This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS  ALMATY 001501 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
STATE FOR EUR/CACEN (JMUDGE) and DRL/PHD (PDAVIS) 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PREL KDEM PHUM PINR KZ POLITICAL
SUBJECT: KAZAKHSTANI PARLIAMENT PASSES REGRESSIVE AMENDMENTS 
TO ELECTIONS LAW 
 
 
¶1.  (SBU) SUMMARY: During a joint meeting of both chambers 
on April 8, the Kazakhstani Parliament passed a set of 
amendments to the Elections Law that raise serious concerns 
about the GOK's political will to support free and fair 
elections.  Although there are some amendments that appear 
to be an attempt to address genuine shortcomings in the 
current legislation, these positive moves are vaguely 
drafted and create as many questions as they answer.  The 
majority of the amendments passed are distinctly at odds 
with Kazakhstan's OSCE commitments.  The most troubling 
changes are severe limitations on rights of assembly and 
free association during the pre-elections period and 
burdensome eligibility restrictions for candidates, members 
of election commissions, and parties joining electoral 
blocs.  These amendments appear to be the executive branch 
response to recent events in the Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan. END 
SUMMARY 
 
THE VOTE 
-------- 
¶2. (SBU) The controversial Parliamentary vote came the day 
after ODIHR released a stinging preliminary assessment of 
the proposed amendments.  OSCE reports that the assessment 
was done at the request of pro-Presidential Asar party. The 
amendments were drafted by the Ministry of Justice, 
presumably at the initiative of the Presidential 
Administration, and presented to Parliament by Minister of 
Justice Onalsyn Zhumabekov.  Given the heavily pro- 
Presidential makeup of the Parliament, the debate was 
remarkably divided, with Asar MPs reportedly sticking 
together to oppose the measure.  Several other 
Parliamentarians, including Senator Zauresh Battalova (DCK) 
and Serik Abdrakhmanov (Otan), Chairman of the Mazhilis' 
International Relations, Security and Defense Committee, 
publicly criticized the amendments as an undemocratic 
infringement of citizens rights.  Abdrakmanov was 
particularly concerned about the restrictions on freedom of 
peaceful assembly.  Because breakout of the vote is not 
publicly available, it is unclear how many Otan members 
voted with Abdrakhmanov and how many voted with Speaker of 
the Mazhilis Ural Mukhamedzhanov, who expressed strong 
support of the amendments. 
 
THE AMENDMENTS: THE SOMEWHAT GOOD... 
--------------------------------------------- ----------- 
¶3. (SBU) Several of the amendments received praise, albeit 
faint, in the ODIHR assessment.  One amendment establishes a 
deadline of two days prior to an election for a candidate to 
withdraw.  Previously, a candidate could withdraw at any 
time.  ODIHR notes that the new deadline allows time for 
notice to be disseminated to prevent wasted votes, although 
the ODIHR assessment recommends that the deadline be 
increased.  ODIHR also praised two amendments to Article 49: 
one provides a five day deadline for resolution of citizens' 
and organizations' appeals regarding election violations, 
the other provides a three day deadline for resolution of 
appeals regarding decisions and actions of election 
commissions and their members. 
 
 
THE PROBABLY BAD ... 
-------------------- 
¶4. (SBU) Election Commissions: ODIHR recommended 
clarification of an amendment to Article 10 that regulates 
changes in the composition of the election commission.  The 
language, ODIHR notes, could be construed as either creating 
an additional authority vested in the next election 
commission in the chain of authority, or as creating an 
additional procedural requirement that changes in election 
commissions be approved by the next level election 
commission.  ODIHR tied this amendment to its previously 
expressed concerns about opposition parties' 
disproportionately low representation on election 
commissions; Post shares those concerns. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Voter lists: ODIHR criticized an amendment to 
Article 24 empowering election commissions to register a 
voter who had moved into a precinct in the interim between 
the date the Central Election Commission (CEC) presents an 
election list and the date of the election.  Post agrees 
with the ODIHR assessment that the amendment, as drafted, 
has insufficient safeguards to ensure that voters cannot 
 
