COST OF POLITICS IN KYRGYZSTAN BACKGROUND PAPER Omurbek Ibraev C O N T E N T S Introduction 1 Methodology 1 I. Historical context 2 II. Current drivers of the cost of parliamentary politics 6 III. Outlook 11 I N T R O D U C T I O N This primary research on the cost of parliamentary politics was conducted by sampling current and former MPs, unsuccessful candidates for these positions and political party officers. It examined the financial implications of running for office in parliamentary elections in Kyrgyzstan which were held in October 2015. From this information, WFD will create a data set that can deepen the donor community’s understanding of electoral incentives and inform future programming aimed at improving democratic outcomes in the countries in which WFD works. The Kyrgyz Republic (hereafter “Kyrgyzstan”) is the sole democracy to emerge in the Central Asian post-Soviet states. While the country has experienced two revolutions in the past 10 years, it has developed into the only stable parliamentary system in the region. The country has seen a dramatic increase in the cost of politics within the last decade that threatens to undermine this fledgling democracy. M E T H O D O L O G Y In the framework for this study, two methods of analysis were mainly used: desk-based review and situational analysis. The desk-based research focused on the drivers of the cost of politics in Kyrgyzstan. It included a legal analysis of current legislation governing election procedures. It also examined the core issues contributing to the rising cost of politics in Kyrgyzstan. The situational analysis examined the current realities regarding the increased influence of money in politics by conducting semi-structured interviews (survey) of MPs, political parties’ election campaign staff and leading local experts in the field. The research examined these principal questions: 1. What is the historical experience of campaign financing and how has this shaped previous elections at the parliamentary level? 2. What are the key drivers of electoral costs for current parliamentary elections? What does it roughly cost to run for parliament? What are the principal sources of funding for parliamentary campaigns? Is the burden to fund campaigns principally on the candidate or the political party? 3. What are the costs incurred by MPs once in office? Are these demands principally public (official engagements) or private (constituent requests)? 4. What barriers do these costs create for particular groups (such as women)? 5. What are the prospects for future expansion or reduction of these costs based on either normative or legal constraints? The survey covered current and former MPs of the Kyrgyz Parliament, as well as other participants in local council elections that were conducted in March 2016.The total number of surveyed participants was about 40 people. 1 The political system their list from each gender and every fourth Since gaining independence from the Soviet candidate on the list from a different gender. Union in 1991, Kyrgyzstan has attempted There was also as well a 15-per-cent quota with mixed results to construct a functioning on each list for ethnic minority candidates. parliamentary system. The country’s first Controversially, following claims of vote rigging elections in October 1991 returned Askar at the previous election, biometrics were Akayev unopposed and it initially appeared introduced. A number of parties combined as though he was committed to economic their financial resources and sought to ensure and political reform. However, allegations of their ability to exceed the seven-per-cent corruption and vote-rigging soon bubbled to threshold to be allocated seats. These parties the surface and by 2005 Akayev was still in largely represented northern and southern post in spite of a promise to stand down when constituencies respectively. Controversy also his term expired. circulated around the formation of party lists with allegations that places were sold to the This led to protests and Akayev’s eventual highest bidder – rumours suggest that high downfall in what became known as the Tulip places on the lists cost between US$500,000 Revolution. He was replaced by Opposition and US$1 million. Leader Kurmanbek Bakiyev after a landslide victory in which he too promised significant Six parties won seats in parliament. The Social political reform. When this reform failed to Democratic Party of Kyrgyzstan (SDPK), a be delivered, a second revolution followed in party identified with President Almazbek 2010 which led to ethnic violence, particularly Atambayev, led the pack. Other parties with between Kyrgyz and Uzbeks in the south of seats were: the opposition Respublika-Ata the country. Jurt; the pro-government Kyrgyzstan party; the southern-focused Onuguu-Progress; Bir Bol, a That revolution, which broadly sets the patchwork party formed by veteran officials tone for Kyrgyz politics today, resulted in a from earlier presidential administrations; and referendum which reduced presidential power the left-of-centre Ata Meken party, a long-time and proposed a new