Snap elections of the President in Kazakhstan ended with firm victory of the current Head of the state Nursultan Nazarbayev. This may have various estimations and viewpoints. But there is the fact – the election campaign was of pure virtuosity.
Analyzing the situation one may note that Nazarbayev gained victory on two levels: directly for the votes of the people and for electoral activity which is the same important. If during the Presidential elections of 2005 the voter turnover was 77,1%, then current election campaign at all demonstrated the unprecedented result as the polling place was attended by 98,9% of all voters. What is the reason for the kind of intensiveness? Many experts prone to think that it was about opposition. A number of parties in Kazakhstan demonstratively refused to participate in the elections, which was of great assistance for the power-in-office. They introduced an intrigue into the process, calling its followers and sympathizers to boycott the electoral process. Oppositional Mass Media named voters turnout the most problem issue. The legitimacy of the power was doubted. And the opponents themselves without realizing provoked the kind of splash of electoral activity.
Any political analyst says, that the absence of an intrigue in the course of pre-electoral race is the reason of voter\s apathy. Many scientific papers covered this subject. And in general, if it had not been for the maneuvers of Nazarbayev’s rivals the Presidential elections could be much more boring. Everybody understood – the opposing Presidential candidates – the representative of Communist Party of Kazakhstan Zhambyl Akhmetbekov, the Leader of the Party of Patriots Gani Kasymov and the Head of ecologic movement “Tabigat” Mels Yeliusizov are of no real competition. Why do they need to vote then? And here is a real challenge – the opposition declared boycott, counting to attract all those people who ignored voting. And people, without willing to become somebody’s game hostage, simply rushed forward to the constituencies. In the election day by four o’clock more the 7 million people which is 76,9% voted.
Some international observers were confused by the kind of high result.
Especially Western ones. This is related with that in the Old World recently, no matter how paradox it would sound, “deficiency of democracy” has been observed – citizens do not use their voting right. And still there are some exceptions. For example, traditionally high turnout of voters in Germany from 60% during municipal and land elections up to 82-85% within federal ones. People of Greece are much politicized, where the turnout comprises more than 90%. And this doesn’t invoke any doubts.
In general as international observers prove, Kazakhstani electoral campaign was fair and transparent. There were 1059 of foreign observers from the OSCE, SCO, CIS, EU, OIC, Europe and the USA, and also 200 international reporters. They confirmed that within all stages the electoral process was maximum opened and transparent for Kazakh and international community.
There are some remarks, naturally, as there can be no perfect elections.
There are also other issues actively discussed at the moment.
In general there are no serious violations that would influence the results of voting. And in general there are hardly people doubting the victory of Nursultan Nazarbayev. Many experts were sure of Nazarbayev’s victory, long before the voting.
As for the opposition - ignoring elections they were totally defeated. Odd moves of the opponents are of no logic or sound sense. Why didn’t they join the electoral race? Did they have no time to prepare? Indeed, elections were hold within peak terms, but even considering this any normal party, working with the voters permanently instead of election periods, would definitely join the struggle.
In any case, the participation in elections is another chance, the possibility to win some political scores urgent on the eve of Parliamentary elections. Should we say that the parties KNPK, patriots and “Nur Otan” that are persistently rotated on TV, news lines and newspapers, thus are more recognizable and have much more chances to get into the main law-making body of the country.