 
register and vote in multiple districts.  However, the 
measure appears to be an attempt to address voter access 
problems noted in ODIHR's September Mazhilis election 
assessment.  Post believes that the additional safeguards 
proposed by ODIHR in its assessment, including recording 
voter's ID cards on voter lists and assigning serial numbers 
to precinct-issued voter certificates, would ensure a 
reasonable amount of voter list accountability. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Mobile Voting: ODIHR views the amendment expanding 
access to mobile voting as ambiguous and contradictory to 
current Kazakhstani legislation.  For example, the amendment 
provides for mobile voting for those living in remote 
regions "where there are no electoral districts."  The 
amendment provides no measure of "remoteness," and ignores 
the fact that every square meter of the country is assigned 
to an electoral district and polling station. 
 
¶7.  (SBU) Financial Disclosure: Another provision in the 
amendments would require candidates and their spouses to 
provide financial disclosure statements.  Given the role of 
GOK financial police inspectors in partisan harassment, Post 
agrees with ODIHR's recommendation that language be added to 
the amendment to make it clear that the disclosure is for 
public information purposes, not disqualification, and 
cannot be used as the basis for any criminal or financial 
investigations. 
 
AND THE DEFINITELY UGLY 
----------------------- 
¶8. (SBU) Restrictions on Freedom of Assembly: The 
restrictions on freedom of assembly and freedom of 
association are the most troubling of these amendments. 
From the day of the election until the official publication 
of election results, rallies, demonstrations and other forms 
of public gatherings, whether organized by candidates or 
parties, are prohibited.  There are separate prohibitions 
against organizing and attending such gatherings.  Post 
agrees with ODIHR's assessment that these provisions are a 
clear violation of the OSCE Copenhagen Document and that 
freedom of peaceful assembly is a fundamental human right 
guaranteed under international treaties signed by the GOK. 
 
¶9. (SBU) Restrictions on Electoral Blocs: An amendment to 
Article 87 that places additional requirements on electoral 
blocs appears aimed at upcoming presidential elections, in 
which several opposition parties have announced plans to 
back a single candidate.  Blocs will now be required to have 
a coordinating council that operates under a formal written 
agreement between the parties; the coordinating council 
would be required to keep written minutes of its decisions. 
The article may have been drafted in response to Ak Zhol 
Chairman Baimenov's public criticism that the Coordinating 
Council of Democratic Forces (including his former Ak Zhol 
co-chairs Abilov, Sarsenbauily and Zhandosov) was holding 
"back room" discussions among senior leaders that had not 
been shared with the rank and file party membership. Post 
shares ODIHR's concern that this legislation, while possibly 
an attempt to do something positive, creates an opening for 
GOK oversight of parties' and blocs' internal policies that 
would be unacceptably intrusive. 
 
COMMENT 
------- 
¶10.  COMMENT: Post-election events in Ukraine were watched 
very closely in Kazakhstan, especially in light of the 
previous year's events in Georgia.  Although there were no 
immediate, overt legislative responses, there was a marked 
increase in harassment of pro-democracy NGOs through 
administrative investigations, raids, and audits(reftel E). 
The events in Kyrgyzstan, however, with media reports of 
violence and looting, have been cited by some pro- 
presidential  politicians as justification for "protective" 
measures restricting political rights, including rights of 
assembly.  The sloppy drafting could be a sign that some or 
all of amendments were drafted hastily, in response to the 
situation in Kyrgyzstan.   Although it is likely that 
President Nazarbayev will sign this legislation, there is 
still a slight chance that he could be persuaded by his 
daughter or others to reject the package.  Post will 
continue to support OSCE/ODIHR's engagement on this issue 
and will look for opportunities to make our concerns known 
 
 
to the GOK. END COMMENT 
 
¶12. (U) Dushanbe minimize considered. 
 
ASQUINO 
 
 
NNNN