Parliamentary election in Kyrgyzstan 1995
The 1995 parliamentary elections in Kyrgyzstan were held on February 5, 1995 with a runoff on February 19, 1995. The parliamentary election was the first election of its kind in the history of Kyrgyzstan and produced the Kyrgyz Social Democratic Party (SDPK) as the strongest political group.
Electoral system
A total of 105 members of the political bicameral system of Kyrgyzstan were elected . As a basis for the parliamentary election, which was designed as a majority election, Kyrgyzstan was divided into 70 electoral districts with comparable numbers of inhabitants. In each of these districts a mandate for the representative chamber of the Kyrgyz Parliament was given. For the election of the legislative chamber with 35 MPs, two of these electoral districts were merged, so that 35 electoral districts were formed, in each of which a mandate was to be awarded. The candidates each required an absolute majority of the votes cast to move into one of the two chambers . Due to the large number of candidates in some electoral districts, none of the candidates succeeded in the first ballot, so that in these electoral districts a runoff election between the two candidates with the most votes in the first ballot had to be held. This was held two weeks after the first ballot, on February 19, in accordance with the current Kyrgyz electoral law. In the future political system of Kyrgyzstan, the smaller legislative chamber should be the central legislative body , while the representative chamber met less often and only had to be consulted on some of the political decisions.
background
After gaining independence in 1991 in the course of the collapse of the Soviet Union, Kyrgyzstan took a different path from the other Central Asian states . While tendencies towards a presidential system of government with authoritarian features quickly became apparent there, foreign observers referred to Kyrgyzstan as the "island of democracy ". One reason for this was the lively political debates between the president and the opposition in parliament was created before the 1995 election as the successor to the Supreme Soviet , as the 350 members of the Supreme Soviet of the Kyrgyz Socialist Soviet Republic were elected in 1990 and were thus legitimized until 1995. After the election to the Supreme Soviet in 1990, there was officially a clear majority in the Communist Party , which occupied more than 90% of the seats in the Supreme Soviet. In fact, numerous members of the Supreme Soviet were close to democratic movements, so that the transformation of the political system after independence towards more democracy was basically supported by parliament.
There were conflicts between President Askar Akayev , who had been in office in Kyrgyzstan since the 1991 presidential election , and the parliamentary opposition over the form and timing of parliamentary elections. In the Kyrgyz constitution of 1993, the establishment of a unicameral system with the Dschogorku Kengesch was laid down as the new Kyrgyz legislative body, and the newly formed parliament was to comprise 105 members. President Akayev, on the other hand, advocated the establishment of a bicameral system with the legislative assembly as the central legislative body and the assembly of the people's representatives as the representation of local dignitaries in the political system of Kyrgyzstan. A constitutional referendum on this issue was held in Kyrgyzstan on October 22, 1994, with 88.1% of the votes cast in favor of the establishment of a bicameral system. With the confirmation by the referendum, Akayev began to reform the electoral system with numerous ordinances and orders according to his ideas. The referendum was sharply criticized by the opposition, the opposition party Erkin sued the Kyrgyzstan Supreme Court to have the referendum canceled because the president's actions were not covered by the constitution. In addition, the plaintiffs provided evidence of a significantly lower turnout than officially stated. However, the complaint was not allowed. As a result of the positive referendum, President Akayev issued several decrees to adjust the electoral law. However, the president's powers were insufficient to make fundamental changes to the constitution, so that he had to rely on parliamentary approval. In order to work out a consensus-based solution for the constitutional reform, a constitutional meeting was called with representatives of the government as well as local, legal and party-political officials. The proposals drawn up should be accepted by both chambers of the new parliament after the parliamentary elections.
Parties
The party landscape in Kyrgyzstan had developed intensively after independence. After the democratic opposition had united in the final phase of the existence of the Kyrgyz SSR as the Democratic Movement of Kyrgyzstan, this movement was weakened after independence through splits in favor of a more diverse party landscape. Overall, the political parties were at the beginning of their development before the 1995 parliamentary elections and did not have a broad political base. The parties were often strongly focused on one person and were barely able to make a lasting impression due to constant changes caused by splits and mergers. The following parties were registered in the run-up to the parliamentary election and were therefore entitled to put forward candidates:
Democratic Movement of Kyrgyzstan
The umbrella organization of the opposition movement during communist rule was weakened by numerous splits and positioned itself under party chairman Zhepar Zhekhsheyev as the moderate party of the center. Among other things, she advocated an active social policy and a clear demarcation from the politics of the former Soviet Union . The Democratic Movement was also seen as a supporter of President Akayev's policies.
