On the tail of Kyrgyzstan’s fourth election this year, President Sadyr Japarov seems to have finally secured an allied parliament but this apparent victory hasn’t come without opposition. After a largely peaceful election day, allegations of ballot counting blackouts, fraud, and widespread corruption still linger. So far, the results portray a Jogorku Kenesh (Supreme Council) far less diverse than years prior. Will these protests follow the precedent set by last year’s parliamentary election, or will these results stand?
Until votes began to be counted on November 28th, it seemed that the main news story surrounding Kyrgyzstan’s parliamentary election would be the record low 34% voter turnout, contrasted with the near 60% turnout in 2020. An electoral law approved in July restructured parliament, removing 30 parliamentary seats, lowering the vote threshold from 7% to 5%, and adopting a split ballot system that threw some voters into confusion. Voters received two ballots, one district-specific and one organized by party with 54 individual squares representing specific candidates. Despite this setback, most polling stations were reported to be in working order and well-organized, but the procedural successes of the day quickly faded as voters turned their eyes to the Central Election Commission (BShK) monitor. After a few hours of standard ballot-counting, the monitor—and the 70% of the vote that had been tallied—went black. When the monitor returned 90% of the vote had now been counted. Some opposition parties, like social-democratic Ata-Meken (Homeland) and cultural nationalist Uluttar Birimdigi (Unity of Nationalities) saw not only their percent of the vote reduced but found tens of thousands of votes had mysteriously vanished and their seats revoked. While ten parties had passed the 5% threshold for parliamentary representation forty minutes earlier, only seven maintained their seats after the blackout. This at first glance appears to be a Japarov push, with three pro-government parties winning nearly half of the seats in the Jogorku Kenesh, but even these parties were not safe from the malfunction. While Japarov officially belongs to the Mekenchil party, its standing as an extra-parliamentary entity required him to establish especially close ties with right-wing party Ata-Zhurt (Fatherland). Ata-Zhurt has received nearly 20% of the vote in the days following the election but was among the parties whose vote count dropped dramatically in the brief blackout. The BShK further invalidated around 120,000 ballots, representing 10% of the votes cast. Japarov rapidly complied with mounting demands for a recount, allowing all ballots to be counted by hand though it remains unclear if invalidated ballots will be reinstated.
In the days before the election, government officials detained fifteen, alleging a coup plot involving 1000 aggressive young people protesting the election results was underway. Of course, given that the October 2020 parliamentary elections currently being replaced resulted in a coup that overthrew former President Sooronbay Jeenbekov, post-election unrest is fully within the realm of possibility. What should raise alarm bells about these arrests is the statement made by the State Committee for National Security (UKMK), chaired by former head Ata-Zhurt, Kamchybek Tashiev. Without naming any suspects or detainees, the UKMK claimed that current deputies of the Jogorku Kenesh and former high-ranking officials were instrumental in this plot. This assertion is a blatant attempt to discredit any opposition or protest surrounding the transparency of the election. Coupled with Japarov’s threat that election officials would “answer with their heads” if any foul play was uncovered, the expectation of a government loyal to Japarov is clear. His emphatic pledge of a free and fair election operates less as a promise than as a strict narrative to follow.
The leader of Ata-Meken, Omurbek Tekebayev, called for full annulment of the results, citing errors with the hand-counting process as well. On December 1st Tekebayev was assaulted by a large mob while en route to a meeting with heads of other parties. He was quoted: “They want to enforce the outcome of the vote, not with a decree from the Central Election Commission, but with fists and the threat of political terror.” This approach of intimidation appears to have found success. Dozens took to the streets of Bishkek the day after the election to protest the BShK’s conduct, but the rallies do not carry the same energy seen in protests last year. As the wait for the final BShK tally winds down, so does the window of opportunity for the opposition. In the coming days it remains to be seen whether protests will continue to emerge, but it seems unlikely. Political unrest is not unfamiliar to Kyrgyzstan, but in a year marred by a pandemic, botched elections, and a looming electricity crisis, exhaustion is setting in. While citizens are more concerned with keeping their lights on and combatting rising COVID-19 infections, Japarov is consolidating all the power he needs to maintain a hold on the nation for years to come.
Hi, Mikayla! I found your analysis on the recent election in Kyrgyzstan to be both very informative and interesting. Prior to reading this post, I was very unfamiliar with elections in Kyrgyzstan. I think that it is first important to acknowledge the record-low 34 percent voter turnout. This voter turnout percentage decreased by over 25 percent from the last election, and this reality is arguably an important indicator of democratic erosion.
