Opposition to Use OSCE Bid to Force Changes
Opposition to Use OSCE Bid to Force Changes
Kazakstan’s bid to chair the OSCE offers the country’s opposition parties a great opportunity to force concessions that will make life easier for them, according to NBCentralAsia political observers.
On September 27, opposition leaders and other public figures issued a statement on behalf of “the democratic public of Kazakstan”, saying that if the country is to win the OSCE chairmanship in 2009, the authorities will need to make policy changes in four main areas: guaranteeing the right to hold rallies and demonstrations, abolishing amendments to the media law, reforming election legislation, and ending politically-motivated court cases.
Instead of pointing out the failings of President Nursultan Nazarbaev’s government and campaigning against the bid, the opposition has opted to focus on just four key issues, all of which have been raised within the OSCE and also by United States and British officials, who are the greatest sceptics on the issue of a Kazak chairmanship.
Opposition politicians say that if the government lifted the current requirement to seek formal permission for a public meeting, they would have the freedom to stage protests without being obstructed, although they would still inform the local authorities in advance. Revising election laws to bring them into line with OSCE standards would make it more likely that opposition candidates would win seats in parliamentary and local elections.
An important factor in this choice of tactics is that these four demands are easy to fulfill and would not require fundamental changes, unlike some of the other items on the opposition wish-list, such as boosting the power of parliament and local government, reforming the judiciary, and allowing all political forces equal access to the media.
The opposition statement coincided with President Nazarbaev’s visit to the US, during which Kazakstan’s bid to lead the OSCE had been expected to be high on the agenda. However, his talks in the US did not touch on this issue specifically, and there was no public talk of the lack of democratic progress in his country.
(News Briefing Central Asia draws comment and analysis from a broad range of political observers across the region.)
On September 27, opposition leaders and other public figures issued a statement on behalf of “the democratic public of Kazakstan”, saying that if the country is to win the OSCE chairmanship in 2009, the authorities will need to make policy changes in four main areas: guaranteeing the right to hold rallies and demonstrations, abolishing amendments to the media law, reforming election legislation, and ending politically-motivated court cases.
Instead of pointing out the failings of President Nursultan Nazarbaev’s government and campaigning against the bid, the opposition has opted to focus on just four key issues, all of which have been raised within the OSCE and also by United States and British officials, who are the greatest sceptics on the issue of a Kazak chairmanship.
Opposition politicians say that if the government lifted the current requirement to seek formal permission for a public meeting, they would have the freedom to stage protests without being obstructed, although they would still inform the local authorities in advance. Revising election laws to bring them into line with OSCE standards would make it more likely that opposition candidates would win seats in parliamentary and local elections.
An important factor in this choice of tactics is that these four demands are easy to fulfill and would not require fundamental changes, unlike some of the other items on the opposition wish-list, such as boosting the power of parliament and local government, reforming the judiciary, and allowing all political forces equal access to the media.
The opposition statement coincided with President Nazarbaev’s visit to the US, during which Kazakstan’s bid to lead the OSCE had been expected to be high on the agenda. However, his talks in the US did not touch on this issue specifically, and there was no public talk of the lack of democratic progress in his country.
(News Briefing Central Asia draws comment and analysis from a broad range of political observers across the region.)