Social Democratic Party of Kyrgyzstan
The Social Democratic Party of Kyrgyzstan was founded in 1994 and stood for a social democracy with a strongly liberal character. This orientation ensured that the social democratic party was also popular with entrepreneurs hoping for liberal economic reforms.
Asaba
The Asaba party split off from the Democratic Movement after it took a moderate course. Asaba, on the other hand, advocated a nationalist course and called for more active promotion of the Kyrgyz language and culture. The Asaba party was also rated as loyal to the president.
Erkin
Like Asaba, the Erkin party split from the Democratic Movement in order to push through a more nationalistic course. In contrast to Asaba, however, Erkin profited as an opposition party against Akayev's policies. In particular, the constitutional referendum in 1994 and the reforms that followed met with fierce criticism from the Erkin party. Above all, the party relies on the principle of the separation of powers , which, in the opinion of its supporters, has not yet been sufficiently implemented in Kyrgyzstan.
Ata Meken
Before the election, Ata Meken spoke out in favor of a pro-western course and also called for the social and health systems to be expanded . With the moderate but reform-oriented course Ata Meken had a particularly strong electorate among young intellectuals and entrepreneurs and was characterized by good internal party organization.
Communist Party of Kyrgyzstan
The Communist Party of Kyrgyzstan was re-established in 1993 after the provisional ban on the Communist Party in 1991 and with its communist orientation it clearly distinguished itself from the rest of the anti-communist parties and from the politics of the president.
Other parties
In addition to these larger parties in Kyrgyzstan, numerous other parties also ran for the election, some with a very limited electorate. These included the Agricultural Labor Party, the Ecological Party and the Party of Democratic Women.
Election campaign
Despite the poorly developed Kyrgyz party system to date, there was a controversial election campaign before the parliamentary elections.
financing
The financing of election campaigns was regulated and strictly controlled by the responsible district commission. Each candidate was given a budget for the election campaign. If one of the candidates wanted to top up this budget with funds from other sources, he had to make the additionally acquired funds available to the district committee, which then distributed the funds evenly to all candidates in the affected district. In this way, the starting conditions for all candidates should be aligned and equal opportunities should be created. However, this strict regulation gave rise to fears that candidates could use illegal campaign funding to gain a competitive advantage .
media
Kyrgyzstan had the highest level of press freedom in Central Asia at the time of the election . In the run-up to the election, the government took measures to restrict press freedom. In August 1994, for example, two daily newspapers were closed on the basis of a new media law that also met with great criticism at national level. In addition, two cases of violence against journalists became known. However, since numerous media could continue to report independently, the media were part of the election campaign and were also used by the opposition. The strict regulation of campaign financing ensured that the candidates' presence in the daily newspaper , television and radio was comparable. A point of contention regarding the media was the above-average media presence of politicians who already held political office before the election, as this was seen by competitors as an advantage in the election campaign.
Role of local dignitaries
The so-called Akims, local dignitaries who often have a great influence at the regional level, play a traditionally large role in Kyrgyz politics. In Bishkek and Osh the Akims be selected, appointed in rest of the country by the President. In many cases , the Akims represent powerful clans who play an important role in Kyrgyzstan. Based on their clans, many Akims succeed in gaining great influence over the population of their Akimat. With regard to the 1995 elections, this influence was viewed critically, as it partly led to an influence on the voting behavior of the population when candidates were supported by local clans.
