Constitutional reforms in Kazakhstan: 56 amendments and the path to a “New Kazakhstan”

Early June 2022 marked a watershed moment for Kazakhstan, as the country held a national referendum on a series of changes to its constitution. The event came against the backdrop of dramatic events in January and President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev’s ambitious promises to build a “New Kazakhstan.” The vote was not only intended to reshape the power structure but also to shape the future direction of this strategically important Central Asian state. Millions of Kazakhstanis, who were called to vote, made a choice that had far-reaching consequences not only for their country but also for regional stability and the dynamics of geopolitical influence. Was it a genuine step toward democratization, or just another act of redistribution of power while preserving familiar authoritarian patterns?

The referendum on June 5, 2022, became a central element of the reform program initiated by President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev. This initiative gained considerable relevance after the large-scale unrest in January¹, known as "Qantar" or "Bloody January." What began as peaceful protests against rising fuel prices quickly escalated into unprecedented violence, exposing deep-seated societal problems: social inequality, corruption, and excessive concentration of power. According to official figures, the unrest left at least 238 people dead and caused significant damage to the economy.²After suppressing the protests, including with the help of a CSTO contingent, Tokayev promised radical changes that would ensure more fair and effective governance.

The turning point: echoes of the January crisis

The events of January 2022 were a shock not only to Kazakhstan, but to the entire region and the world. For decades, the country had been seen as an island of stability in turbulent Central Asia, largely thanks to the charismatic leadership of Nursultan Nazarbayev. However, the protests revealed that serious internal contradictions were building up beneath the facade of stability. Deep youth discontent, economic inequality, a widespread sense of injustice, and the influence of clan structures in power created an explosive mixture. President Tokayev, previously seen as Nazarbayev’s cautious successor, has used the crisis to strengthen his own position and dismantle the system of dual power³He took over as chairman of the Security Council, removed a number of high-ranking officials associated with the former president, and announced the beginning of the era of the "New Kazakhstan."

The announcement of constitutional reforms became a central element of this new strategy. Tokayev sought not only to restore public trust but also to legitimize his rule by separating it from Nazarbayev’s legacy. The idea of ​​a “New Kazakhstan” envisaged a transition from a “super-presidential” model to a more balanced system with a stronger role for parliament and civil society. The referendum was presented as a direct appeal to the people, as an instrument of true democracy, designed to ensure broad support for the planned reforms. It was also intended to send a signal to the international community that the country was ready for modernization and openness, despite the harsh suppression of the January protests.

Amendments to the Basic Law: what exactly was proposed?

The package of 56 amendments to 33 articles of the Constitution was large-scale and affected almost all spheres of public administration. The key proposals aimed at redistributing powers and introducing new mechanisms of state organization:

• Limitations on the President's powers: One of the main innovations was the ban on the President of Kazakhstan being a member of any political party during his entire term of office. This was intended to emphasize the non-partisan status of the head of state.⁴, positioning him as a non-partisan arbiter representing the interests of the entire people. The mechanism for forming local representative bodies (maslikhats) was also changed, which was supposed to promote greater decentralization and involvement of the population in governance.
• Cancellation of the status of "Elbasa": Perhaps the most symbolic change was the removal from the Constitution of all references to the status of the first president, Nursultan Nazarbayev, as “Leader of the Nation.” This stripped him of his lifelong chairmanship of the Assembly of the People of Kazakhstan and the Security Council, as well as guarantees of immunity and special privileges, a clear signal of the end of the Nazarbayev era and his monopolistic influence over the country’s political life. This move was seen as the final chord in the dismantling of the Nazarbayev system.
• Strengthening the role of Parliament: It was proposed to significantly strengthen the powers of the Mazhilis (the lower house of parliament), in particular, regarding control over the activities of the government. The parliament was to receive the right to veto a number of appointments, as well as the authority to form the Constitutional Court. The number of deputies of the Senate (the upper house) was reduced, and the procedure for their formation was changed, which was supposed to increase their efficiency.
• Restoration of the Constitutional Court: Instead of the Constitutional Council, which had limited powers, it was proposed to restore a full-fledged Constitutional Court.⁵This body should be given broad powers to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens, ensuring the supremacy of the Constitution. This would give citizens the opportunity to directly address it, which would significantly expand the possibilities of legal protection and supervision of compliance with the Basic Law.
• Other key changes: Other important amendments included the constitutionalization of a complete ban on the death penalty, the establishment of the Human Rights Commissioner, strengthened guarantees of judicial independence, and the introduction of a mixed electoral system for maslikhats. The ownership of land and its subsoil was also clearly enshrined in the constitution, responding to long-standing public demands.

