Kazakhstan’s 23 August early parliamentary elections, while technically well prepared, took place in an environment lacking political pluralism. Political choice was reduced by the lack of distinct political alternatives, with all contesting parties supporting the incumbent president’s policies, international observers – including the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe – said in a preliminary statement released today.
The campaign itself was orderly and the contesting parties were provided with equal campaign conditions. However, a new party, Adilet, had an undue advantage, the observers said.
Constraints on standing, on the media, and for women
Election-related laws and regulations, substantially revised close to the elections with limited public consultation, contain a number of provisions that do not align with international standards for democratic elections, including with respect to fundamental rights related to political participation, the statement says. Women remain significantly underrepresented.
While voters had access to a number of media outlets, media pluralism remained limited, with concerns regarding restrictions on the media and pressure on journalists. The media monitored by the observers provided scarce editorial and analytical coverage of the elections, diminishing voters’ ability to make an informed choice.
“After undertaking a constitutional reset of its electoral framework, Kazakhstan has held elections that provided an opportunity to see whether these changes opened space for healthy political competition,” said Gábor Hajdu, OSCE special coordinator, who led the observation team. “However, there are few genuine opportunities for independent candidacies, limited space for civil society and independent media, and a lack of a level playing field, including for women.”
The elimination of the right to stand independently and the rule that candidates for the new 145-member Kurultai (the Kazakh parliament) could only be nominated by political parties from their members limited electoral competitiveness.
Reports of misuse of public resources in election
Observers received credible reports of instances of the misuse of public resources, including the involvement of public sector employees, giving Adilet an undue advantage that blurred the line between state and party.
The election campaign and election day were generally calm and orderly. However marked differences between voter activity observed and official turnout data, as well as significant procedural violations during the vote count, raising questions about the integrity of the voter turnout reporting and the counting process.
On a positive note the election administration enjoyed the confidence of contesting parties, carried out an extensive voter information campaign, and made considerable efforts to ensure accessibility of polling stations and facilitate the participation of people with disabilities.
The media market is state-dominated through direct ownership and non-transparent budgetary subsidies. These factors, along with reported concerns of state influence on editorial content constrict media pluralism, despite the large number of registered outlets. Long-standing concerns about arrests and pressure on independent journalists generate pervasive self-censorship.
“Free and fair elections and independent media are deeply interconnected. Without an inclusive, credible and pluralistic media environment, political participation and representation are fundamentally limited, especially during elections,” said Sevilay Çelenk head of the Parliamentary Assembly delegation. “The newly elected Kurultai should foster a genuinely pluralistic mainstream media environment that ensures all voices and perspectives from across society in Kazakhstan are heard and represented.”
Women remain significantly under-represented in political and public life; they accounted for 172 of the 545 candidates (31.5 per cent) while their participation in the campaign remained limited and uneven across regions.
Best electoral practice not being implemented
The 2026 changes to campaign finance rules increased the ceilings for contributions and expenditure. Recommendations by the Council of Europe’s Group of states against corruption on campaign finance reporting and oversight remain unaddressed. The oversight mechanism lacks independent verification or fact-finding, which limits the scope and effectiveness of oversight.
The broadly and vaguely formulated 2026 amendments expanding the foreign funding prohibition to any election-related activities were interpreted by the authorities in conflicting ways, which created undue impediments for citizen observers, contrary to OSCE commitments, and rendered some reluctant to observe. Although several organisations carried out observations on election day, there remained a clear need for improvements in line with prior OSCE recommendations.
