Arming Parliament
Arming Parliament
NBCentralAsia commentators have criticised a decision to allow members of parliament to carry weapons, saying it will do nothing to resolve security problems facing Kyrgyzstan, and is unfair since other citizens are not allowed to bear arms.
On December 14, parliament overrode a presidential veto on a proposed change to the law allowing members of parliament to be issued with a firearm. The right to issue side-arms to civilians used to rest with the Kyrgyz president and prime minister alone, but the change extends that authority to the speaker of parliament.
Member of parliamentarian Sultan Urmanaev welcomed the move, saying carrying a weapon is more effective than having a bodyguard. He recalled that three members of parliament who were killed in 2005 – Jyrgalbek Surabaldiev, Bayaman Erkinbaev and Tynychbek Akmatbaev – all had bodyguards.
“Possessing a weapon is principally for psychological reasons – it will allow us to go about our business with peace of mind,” said Urmanaev suggests. “We have a right to security. Members of parliament have a right to defend themselves.”
Most political observers interviewed by NBCentralAsia are against the change to the law. Edil Baisalov, leader of the Coalition for Democracy and Civil Society, does not believe issuing deputies with firearms will increase their personal safety or improve public security.
“It’s the law-enforcement agencies that should be performing better,” he said. “Members of parliament care only about their own security. If the state is unable to provide security, I and every other citizen should be issued with a weapon. I am totally against this law.”
Deputy Interior Minister Temirkan Subanov agreed with this view, saying the new rules are likely to lead to more widespread gun ownership and looser controls over the circulation of such weapons. He wants instead to see more government expenditure being earmarked so that the security services can provide adequate protection for state officials and politicians.
Political scientist Tamerlan Ibraimov accepts that high crime rates in Kyrgyzstan have forced lawmakers to take extraordinary measures to protect themselves. At the same time, he says, singling them out as a uniquely privileged group is unethical and contrary to social justice.
“The constitution and legislation do allow certain privileges for particular groups, for example immunity for the president and members of parliament,” he said. “But ethnic questions arise here - why are some people allowed to use weapons to defend themselves and others are not?”
(News Briefing Central Asia draws comment and analysis from a broad range of political observers across the region.)
On December 14, parliament overrode a presidential veto on a proposed change to the law allowing members of parliament to be issued with a firearm. The right to issue side-arms to civilians used to rest with the Kyrgyz president and prime minister alone, but the change extends that authority to the speaker of parliament.
Member of parliamentarian Sultan Urmanaev welcomed the move, saying carrying a weapon is more effective than having a bodyguard. He recalled that three members of parliament who were killed in 2005 – Jyrgalbek Surabaldiev, Bayaman Erkinbaev and Tynychbek Akmatbaev – all had bodyguards.
“Possessing a weapon is principally for psychological reasons – it will allow us to go about our business with peace of mind,” said Urmanaev suggests. “We have a right to security. Members of parliament have a right to defend themselves.”
Most political observers interviewed by NBCentralAsia are against the change to the law. Edil Baisalov, leader of the Coalition for Democracy and Civil Society, does not believe issuing deputies with firearms will increase their personal safety or improve public security.
“It’s the law-enforcement agencies that should be performing better,” he said. “Members of parliament care only about their own security. If the state is unable to provide security, I and every other citizen should be issued with a weapon. I am totally against this law.”
Deputy Interior Minister Temirkan Subanov agreed with this view, saying the new rules are likely to lead to more widespread gun ownership and looser controls over the circulation of such weapons. He wants instead to see more government expenditure being earmarked so that the security services can provide adequate protection for state officials and politicians.
Political scientist Tamerlan Ibraimov accepts that high crime rates in Kyrgyzstan have forced lawmakers to take extraordinary measures to protect themselves. At the same time, he says, singling them out as a uniquely privileged group is unethical and contrary to social justice.
“The constitution and legislation do allow certain privileges for particular groups, for example immunity for the president and members of parliament,” he said. “But ethnic questions arise here - why are some people allowed to use weapons to defend themselves and others are not?”
(News Briefing Central Asia draws comment and analysis from a broad range of political observers across the region.)
