The election of August 23 should be understood as more than just the beginning of a new parliamentary term. It represents an important institutional founding moment. The transition from a bicameral Parliament to the new unicameral Kurultai under the Constitution that entered into force on July 1 creates not only a different institutional structure, but also an opportunity to shape new parliamentary conventions, practices and expectations for the decades ahead.
Arifeen Yama.
The preliminary results indicate a high level of electoral participation and the representation of five political parties in the new chamber. Yet from an institutional perspective, the most important question extends beyond the distribution of seats. The longer-term significance of this election will be determined by how effectively the first Kurultai develops its roles in legislation, representation, scrutiny, accountability and public deliberation.
Comparative experience demonstrates that unicameralism can offer important advantages. A single parliamentary chamber can simplify legislative procedures, reduce institutional duplication and contribute to more timely decision-making. These qualities may be particularly valuable for a country navigating rapid economic, technological and geopolitical change.
At the same time, unicameralism places a greater responsibility upon the Parliament itself. Where there is no second legislative chamber to undertake additional review, the quality of parliamentary committees, legislative scrutiny, consultation with experts and stakeholders, and opportunities for meaningful deliberation become particularly important. For this reason, the strength of the new Kurultai will ultimately depend not simply upon its constitutional powers, but upon the parliamentary culture and institutional practices that develop within it.
The first Kurultai carries a special responsibility. The procedures, conventions and norms established during its first five-year term may become precedents for future generations of parliamentarians. Strong committee systems, evidence-based legislative review, transparent parliamentary proceedings and meaningful debate across political viewpoints would therefore represent investments in the long-term institutional development of the Republic.
A second important dimension concerns the relationship between political stability and political pluralism. Stability has considerable value, particularly at a time of heightened international uncertainty. Kazakhstan occupies a strategically important position in Eurasia and must simultaneously manage economic modernization, regional connectivity, social development and increasingly complex relations among major international actors.
However, strong political institutions are most sustainable when stability is accompanied by channels through which different interests, regions, generations and social groups can participate constructively in public decision-making. Parliamentary diversity need not be understood as a source of political fragmentation. Properly institutionalized, it can strengthen the policy process by allowing competing perspectives to be debated within constitutional institutions rather than outside them.
The party-list electoral system may encourage the development of more programmatic political parties and nationally oriented policy platforms. At the same time, the evolution of the system could benefit from continued attention to internal party democracy, transparent political recruitment and meaningful engagement between parliamentarians and citizens beyond electoral periods.
This is particularly relevant in a geographically large and socially diverse country such as Kazakhstan. With the transition to a unicameral legislature elected through a nationwide party-list system, developing effective mechanisms through which the voices of different regions and communities reach the Kurultai will be important. Parliamentary hearings, regional consultations, public petitions, digital participation mechanisms and systematic engagement with civil society could all contribute to ensuring that greater institutional efficiency is accompanied by broad social representation.
Participation of women, young people and persons with disabilities as an important dimension of parliamentary development. Representation becomes most meaningful when inclusion extends beyond candidate lists to substantive participation in parliamentary leadership, committees, legislative initiatives and policy formation.
International election observers have recognized several positive aspects of the electoral process, including professional preparations and efforts to facilitate voter participation, while also identifying areas where further progress could strengthen political pluralism, media diversity, electoral transparency and public confidence. Constructive engagement with such observations can, in my view, complement Kazakhstan’s reform agenda and enhance the credibility of its institutions both domestically and internationally.
More broadly, the development of the Kurultai should be viewed as part of a longer process of institution-building rather than as a single constitutional event. Constitutions can establish institutional architecture, but political institutions acquire legitimacy through practice: through the quality of legislation they produce, their responsiveness to citizens, their ability to scrutinize public policy and expenditure, and their capacity to provide a credible forum for national debate.
Kazakhstan has entered a particularly consequential stage of its political development. The creation of the Kurultai provides an opportunity to strengthen the principle that durable governance rests not only on effective executive leadership, but also on capable, respected and trusted institutions.
The ultimate historical importance of the 2026 election may not be measured primarily by the result of the first electoral contest. It will be measured by whether the new institutional framework allows the Kurultai progressively to develop its own authority, professionalism, deliberative capacity and public legitimacy.
If this occurs, the establishment of the Kurultai may come to be regarded not simply as a restructuring of Parliament, but as an important stage in the maturation of Kazakhstan’s constitutional order.
Kazakhstan has often demonstrated an ability to pursue political and economic change while preserving state continuity in a complex geopolitical environment. The establishment of the new Kurultai now provides an opportunity to extend this tradition from stability-oriented governance toward deeper institutional development.
The first Kurultai can therefore play an especially important role: not merely as a legislature operating under a new Constitution, but as an institution capable of establishing the conventions and standards upon which Kazakhstan’s future parliamentary system will be built.
The author is Arifeen Yama, PhD from the Institute of Asian Studies at Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of The Astana Times.