constitution that made fixture on the Kyrgyz political scene. Three Kyrgyzstan a parliamentary democracy with of the six (Onuguu Progress, Bir Bol and a 120-seat parliament which no one party Kyrgyzstan) were formed less than one year could dominate. Parties based on ethnicity or before the 2015 elections. As parties are able religion were banned. to gain power with no clear policy platform and there is little public demand for this, there Kyrgyzstan is a semi-parliamentary system is little incentive to reform. with a directly elected president and a prime minister elected by parliament. In the last The political party system in the Kyrgyz election, 14 parties submitted candidate lists Republic is fragmented, with the Ministry of and paid the required fee of KGS5 million Justice officially registering 203 political parties, (Kyrgyz soms) (about US$74,000) in order which in Kyrgyzstan are formed around the to participate in the election. The fee was personalities of their leaders and not by increased fivefold from previous elections and platforms, which largely coincide. However, the is criticized by some as being an obstacle to ministry of justice has no authority or capacity exclude smaller parties. to control the implementation of financial Parliamentary elections took place on 4 transparency by political parties. October 2015. Parties were required to have at least 30 per cent of the candidates on In Kyrgyzstan, political parties are based 2 around the personality of a leader rather particular seem to feed the division of power: than a long-term identity based on policies. social and political fragmentation and the During the survey, most respondents stated interests of predatory political and business that parties lacked the skills and experience elites. to debate policy positions and unite voters around their ideas. One kind of fragmentation is evident through the strong ties that exist between particular The big-man syndrome political leaders and their local constituencies. Currently, the most common motivations As political scientist Scott Radnitz argued for the appearance of political parties and to explain the 2005 Tulip Revolution, under projects in the Kyrgyz Republic are continuity conditions of weak state capacity, political and lobbying. Most parties are headed by and business elites maintain close client-type former or current high-ranking officials. Parties relationships with particular localities (often lobby and support the interests of certain their hometowns as well as their electoral social structures and groups at all levels. For districts), eroding the authority of formal example, each financial group or clan reaching state institutions. While some specifics of that a certain level of development considers it 2005 situation no longer apply, such as the necessary to have a party that will lobby for its majoritarian system of electing parliamentary interests in the power structure. deputies, political elite connections to particular localities remain salient. As the Political parties are often no more than a 2010 and 2015 elections demonstrate, Kyrgyz temporary collection of interests, driven parties continue to rely on particular party by individuals with generic platforms and members’ work at the local level to mobilize little contact with their electorate. This is votes. Another dimension of Kyrgyzstan’s exacerbated by the closed list electoral political fragmentation is regional. While system, which does not naturally lend itself generally considered highly sensitive and to fostering strong links between MPs and politicized, regional differences in voting constituencies. Parties remain focused behavior provide interesting data. Those around individuals, and many party leaders parties led by politicians from the southern are successful businessmen seeking office to regions received fewer votes in the northern obtain immunity and government influence. regions, and vice versa. This may indicate an MPs continue to buy their way on to party urban-rural divide and/or a degree of ethnic lists with widespread reports and evidence of homogeneity within populations. this practice. The second factor that feeds the division of Political parties are often inactive between power into multiple centers is the nature of elections and poorly connected to the factions the current political elite. The post-Soviet in parliament. political elite in Kyrgyzstan developed into a large predatory group that views the state The fragmentation of politics primarily as a tool for private enrichment. The The eradication of a strong presidency and efforts of both former presidents Akaev and the monopoly of a single group over political Bakiev to create single pro-presidential parties power thus appear to have been achieved. left important and powerful actors outside However, given the twists in the political the “state” system, leading to the March 2005 system of Kyrgyzstan over the past 20 years, and April 2010 events. The current multiparty one wonders how sustainable the current parliament and coalition government, in this political system really is.