Proportional Representation Offers Major Political Change

The hasty process by which the new Kyrgyz constitution was passed has left many legal details unresolved, so making the new system of proportional representation work is going to be no easy task.



The new constitution stipulates a parliament with 90 members – in place of the 75 it has had until now - with a five-year term. Half of its members will be elected by proportional representation, via party lists, and the rest by the first-past-the-post system.



If one political party wins more than 50 per cent of seats allotted by proportional representation, it can name a prime minister and cabinet, whom the president then confirms. If no party wins enough seats, the president appoints a cabinet.



Topchubek Turgunaliev, the head of the Erkindik party, says the deficiencies of the first-past-the post system, used until now for all parliamentary seats, have long been apparent. He argues that in the form in which it operated in Kyrgyzstan, the system reinforced tribalism, allowed the authorities of the day to influence elections, and created opportunities for vote-buying.



He would like to see all seats, not just half of them, being made subject to proportional representation. “All these [negative] features will continue to exist if the majoritarian system is retained for half the seats. That’s enormously damaging to national unity,” he said.



Another party leader, Kubatbek Baibolov of the Union of Democratic Forces, recommends that two-thirds of parliament should be elected by proportional representation.



“In order for political parties to develop, the proportional system needs to dominate,” he said. “But even under this system, the first-past-the-post deputies are also going be drawn to the various parties since they too have an interest in shaping the cabinet.”



Political commentators note that in cases where no wins more than 50 per cent of the 45 proportional-representation seats, the president has the right to select a party and instruct it to form a cabinet. They argue that this undermines the rights of voters to choose a governing party.



The experts offer differing views on the future of a party-based system, and on whether the parties themselves are prepared to take on such an expanded role.



Gulnara Ishakova, an expert on constitutional law and a senior lecturer at the America University of Central Asia, argues that as things stand, it will be difficult for parties to secure the required majority unless they merge with other political forces. So in the main, the parties are not yet ready to take on the responsible role assigned them under this constitution.



Moya Strana party co-leader Zainiddin Kurmanov, on the other hand, is certain that the entire country, not just the political parties are ready for the challenge. The only thing that has held them back until now was the lack of political will to create the conditions in which a party system could develop. He recalls that Kyrgyzstan has some experience of the proportional system since it has been used for some seats in past elections.



Nurlan Sadykov, director of the Institute for Constitutional Policy, agrees, arguing that the new constitution will provide the stimulus for the new system. “If we don’t start creating this kind of political system, it will never develop. This is the aim of the constitution, which is going to be the motor that drives the parties,” he said.



All the commentators interviewed by NBCentralAsia predicted that Kyrgyzstan’s parties – all 84 of them – will soon undergo a process of consolidation. Turgunaliev argues that just three parties would suffice to cover the entire spectrum of political views: a right-wing party, a leftist one and a centrist one.



Some observers believe the first to merge will be the pro-government parties, since the terms of the constitution will motivate the president to win a majority in his favour in parliament.



(News Briefing Central Asia draws comment and analysis from a broad range of political observers across the region.)