A Step Toward Democracy?

The Kazak authorities have hailed the first ever elections of local government chiefs as a sign that the political system is becoming more democratic. However, some election experts say that the exercise is a poor imitation of democracy since the officials will not be elected directly, and it will not result in a real decentralisation of power.



A total of 59 akims, or local government heads, will be elected on October 20 this year, 49 of them at district-level and ten as town mayors. This represents 30 per cent of all the akims who form this tier of government in Kazakstan. Under a decree issued by President Nursultan Nazarbaev in June, the job of akim becomes an elected rather than appointed post. Four districts have so far held ballots as a trial run.



Since the akims used to be appointed by regional governors, these elections might seem like a revolutionary shift toward decentralisation and greater democracy. But some experts on election legislation say the way the system has been set up is less than democratic.



For one thing, the akims will not be elected directly by the public, but will instead be selected by local councils or maslihats. Although the maslihats are themselves directly elected, having indirectly elected akims will restrict people’s choice, and will mean these officials are less accountable to their community. Furthermore, it is much easier for a would-be akim to pressure a small number of local councillors than to campaign for votes among the electorate.



Another downside is that candidates for the posts will be nominated by the regional governors, who are in turn appointed by the president. This seriously undermines the point of holding an election, and will leave the central authorities just as able to influence district-level government as they were prior to this reform.



NBCentralAsia commentators worry that since the governors pick the candidates, only people sympathetic to the regime will make it as far as the ballot. In addition, an akim whose name has been put forward by his superiors may end up firmly under the governor’s thumb and unable to manage local affairs independently.



Finally, even if the provincial governors do pick the candidates fairly and refrain from interfering in the electoral process, the fact the electoral procedure excludes the public from any direct role may well trigger rivalries among local elite figures as they fight for the votes of local councillors. This could create friction between competing clans at district level.



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