Back to Square One as Kyrgyz Constitution is Scrapped
Back to Square One as Kyrgyz Constitution is Scrapped
The Constitutional Court’s decision to revert back to the 2003 version of the Kyrgyz constitution is unlikely to cause a political stand-off, but may unleash legal chaos, say NBCentralAsia analysts.
On September 14, the court, which has supreme jurisdiction on constitutional matters, ruled that the latest version of the constitution, dating from December 2006, and also its immediate predecessor adopted the previous month, were both null and void. Kyrgyzstan therefore reverts to the constitution that was introduced in 2003, when President Askar Akaev was in power.
Judges ruled that amendments to the rules of parliament, which were introduced especially so that legislators could pass constitutional amendments without referring them to the court, were not legally valid.
The court reviewed the matter after receiving a submission from two members of parliament, Melis Eshimkanov and Kabay Karabekov.
In November 2006, under pressure from large opposition demonstrations, the Kyrgyz parliament adopted changes to the constitution which strengthened the role of parliament and limited the president’s authority.
However, one month later, parliament approved a different version of the constitution which largely re-established the status-quo and restored most of the president’s powers.
The decision means that all legislation passed since November will have to be reviewed to ensure it complies with the 2003 constitution.
But Kyrgyzstan may not keep this version for long. In an address to parliament on September 19, President Kurmanbek Bakiev said a referendum on an all-new constitution will be held on October 21.
Eshimkanov believes the ruling means that further developments relating to constitutional reform will take place “within a legal framework”.
Nor does he envisage this will create significant trouble, even though demands for constitutional reform have consistently been at the centre of the confrontation between the Bakiev administration and the opposition.
“Of course there are certain forces – specifically some parliamentarians and political forces - that fought for their place in the sun, and will try to create a storm in a teacup,” he said. “But I don’t think it will last long.”.
According to Eshimkanov, this is a turning point where the government and opposition will have to sit down and negotiate a consensus decision without blaming one another or stirring up demonstrations.
Valentin Bogatyrev, director of the Fund to Support Development Programs, agrees that the Constitutional Court ruling will not set off a major political crisis.
He predicts that once the referendum is over, Kyrgyzstan can expect to have a new constitution by the end of the year.
However, Aziza Abdirasulova, the director of the Kylym Shamy legal centre, fears that the reinstatement of the 2003 constitution – even if it is a temporary move - will plunge Kyrgyzstan into legal chaos. The criminal code has undergone a number of changes since last year that in her view completely contradict the 2003 document. For instance, the current criminal code states that arrest warrants must be sanctioned by a court, whereas the old constitution says warrants are issued by prosecutors.
Political analyst Toktogul Kakchekeev argues that it would be “totally unreasonable” to amend laws now when a new constitution may be adopted in October. He suggests that recent legislation can stay as it is until then – even if it contradicts the constitution.
(NBCentralAsia draws comment and analysis from a broad range of political observers across the region)
On September 14, the court, which has supreme jurisdiction on constitutional matters, ruled that the latest version of the constitution, dating from December 2006, and also its immediate predecessor adopted the previous month, were both null and void. Kyrgyzstan therefore reverts to the constitution that was introduced in 2003, when President Askar Akaev was in power.
Judges ruled that amendments to the rules of parliament, which were introduced especially so that legislators could pass constitutional amendments without referring them to the court, were not legally valid.
The court reviewed the matter after receiving a submission from two members of parliament, Melis Eshimkanov and Kabay Karabekov.
In November 2006, under pressure from large opposition demonstrations, the Kyrgyz parliament adopted changes to the constitution which strengthened the role of parliament and limited the president’s authority.
However, one month later, parliament approved a different version of the constitution which largely re-established the status-quo and restored most of the president’s powers.
The decision means that all legislation passed since November will have to be reviewed to ensure it complies with the 2003 constitution.
But Kyrgyzstan may not keep this version for long. In an address to parliament on September 19, President Kurmanbek Bakiev said a referendum on an all-new constitution will be held on October 21.
Eshimkanov believes the ruling means that further developments relating to constitutional reform will take place “within a legal framework”.
Nor does he envisage this will create significant trouble, even though demands for constitutional reform have consistently been at the centre of the confrontation between the Bakiev administration and the opposition.
“Of course there are certain forces – specifically some parliamentarians and political forces - that fought for their place in the sun, and will try to create a storm in a teacup,” he said. “But I don’t think it will last long.”.
According to Eshimkanov, this is a turning point where the government and opposition will have to sit down and negotiate a consensus decision without blaming one another or stirring up demonstrations.
Valentin Bogatyrev, director of the Fund to Support Development Programs, agrees that the Constitutional Court ruling will not set off a major political crisis.
He predicts that once the referendum is over, Kyrgyzstan can expect to have a new constitution by the end of the year.
However, Aziza Abdirasulova, the director of the Kylym Shamy legal centre, fears that the reinstatement of the 2003 constitution – even if it is a temporary move - will plunge Kyrgyzstan into legal chaos. The criminal code has undergone a number of changes since last year that in her view completely contradict the 2003 document. For instance, the current criminal code states that arrest warrants must be sanctioned by a court, whereas the old constitution says warrants are issued by prosecutors.
Political analyst Toktogul Kakchekeev argues that it would be “totally unreasonable” to amend laws now when a new constitution may be adopted in October. He suggests that recent legislation can stay as it is until then – even if it contradicts the constitution.
(NBCentralAsia draws comment and analysis from a broad range of political observers across the region)