Result
The turnout was given as 62% in both the first and the second ballot. After the second ballot, the following result was obtained for the distribution of the 105 seats in the bicameral parliament:
| Political party | Seats |
|---|---|
| Social Democratic Party of Kyrgyzstan | 14th |
| Asaba | 4th |
| Unity Party of Kyrgyzstan | 4th |
| Ata Meken | 3 |
| Republican Democratic Party | 3 |
| Communist Party of Kyrgyzstan | 3 |
| Republican People's Party | 3 |
| Agrarian Party | 1 |
| Agricultural Labor Party | 1 |
| Democratic Movement of Kyrgyzstan | 1 |
| Party of Democratic Women | 1 |
| Independent | 67 |
| total | 105 |
The result was evidence of the hitherto low level of attraction of political parties in Kyrgyzstan, which led to a majority of independent candidates in the Kyrgyz parliament. Another insight from the election was the clear victory of the Social Democratic Party over the other political parties. This surprising success of the party, which was only founded in 1994, was also one of the reasons for the poor performance of the Democratic Movement of Kyrgyzstan, which emerged from the elections with only one seat in parliament. From the perspective of President Akayev, the performance of the Erkin parties and the Communist Party was particularly important, as they had spoken out most clearly against the incumbent president in the ballot. Since Erkin did not get a seat and the Communist Party only got three seats, the opposition to the president remained weakly represented in parliament.
consequences
The election contributed to the establishment of the two-chamber system in Kyrgyzstan. With the election result, President Akayev was able to rely on support for his policies in parliament, so that he could have the reform of the political system confirmed by parliament after the election. On March 28, 1995, both houses of parliament held the first session of the new legislature . Apas Jumagulov was re-elected as Prime Minister on April 5, 1995, and remained in office until March 1998. With the victory in the presidential election in Kyrgyzstan in 1995 and constitutional reforms in favor of the president's position of power, President Akayev set the course for increasingly authoritarian rule in the years after the election .
rating
The election was observed by numerous Kyrgyz observers, an observer mission from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and a team from the International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES). The OSCE Observer Mission concluded that the parliamentary election did not fully meet the standards of a democratic election due to irregularities reported across the country, often related to local dignitaries or campaign funding. Nevertheless, the OSCE classified the election as democratic, as Kyrgyzstan seemed to be going through a process of democratization at that time . IFES observers also noted irregularities in the election and also criticized the imprecise electoral law and the lack of transparency surrounding the constitutional referendum in 1994 and the associated reform of the political system.
Individual evidence
- ^ Gwenn Hofmann: Kyrgyzstan Technical Election Assessment . Ed .: International Foundation for Election Systems. Washington DC March 1995, p. 9 .
- ↑ Kyrgyzstan Technical Election Assessment March 1995. Accessed April 8, 2020 .
- ^ National Democratic Institute (ed.): Statement of the NDI Pre-Election Delegation to Kyrgyzstan . Bishkek September 2000, p. 2 .
- ^ Gwenn Hofmann: Kyrgyzstan Technical Election Assessment . Ed .: International Foundation for Election Systems. Washington DC March 1995, p. 7-10 .
- ^ Gwenn Hofmann: Kyrgyzstan Technical Election Assessment . Ed .: International Foundation for Election Systems. Washington DC March 1995, p. 14-19 .
- ^ Social-Democratic Party of Kyrgyzstan. Retrieved April 8, 2020 .
- ↑ Maksat Kachkeev .: Central Asia: between the rule of law, religion and Soviet tradition. Bwv Berliner Wissenschaft, Berlin 2013, ISBN 3-8305-2860-4 , p. 177 .
- ^ Gwenn Hofmann: Kyrgyzstan Technical Election Assessment . Ed .: International Foundation for Election Systems. Washington DC March 1995, p. 12, 46 ff .
- ^ Gwenn Hofmann: Kyrgyzstan Technical Election Assessment . Ed .: International Foundation for Election Systems. Washington DC March 1995, p. 13 .
- ^ The Europa world year book 2004. Europa, London 2004, ISBN 1-85743-253-3 , pp. 2554 .
- ↑ Nohlen, Dieter., Grotz, Florian., Hartmann, Christof .: Elections in Asia and the Pacific: a data handbook . Oxford University Press, Oxford 2001, ISBN 0-19-924958-X , pp. 440 f .
- ↑ Kyrgyzstan 1991 - present. Retrieved April 8, 2020 .
- ↑ Spaiser, Olga: External Democracy Promotion in the Post-Soviet Area: The OSCE's Possibilities and Limits for Action in Kyrgyzstan . 1st edition. Hamburg, ISBN 978-3-8366-2750-4 , pp. 45 .
