Protests in Kazakhstan, no matter what goals are pursued by activists, are taken by authorities as a threat to the existing political regime. Back in 2019, when Nursultan Nazarbayev stepped down from presidency, there was some easing of restrictions on the right to peaceful assembly. However, it did not last long: in January 2022, the bloodiest riot in the history of the country (Kantar) occurred, which resulted in 238 people killed, including two children and six teenagers.
CABAR.asia talked to Bakhytzhan Toregozhina, a renowned human rights activist, head of the civil society coalition “Qantar 2022”, on how protests and authority’s reaction to them have changed.
– Protests in Kazakhstan are known for their major upsurges accompanied by violent repressions – Zhanaozen of 2011 and Kantar of 2022. What is common between these two protests but the obvious sign, i.e. the reaction of authorities that resorted to weapons?
– In the beginning, these two protests were peaceful, and then turned into a violent phase. In Zhanaozen, protesting oil workers did not use the weapons. Peaceful and unarmed citizens took part in the Kantar protest, but, according to the documents, the weapons were brought to the protest venues and distributed among participants. Peaceful citizens do not know how to use weapons, and took them only as a trophy. Protesters in Zhanaozen, just like in Kantar, initially stood up for their socio-economic rights when they chanted “Gaz yelu!” (translation from the Kazakh language: ‘Gas 50’, meaning that the main demand of the protesters was to reduce the gas price to 50 tenge per litre – Editor). However, it was a different situation in Kantar because the protest was supported by more than 80 cities and towns, district centres, and was well organised.
Zhanaozen was the protest of workers, who had protested for seven months before and demanded observance of their labour rights, fair remuneration from the employer. It had nothing to do with the change of power or the akim. Unfortunately, politics intervened and authorities used weapons because they did not want to overshadow the celebration of December 16 (Independence Day of Kazakhstan – Editor). This is how they decided to cease months-long strikes.
– Can we say that Zhanaozen blocked temporarily the protest activity in Kazakhstan when 16 people were shot dead?
– The society was scared, and it is clear why. Every mentioning of the word ‘protest’ caused everyone to recall the shooting of people at the square of Zhanaozen. People came to their senses and were literally waiting for the authorities to investigate the events properly, for punishment of perpetrators who ordered to shoot. But authorities failed to do it. People licked their wounds and rethought their relationships with authorities.
– According to some experts, the lack of justice in the investigation of Zhanaozen 2011 has acted as a trigger, which caused people from various regions to support protests caused by liquefied gas price hike that broke out in the west of Kazakhstan 11 years later, in January 2022.
– Kantar is an organised protest, this is my personal opinion. When authorities say that events in Kantar had been prepared for two years, I agree with this opinion as a person who documented these events. In fact, people, perpetrators, scenario, political technology, main team were well prepared. They knew exactly where the stores, police departments were, how to lead the crowd to the centre. They used ordinary people. When we recorded information, we arrived at a conclusion that people failed to understand what happened. It was one of the options of the coup d’état.– In 2016, when there were land protests against amendments to the Land Code, the authorities decided to discuss the issue and met the demands of the protesters. However, the leaders of the protests were incarcerated eventually. But relationships between the authorities and the people seemed to change a little. Why do you think it happened?
– Some would disagree with my opinion, but land protests were also initiated by some officials from authorities. That’s why we saw support from local officials – some akims took part in the protests together with the protesters. It means that they were allowed to protest ‘from above’. What did the presence of Nurlan Nogayev (the then akim of Atyrau region – Editor) in the protest mean? I attended the trial of Maks Bokayev and Talgat Ayan (civil activists convicted after participation in land protests – Editor) and it was declared there that directors of enterprises provided buses to their workers and released them from work to send them to Atyrau for the protests. How is it ever possible if they are all dependent on local authorities and KNB (National Security Committee – Editor), whose activity is to prosecute dissent?
Back then, protests took place in many cities, and their agenda was supported by the public because the land issue was quite relevant then and caused concern of the people. At some point, the things got out of hand, and obvious leaders emerged (Maks Bokayev and Talgat Ayan – Editor). They could be supported by the public and it could change the history. Therefore, they incarcerated the leaders, whom the public deemed as their heroes. Back then, the murky decision on introducing of norms allowing foreigners to buy land to the legislation was quietly reviewed in the offices in a way profitable to authorities.
We do know that decisions that the authorities want to ‘push through’ are adopted quietly, away from the public, and citizens are just informed of the fact. When something is brought up for discussion, the goal is to remind about oneself, or pursue other goals, for example, to gain more popularity.
