Bid to Dissolve Parliament

A number of Kyrgyz legislators are pressing for the dissolution of parliament, but NBCentraAsia analysts are certain the initiative will be rejected by the majority.



On September 12, member of parliament Dooronbek Sadyraliev announced that he wanted to kick-start the process of dissolving parliament, saying there was an “unhealthy social and political situation in the republic as well as within parliament”.



He complained that his fellow-deputies were failing in their duties, and that they did not turn up for sessions and frequently voted in place of absent colleagues. They were, he said, pursuing private rather than public interests.



Parliament can be dissolved by the president following a referendum in favour of such a move, if parliament rejects the president’s nomination for prime minister three times, or if the country’s Constitutional Court rejects an impeachment attempt by the legislators.



Dissolution also becomes possible if insuperable differences arise between parliament and another branch of authority (the executirve of the judiciary).



Finally, parliament can vote to dissolve itself if no fewer than two thirds of all members vote in favour.



In the two years that the present legislature has worked, demands for it to close down and make way for fresh elections have been heard time and again.



The first time was immediately after the general election of early 2005, which were slated by international observers and which acted as catalyst for the mass protests which ultimately brought down President Askar Akaev’s administration in March that year.



The issue came back onto the agenda after a new constitution was passed in November 2006, following mass demonstrations. The document envisages a new-shape legislature with 90 members instead of the present 75, half of them to be elected by proportional representation rather than the first-past-the-post system now in use.



Importantly, the constitution also gives the majority party more of a say in forming the government.



Those who argued for dissolution said the current structure clearly did not match what was set out in the constitution and therefore represented an impediment to progress.



Deputy Omurbek Tekebaev thinks many voters agree with Sadyrbaev because they regard the current parliament as past its sell-by date.



But the problem is that an early election might be neither transparent nor trouble-free, he said.



“Many parliamentarians and members of the public are dissatisfied with the performance of this legislature,” said Tekebaev. “If society calmed down and authorities were able to conduct fair, legitimate elections, then the initiative could justifiably go through.”



However, Tamerlan Ibraimov, the director of the Centre for Political and Legal Studies, believes there are no real grounds for dissolving this parliament. The demands are more “a kind of political game than a real intention”, he said.



“However, if parliament does dissolve itself, then as likely as not it will have a negative effect on the social and political situation,” he added.



(NBCentralAsia draws comment and analysis from a broad range of political observers across the region)