NGO LAW PASSED BY MAZHILIS STILL PROBLEMATIC; ASAR

UNCLAS ALMATY 002386 SIPDIS SENSITIVE STATE FOR EUR/CACEN (J. MUDGE) AND DRL/PHD (C. KUCHTA- HELBLING) E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV PREL KDEM PINR KZ POLITICAL SUBJECT: NGO LAW PASSED BY MAZHILIS STILL PROBLEMATIC; ASAR LEADER AND FOREIGN MINISTER SPEAK OUT AGAINST IT SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED REF: A) ALMATY 1838 B) ALMATY 1854 ¶1. (SBU) Summary: Informal OSCE analysis of draft NGO legislation adopted by the Mazhilis (lower house of Parliament) on June 10 provides clarification on changes made during the parliamentary review process. Contrary to previous media reports that certain restrictive parts of the legislation would be dropped, the revised version of the draft laws on NGOs appears to preserve earlier drafts' provisions for tightened control by local authorities over NGO activities and financing. Commentary and criticism continue from politicians and stakeholders. Criticism by First Daughter and Asar leader, Dariga Nazarbayeva, and Foreign Minister Tokayev, suggests that senior leaders in Astana could be setting the stage for the President to withdraw or veto the legislation. End summary. BACKGROUND ON NGO LAW PACKAGE -------------- ¶2. (U) As reported in reftels, the draft NGO legislation consists of a new NGO law, "On the Activities of Branches and Representative Offices of International or Foreign Non- Commercial Organizations in the Republic of Kazakhstan," ("NGO Law"),and a separate package of NGO amendments to existing laws (collectively "NGO legislation"). After giving some consideration to constitutional issues, the Mazhilis passed the NGO legislation on June 15 and forwarded it to the Senate for action. The date of the first Senate reading has not yet been set, but consideration must take place soon, since Parliament is scheduled to end its current session on June 30. THE NGO LEGISLATION AS IT STANDS -------------- ¶3. (SBU) According to the OSCE Center's informal analysis, the scope of the NGO legislation has been expanded to cover not only branches and representative offices of foreign NGOs in Kazakhstan, but also local Kazakhstani NGOs which may have branch offices outside the country. The ban on a foreigner heading a local branch of an NGO based in Kazakhstan was not dropped. In addition, Kazakhstani NGOs are not allowed to have foreign citizens sit as board members, even if those NGOs have branches in other countries, or have "foreign participation." ¶4. (SBU) In response to criticism about insufficient definition of "accreditation" requirements in earlier drafts, the Mazhilis added language that gives the Ministry of Justice a role in approving the substance of each NGO's mission scope and programs. This procedure would be a prerequisite for registration, an administrative process that the MOJ is already performing under existing law. As in previous drafts, an NGO failing to be accredited by the MOJ would have its operations automatically terminated. In addition, local NGOs must reveal sources of grants, donations, and any other financing received from foreign entities. Anonymous donations remain prohibited. ¶5. (SBU) Another addition by the Mazhilis to the legislation is the inclusion of a requirement for all NGOs to use only bank accounts held in Kazakhstani banks. The OSCE Center noted that such a restriction, although having some legitimate aims in terms of increasing transparency, will be highly vulnerable to abuse given the likelihood that domestic banks could be unable or unwilling to maintain sufficient standards of confidentiality. Furthermore, as had been stipulated in the original draft, the version passed by the Mazhilis still would require all grants to local NGOs from international organizations to be approved by executive officials at the oblast level before allowing the transfer of funds through the banks. (COMMENT: The NGO legislation would put restrictions on international NGOs similar to those adopted in Uzbekistan in 2003 that created significant difficulties for local NGOs who received USG assistance. END COMMENT) WHO'S WEIGHING IN -------------- ¶6. (SBU) Criticism by local and international NGO groups continues. On June 10, leaders of some local NGOs appealed to the OSCE's chair-in-office, Slovenian Foreign Minister Dimitrij Rupel, as well as to Christian Strohal, Director of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) for assistance in turning back the NGO legislation. Other domestic NGOs, however, including former recipients of grants from international and foreign organizations, have kept a low profile on this issue. One Post contact noted that her fellow NGO leaders did not want to jeopardize their chances to get future GOK funding for their projects. ¶7. (SBU) Although all Parliamentary debate takes place behind closed doors, government leaders and parliamentarians alike have commented publicly on the NGO legislation. Comments by the MP drafters and Otan Party leadership have been in favor of the NGO Law and NGO amendments, citing the "destabilizing" effects of foreign involvement in civil society. On the other side, the opposition has been equally vocal in its criticism of the NGO legislation. Senator Zauresh Battalova, elected as a member of the now-de- registered party Democratic Choice of Kazakhstan (DCK),and currently the lone opposition figure in Parliament, has issued statements against the NGO legislation in the media. Opposition bloc "For a Just Kazakhstan" recently released a statement that criticized the NGO legislation as fundamentally restricting constitutional rights. ¶8. (SBU) Senior pro-presidential figures, however, have also spoken out in recent days against the NGO legislation. Dariga Nazarbayeva, daughter of President Nazarbayev and leader of Asar Party, called for the complete withdrawal of the legislation at a June 17 meeting of the National Committee on Democratization and Civil Society (NKVD). On June 20, Foreign Minister Tokayev met behind closed doors with members of the Mazhilis Committee of International Affairs, Defense and Security. After the meeting, Tokayev released a statement to the media characterizing the NGO legislation as running counter to Kazakhstan's international commitments. Tokayev stated that the legislation could affect operations of the United Nations, World Health Organization, International Organization for Migration, and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Noting that Kazakhstan aspired to the chairmanship of the OSCE, Tokayev said that the NGO legislation appeared to be inconsistent with this goal. COMMENT -------------- ¶9. (SBU) Public criticism of the NGO legislation by Nazarbayeva and Tokayev may be a signal that the stage is being set for the President to withsdraw or veto the draft NGO legislation. Like a previous draft NGO law in 2003 and the draft Media law in 2004, the current draft NGO Law and amendments have been heavily debated and criticized in public forums. President Nazarbayev withdrew the previous draft NGO law in October 2003. He then vetoed, to great applause, the draft media law as unconstitutional in April 2004, while at the same time approving an elections law that had been criticized as not meeting international standards. The veto of the media law, in particular, overshadowed the criticism of the elections law. Astana may be calculating that it can relieve some international pressure by pursuing a "split the difference" strategy-- killing the NGO legislation but signing the equally troubling National Security Amendments into law. ¶10. (U) Dushanbe minimize considered. ORDWAY NNNN