on paper,” she said. “For us, it’s always about something very human, so that people feel more free, more respected, and more protected in their daily lives.” She argued that the decisive question was whether ordinary citizens felt any real change in practice. “Does Parliament have a real role? Does women feel better protected? Does the journalists feel freer?” she asked.
Zsolt Németh, Chairperson of the political group European Conservatives, Patriots & Affiliates in PACE, placed Kazakhstan’s reform process in a broader geopolitical context. He described the country as “the most European, non-European neighbour of the European Union”, pointing to its role as a bridge between Europe and Asia, its growing importance in transport and economic links, and what he called its “fantastic level of geopolitical realism”. He said Kazakhstan’s internal transformation should be seen as part of a wider effort to adapt its political system to modern pressures while preserving stability.
Natalie Sabanadze, Head of the Directorate of Political Affairs and External Relations of the Council of Europe, said the design of state institutions would determine not only current decision-making but also whether states were capable of withstanding future pressure, including hybrid threats and institutional capture. Referring to the Kazakh reform process, she said three elements stood out: a nationwide consultation process, a deliberate effort to ensure domestic ownership, and the creation of new channels of representation such as the People’s Council. “The challenge, of course, is to ensure that checks and balances are firmly established and consistently upheld in practice,” she said, adding that “the ultimate test of any reform lies in practice”.
Alberto Turkstra, Project Director of Diplomatic World Institute, focused on the substance of the constitutional amendments. He said the revised text placed greater emphasis on positive rights and expanded the mechanisms through which citizens could defend them, particularly through the Constitutional Court. He also said the parliamentary elections due in August would provide “the first major test for political parties” under the new framework. In his view, one of the most distinctive innovations was the People’s Council, which he described as “a bold institutional experiment in pluralist governance”.
Other contributions widened the discussion. Emmanuel Dupuy, President of the Prospective and Security Institute in Europe, linked constitutional reform to economic development, decentralisation and institutional adaptation. Islam Dekushev, President of the Free Integration Foundation, examined the role of digital communications during the March referendum campaign and said social media had served “both as a channel of mobilization and as a channel of explanation”.
The overall message from the Strasbourg discussion was that Kazakhstan’s constitutional changes will be judged less by their wording than by their implementation. That view, expressed in different forms by several speakers, ran through the event: reform may begin with constitutional text, but its political meaning will depend on how institutions function once the new framework enters into force.