In your analysis, you provide a detailed overview of what seems to be blatant election day vote fraud. In Bermeo’s (2016) On Democratic Backsliding, she argues that this type of fraud has been replaced by longer term strategic harassment and manipulation. While strategic harassment and manipulation could have also taken place in Kyrgyzstan, it is obvious that blatant election day fraud continues in some states today. In addition to the election monitor’s “computer glitch,” the BShK invalidated 10 percent of the votes cast on election day. With voter turnout at a historic low in the state, this invalidation is particularly impactful. I would be interested to know if voter turnout was low due to citizens feeling like the outcome was already guaranteed in favor of the incumbent. These events, coupled with a detaining of opposition, leave me very concerned about the state of democracy in Kyrgyzstan. This event should be receiving more media attention, particularly as citizens are battling both an electricity crisis and rising COVID-19 infections. This post was great!
Hey Mikayla! I find it somewhat concerning that Kyrgyzstan’s voter turnout has dropped so dramatically in just a year- if that-, and I appreciate the fact that you have chosen to focus on Kyrgyzstan rather than one of the more well-known countries eroding democratically. Voter turnout is obviously a very important indication of how well a democracy is faring, and for it to drop that far shows signs of erosion. What concerns me most about Kyrgyzstan is actually not the low voter turnout or even the suspicious threats by one party, but rather the fact that there have been four elections in this one year. That is far too many elections for one government post for a thriving democracy regardless of position or reason. If it were to be a revoking of office or resigning due to impropriety, they could just have a special election or even appoint someone to the role temporarily, like other democracies do. The low voter turnout actually makes sense when we take into account the four different elections that have happened in 2021 alone. People don’t exactly want to vote over and over again, especially if it’s for the same position. It also shows a weakness in the government, like you mentioned; the president can’t even get a parliamentary majority, hence the overwhelming amount of elections. Is there a chance for Kyrgyzstan to come out of this year as a full democracy, not one barely holding on? I hope so for the country’s sake, but the president and his threats to democracy hardly seem like the future is bright. Very intriguing post! Thank you for covering this topic!
Hi Makayla! I really liked this article (and your presentation in class:)! I did not know that their voter turnout had dropped 26% in just one year! The manipulation of their election here is absurdly obvious. After an initial count, 70% of the total votes had been counted. Then the system went black for “x” amount of time, and when it went live again, 90% of votes were counted. As if this wasn’t blatant enough, opposing parties saw a DROP in their number of votes, despite the percentage of votes that were counted increased. This is obviously a statistical impossibility, again making this cheating of the election system more blatant. As if this wasn’t enough 120,000 votes were invalidated, which was a whopping 10% of the overall number of votes!! No wonder protests occurred because of this. The funniest part of all of this is the declaration made a few days prior; a deceleration declaring any malpractice in this election would be met with severe consequences. I like how you summed up this post by talking about why this is specifically happening now. I did not think of this prior to reading it, so thank you for enlightening me. What you mentioned was this: in a time where the vast majority of the population is focused on covid related issues, as well as keeping their electricity running, it seems like a perfect time for the above mentioned electoral malpractices to occur. This consolidation of power couldn’t come at a better time for Japarov, and couldn’t come at a worse time for his citizens.
Mikayla, I enjoyed reading your blog post and found it interesting that you focused on Kyrgyzstan. I am not familiar with the culture or politics of Kyrgyzstan, and I enjoyed learning more about their democratic practices. It seems, like many other former states under Soviet control, that democracy has not been easy to establish in Kyrgyzstan. The statistics that you provided regarding the change in vote percentage after the “blackout” seem like a very suspect attempt from the government to hide fraudulent behavior. I would like to learn more about the state of civil liberties in Kyrgyzstan so that I could understand if corruption and anti-democratic ideals occur other than in the elections. Because of my small understanding of Kyrgyzstan, it was difficult for me to differentiate between the political parties and their intents. One of the most intriguing aspects of your paper was the change in voter turnout this year compared to 2020. This looks to be a direct result of anti-democratic policies put into place by the current government. Overall, I think that your paper did an excellent job at giving information about a country that not many people know much about.
I enjoyed reading your post, Mikayla. I have always thought countries in that region in the world are fascinating to read about. The shift these nations went through following the collapse of the soviet union is never easy, as you stated. I cannot say that I was incredibly aware of Kyrgyzstan and its democracy, but your post helps me understand what is happening in the country. I’m not surprised that the country has political unrest, especially because of the pandemic. Their future also does not look great because of the threats to democracy that they are receiving from the country’s highest leadership positions. I am impressed with how much you found out about Kyrgyzstan and its democracy, and I think it was very interesting.