All of these changes were presented as a move away from excessive presidential power to a more balanced model that would ensure greater transparency, accountability, and pluralism in the country's political life. However, the true depth of these transformations and their impact on the future remained a subject of lively debate.

Democratic breakthrough or cosmetic overhaul?

Despite official rhetoric about the irreversibility of democratic transformations, a significant number of international experts and representatives of Kazakh civil society expressed justified skepticism about the real depth of the proposed changes. Critical remarks often concerned the following aspects:

• Maintaining strong presidential power: Many analysts pointed out that, despite the stated “reduction” of powers, President Tokayev still retained extremely broad prerogatives. He continued to independently appoint the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice, and key ministers, and also had the ability to dissolve parliament. This meant that Kazakhstan effectively remained a super-presidential republic.⁶, where the parliament performed more decorative than real controlling functions.
• Lack of real political competition: The referendum took place in an environment where the space for real political opposition was extremely limited. Many opposition activists had been detained or persecuted since the January events, and independent media faced pressure and censorship. This raised serious doubts about how free and fair the process of discussing and adopting such radical constitutional changes could be.
• Haste and opacity of reforms: The process of drafting and submitting the amendments to a referendum was extremely rapid. The public was not given enough time for a comprehensive discussion and in-depth analysis of the proposed changes, creating the impression of “top-down” reforms that were simply to be approved without proper debate. This raised questions about the comprehensiveness and transparency of the entire process.
• Legitimization of the new elite: Some observers saw the referendum not so much as a path to democratization, but as an attempt by President Tokayev to legitimize his own power and the new ruling elite after removing Nazarbayev’s influence. The abolition of “Elbasy” status was seen as a key step in this strategy, allowing Tokayev to build his own, more centralized vertical of power without the burden of the past.

At the same time, for a significant part of Kazakhstanis, the referendum became a ray of hope for long-awaited changes. Pre-voting opinion polls showed high support for reforms, which was associated with a deep fatigue with stagnation, a desire for justice and a desire to turn the page on the Nazarbayev era. However, the extent to which these changes would be transformative depended on the authorities' further steps and their readiness for real systemic transformations.

Voting process and results

The referendum on June 5, 2022 was organized as a direct expression of the will of citizens on the question: "Do you accept the amendments and additions to the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan set out in the draft Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Amendments and Additions to the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan"?"⁷The vote was designed to ensure maximum transparency and legitimacy, accompanied by a broad information campaign by the state and the involvement of both local and international observers.

According to the Central Election Commission of Kazakhstan, the turnout for the referendum was over 68,06% of the total number of voters.⁷. This indicated a significant mobilization of the electorate, which met the expectations of the authorities. The majority of voters, namely 77,18%, voted “for” the adoption of constitutional amendments. The percentage of votes “against” was 18,66%, and the remaining ballots were declared invalid. Such results were interpreted by the authorities as unambiguous and broad support for President Tokayev’s course of renewal and building a “New Kazakhstan”.

The international observer mission from the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), which monitored the process, noted that the referendum was generally well organized.⁸, but at the same time pointed to certain systemic shortcomings. In particular, it was about the lack of sufficient pluralism in the information space, which limited the opportunities for genuine debate and the expression of alternative opinions. Some procedural violations were also recorded during the voting, although they were not of a massive nature that would have significantly affected the result. The OSCE report emphasized that the speed with which the constitutional changes were initiated and carried out did not allow for a comprehensive and inclusive public discussion of all proposals.

