International Partnership for Human Rights (IPHR) and Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law (KIBHR) have prepared a joint written briefing for the upcoming EU–Kazakhstan Human Rights Dialogue, scheduled for March 2026. The briefing documents sustained pressure on civic space in Kazakhstan and highlights key challenges to the protection of civic freedoms, which warrant EU attention. IPHR and KIBHR urge the EU to prioritise these issues during the dialogue and in its broader engagement with Kazakhstan under the Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, with a view to securing concrete improvements.
The briefing covers the following issues:
Constitutional Reform
The ongoing constitutional reform in Kazakhstan has been presented as a step toward political modernisation. However, real political change is unlikely in the current environment, where power remains concentrated in the executive without effective checks and balances, political pluralism is suppressed, and opposition parties are excluded from elections.
The reform process has been rushed, non-transparent and non-inclusive. A draft constitution was finalised within a month of launching the reform process in January 2026, with a referendum on it set for 15 March, leaving little opportunity for meaningful debate and civil society participation.
Civil society has also raised concerns about the human rights implications of proposed changes, including the omission of a previous guarantee of the precedence of international treaties over national law, which threatens to undermine the implementation of international human rights treaties in the country.
Incidents of intimidation targeting those opposing the constitutional reform have raised concerns that further attempts to stifle criticism may follow as the referendum draws closer.
Stigmatisation of Civil Society Organisations
Although the “foreign agents” law proposed by a Member of Parliament last year has not advanced, hostile rhetoric against foreign-funded civil society organisations has increased, with decision-makers repeatedly accusing such organisations of promoting ‘’alien’’ values and threatening national security.
New rules that entered into force in January 2026 increase state oversight of foreign-funded organisations, prompting fears of further stigmatisation, pressure, and undue interference into their activities.
LGBTIQ+ groups are particularly vulnerable to harassment, with recurring incidents reported where police appear to have cooperated with anti-LGBTIQ+ activists attacking their meetings.
Escalating Pressure on Independent Media and Free Speech
Independent media and journalists have faced growing pressure, including through police raids and criminal prosecution such as in the recent cases against Orda.kz and KazTAG.
Online attacks against independent media, journalists and bloggers have ranged from direct blocking to apparently coordinated campaigns abusing the complaint mechanisms of social media platforms to trigger closures.
The denial of accreditation to 16 journalists from the Kazakh service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty last summer demonstrates the misuse of accreditation rules to stifle independent reporting.
A broadly worded ban on so-called LGBTIQ+ propaganda, which was adopted despite widespread criticism, could be applied to the publication of virtually any information on LGBTIQ+ issues. It is also likely to further increase stigma, hostility and discrimination against LGBTIQ+ communities.
New legislation expanding the role of so-called community assistants in crime prevention, including by mandating them to address vaguely defined “anti-social behaviour” could enable arbitrary targeting, for example, of LGBTIQ+ rights advocates.
Clampdown on Protests and Lack of Accountability for January 2022 Violations
A Constitutional Court ruling issued in 2025 prohibited automatic refusals of requests to hold assemblies on the grounds that the planned venue is occupied. Despite this, authorities continue to deny authorisation for protests on different pretexts, such as the provision of allegedly incomplete or incorrect information.
Those gathering without official approval, even for small-scale pickets, continue to face detentions, fines and short-term arrests. Preventive detentions of activists ahead of anticipated protests also persist.
This persistent clampdown has effectively discouraged peaceful assemblies as a channel for dialogue with citizens.
While up-to-date official statistics are lacking regarding convictions for torture and other violations during the suppression of mass protests in January 2022, the number remains disproportionately low compared to the number of violations reported.
Civil society concerns about the lack of accountability related to the January 2022 events have been echoed by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights and the UN Human Rights Committee, both of which issued important recommendations on this issue in 2025.
Persecution of Activists, Journalists and Bloggers
Activists, journalists and bloggers continue to face persecution, with criminal charges increasingly used as a tool of retaliation. Prosecution is often initiated under broadly worded provisions of the Criminal Code, which are open to abuse, such as knowingly disseminating “false” information, “inciting” discord, and involvement in “extremist” activities.
For example, journalists Gulnara Bazhkenova, Amir Kassenov and Aset Mataev are all facing ‘’false’’ information charges over their investigative reporting, while satirical blogger Temirlan Yensebek was sentenced to five-year restrictions on his movement and social media activities for allegedly ‘’inciting’’ inter-ethnic discord when sharing a controversial but widely available song. Activist Amangeldy Jahin is under investigation for ‘’extremism,’’ reflecting a broader pattern of using such charges to penalise peaceful opposition engagement.
Five activists who peacefully opposed the construction of a nuclear power plant were convicted of preparing riots, and handed non-custodial sentences, illustrating how authorities equate dissent with rioting.
Other activists, such as Marat Zhylanbaev, Duman Mukhamedkarim and Aigerim Tleuzhan are serving prison sentences widely considered politically motivated amid serious concerns for their health and well-being. Zhylanbaev was reportedly recently transferred to a stricter prison regime following ongoing pressure and restrictions on his contacts with lawyers and family. Extended hunger strikes held by him have further compounded the effects of harsh detention conditions.
Those raising issues sensitive for relations with Kazakhstan’s powerful neighbours have also been targeted. Nineteen activists from the Atajurt movement are currently on trial for ‘’inciting’’ national discord after peacefully protesting China’s repressive policies, while defrocked Orthodox priest Yakov Vorontsov has been accused of running a drug den after opposing Russia’s war against Ukraine and attempting to establish a new Orthodox community independent of Moscow. Journalist Lukpan Akhmedyarov was investigated for spreading ‘’false’’ information over his reporting on Kazakh citizens forcibly enlisted for Russia’s war against Ukraine.
In a recurring intimidation tactic, activists have been summoned and questioned as alleged witnesses in criminal cases. For example, human rights defender Bakhytzhan Toregozhina was questioned on involvement in a banned group after raising concerns about Marat Zhylanbaev’s deteriorating health in prison. After initially being questioned as a witness, LGBTIQ+ rights activist Zhanar Sekerbayeva has now been designated a suspect in an assault case based on an unfounded complaint by an anti-LGBTIQ+ activist who has harassed her and her colleagues.
Lawyers representing defendants in politically motivated cases have also faced reprisals. The case of lawyer Murat Adam set a dangerous precedent: he was stripped of his license after speaking out about procedural violations in the case of his client, journalist Gulnara Bazhkenova.
Transnational repression remains of serious concern, including the lack of meaningful cooperation with the Ukrainian investigation into the 2024 killing of journalist Aidos Sadykov in Kyiv, and intimidation of his widow, journalist Natalia Sadykova.
These issues are addressed in more detail in the full briefing paper prepared by IPHR and KIBHR, which also sets out recommendations for EU engagement with the Kazakhstani authorities. The full briefing and a summary are available for download below.
IPHR-KIBHR summary fact sheet for EU-Kazakhstan Human Rights Dialogue February 2026
IPHR-KIBHR briefing for EU-Kazakhstan Human Rights Dialogue February 2026