Our authorities have enough levers to stop any opposition movement, which they do not support. We can see it through the example of non-registered parties ‘El Tiregi’, ‘Alga Kazakstan’, and other parties, whose activities are blocked because they are not agreed with the authorities. Others, which negotiate with them, or share their interests, are permitted to hold protests. Unfortunately, we do not have a right of peaceful assembly without the approval by local governments.
– After Nazarbayev stepped down from office, ordinary people managed to hold protests for a short time.
– I was really inspired by the adoption of the new law “On protests” 3-4 years ago and filed an application to the akimat. But it was not as easy as it seemed. I was called to the akimat, they asked me some questions. Then, some activists, whom I have never known, appeared and offered ‘help’ to me. They always asked me weird questions about participants, etc… In fact, our authorities are scared of protests. Nazarbayev has been scared of them all his life, and this fear was inherited by Tokayev.
[insert page=’krovavyj–yanvar–izmenilis–li–vlast–i–obshhestvo–v–kazahstane‘ display=’page–post–news–left.php‘]- What is the difference between the reaction of Tokayev to the protests and of his administration?
– Nazarbayev has always been scared of protests and kept them under control. Opposition forces could not get a permit to hold protests. When Tokayev became the president, he promised to introduce the method of notification about protests; it was his thing. First, notice is given, and the akimat issues a permit. In the beginning, activists became active, but then authorities realised they had to improve preparations for protests; akimats and other government bodies had to work intensely to eliminate all risks of things getting out of control, which they got used to. Thus, everything gradually returned to the actual prohibition of peaceful protests. I believe it was the initiative of the KNB because it is responsible for ‘maintaining domestic stability’. Now akimats coordinate only protests of entities affiliated with authorities.
– When a wave of protests occurred in the country after 2019, there was a narrative that the temporary freedom to protest and to demand anything from authorities caused dependency attitudes. What do you think about it?
– I don’t agree with this opinion. A protest is the last resort of people. If you ask a solo protester, he/she would tell you that all instances have been passed, numerous inquiries have been made to state bodies, but the issue was still unresolved. People do understand that protests here are punishable, but still they take this risk. It is a gesture of despair, the last thing they can rely on hoping to draw public and government’s attention to their problem. People protest not because they want to be welfare recipients, but because their problems remain unresolved for years, and they become poor, depressive and absolutely unprotected over this time.
– How did Kantar and its investigation of tortures against detainees, closed trials affect the protest space of the country and the public in general?
– Kantar has brought the civil society down to earth. Now everyone understands that each of us could be shot down for no reason – only for the intention to take to the streets and support the protesters. Kantar got people back to reality by making them realise that the leader of the state can give the ‘fire without warning’ order without clear explanations. Kantar demonstrated that the military that suppressed the protest by harsh measures could deviate the responsibility and could be granted amnesty.
Moreover, Kantar got us back to reality by making citizens realise that our country is not a rule-of-law state, and many decades of non-compliance with the Constitution, disregard of human rights lead to such terrible tragedies.
The society now is even sicker than it was after the Zhanaozen events. People have hidden their pain, suffering and sense of injustice deep inside and are still waiting for the authorities to tell the truth about what happened. Meanwhile, the authorities get mixed up not only in foreign policy, their relations with Türkiye, Russia, China, United States, but also in their relations with the public. The current president is not the president for every Kazakhstani. Kantar has shown that there is a wide gap between the authorities and the people, and it is getting even wider.
– According to sociologists, there had been a very high level of protest intensity before Kantar. It is obvious that after the tragedy the protest intensity has not gone anywhere. What would be your forecasts?
– The protest intensity accumulates. Moreover, the people can see what happens to the people persecuted on political grounds. Recently, leaders of opposing parties Marat Zhylanbaev (Alga Kazakstan) and Nurzhan Altaev (El Tiregi) have been incarcerated; Zhanbolat Mamai (the leader of the non-registered Democratic Party – Editor) has been forced to keep silent; seven activists have been put on trial on a charge of the attempted power grab despite their shortage of money and resources.
Thus, the authorities have added gravity to social injustice, which has remained in the hearts of the people. People realise that it is almost impossible to prove one’s innocence, that the right to a fair trial is rather notional. While the authorities simply close the trials to the public in order to conceal their affiliation and political bias. Perhaps, we need to study the world history to understand how such things usually end up.