International reaction and prospects

The international community closely followed the referendum in Kazakhstan, given the country's strategic importance as a major energy exporter, its role in Central Asia, and the geopolitical balance between Russia, China, and the West. Assessments and expectations were mixed:

• Western countries: The United States and European Union countries have generally welcomed steps toward democratization and strengthening the rule of law. At the same time, they have expressed reservations about real progress. The U.S. State Department has emphasized⁹ the importance of further implementing reforms, strengthening the protection of human rights, ensuring freedom of speech and assembly, and creating conditions for real political competition. For the West, the success of reforms in Kazakhstan is an important signal about the possibility of an evolutionary path for post-socialist countries.
• Neighbors and regional partners: Russia and China, Kazakhstan’s main trading and political partners, have traditionally avoided direct criticism of internal processes in neighboring countries. They have focused on stability and cooperation. For them, a stable Kazakhstan is a key element of regional security and economic partnership, especially against the backdrop of turbulence caused by the war in Ukraine. They have positively assessed Astana’s ability to “overcome the crisis” and its desire for internal stabilization.
• International organizations: In addition to the OSCE/ODIHR, other international organizations working on democracy and human rights issues have also been closely following developments. They have emphasized the importance not only of formal changes to the Constitution, but also of their practical implementation, as well as the development of independent institutions that could ensure their effective functioning and accountability.

Overall, the international outlook can be characterized as cautious optimism mixed with healthy skepticism. The need for reforms after the January events was recognized, but at the same time, there were doubts about the government’s genuine readiness for deep systemic transformations that could realistically limit super-presidential powers and pave the way for genuine political pluralism. Expectations are focused on whether the Tokayev government’s next steps will meet the stated goals of the “New Kazakhstan” and whether the country will be able to avoid a return to autocratic practices.

The future of Kazakhstan: challenges and prospects

The adoption of constitutional amendments in the 2022 referendum undoubtedly opened a new chapter in the history of Kazakhstan, but at the same time posed a number of significant challenges and questions for the country regarding its further development.

• Strengthening the positions of Tokayev and his team: The referendum allowed President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev to strengthen his political position, receiving a popular mandate to further implement reforms. The removal of Nazarbayev’s formal influence gave him the opportunity to build his own political team and implement his initiatives. However, whether this will lead to a real limitation of the super-presidential powers or simply to the replacement of one leader with another remains a key question that worries both domestic and foreign observers.
• The true test of democratization: The real test of democratization will lie not only in the changes on paper, but also in the practical implementation of these norms. The restoration of the Constitutional Court, the strengthening of the role of parliament and the creation of new institutions will require significant efforts to ensure their independence, efficiency and accountability. Without real pluralism, media freedom and opportunities for a full-fledged civil society, these changes may remain only declarative, without changing the essence of the political system.
• Economic and social reforms: Constitutional changes are only part of a broader reform agenda. Building a “New Kazakhstan” also requires profound economic and social transformations aimed at fighting corruption, reducing social inequality, developing small and medium-sized businesses, and diversifying an economy that is still heavily dependent on oil. The challenges in these areas remain enormous.¹⁰, and without addressing them, political reforms may not have the expected effect.
• Geopolitical realities and sovereignty: Kazakhstan is located in a complex geopolitical context, bordering Russia and China, and also feeling the significant impact of events in Ukraine. Strengthening internal stability, transparency, and the rule of law is important for preserving the country's sovereignty and independence in the face of regional and global turbulence. Any move towards greater openness and democracy can help strengthen Kazakhstan's position on the international stage and attract investment.

Kazakhstan is at a critical crossroads. The 2022 referendum was a significant step that demonstrated a desire for change and set a new course. However, the real path to a “New Kazakhstan” will be long and difficult, requiring not only political will, but also consistency, transparency, and a willingness to engage in genuine dialogue with civil society. Only time will tell whether these 56 amendments can become the foundation for a truly democratic, prosperous, and stable future.

Sources

1. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty: Kazakhstan Announces Final Death Toll From January Unrest
2. Eurasianet: Kazakhstan: What's Behind the January Unrest
3. Deutsche Welle: Kazakhstan: Tokayev consolidates power after unrest
4. Official website of the President of Kazakhstan: Constitutional reforms to bolster democracy in Kazakhstan
5. OSCE/ODIHR Referendum Assessment Mission Report: Kazakhstan, Constitutional Referendum, 5 June 2022
6. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: What Does Kazakhstan's Constitutional Referendum Mean for Tokayev's “New Kazakhstan”?
7. Central Election Commission of the Republic of Kazakhstan: Results of the referendum in Kazakhstan, as predicted
8. OSCE/ODIHR: Kazakhstan, Constitutional Referendum, 5 June 2022, Referendum Assessment Mission Report (Summary)
9. US Department of State: Statement on Kazakhstan's Constitutional Referendum
10. World Bank: Kazakhstan Country Overview - Economic Challenges