Question: Why Reading the Text Matters

Why Reading the Text Matters In a referendum, a citizen votes not on a slogan, but on a legal text that shapes the foundations of the state. That is why reading the Constitution itself remains essential for understanding what changes and how new rules affect your rights. ## The referendum has concluded

A referendum vote should not rest only on general sympathy, distrust, or campaign emotion. The issue is the legal framework of the state. The referendum took place on March 15, 2026, and the updated Constitution took effect on July 1, 2026.

## What is enough to read

A person does not need to become a constitutional lawyer before voting. But it is important to review at least:

- a short explanation of the reform
- the list of key changes
- the rights section
- the power-structure section
- the official comparison table

## Why this matters

If people vote without reading, their choice may depend too much on:

- campaign messaging
- social pressure
- selective quotations
- someone else’s interpretation

## What an informed vote means

An informed vote means that a person:

- knows the main changes
- understands the likely consequences
- forms a position independently rather than passively repeating others

## Main idea

The most useful preparation is simple: read enough to understand what changes on July 1 and how the Constitution affects your rights. - The referendum took place on 15 March 2026: 87.15% voted in favour, and the Constitution took effect on July 1, 2026
- A referendum vote concerns a legal text, not just political emotion
- Reading the main changes and comparison table greatly improves informed choice
- Unread voting is more vulnerable to slogans and selective interpretation
- Basic preparation is enough to make a vote more independent

Practical

practical-why-read-before-vote faq practical Practical

Popular Sovereignty and Elections

Citizen Participation

Kurultai

Constitutional Amendment


Question: What the 1995 Constitution Changed

What the 1995 Constitution Changed The 1995 Constitution created the basic framework of Kazakhstan’s modern state system. It clarified the structure of power, consolidated the presidential model, and provided the legal foundation for institutional stability over three decades. ## Why a new Constitution was needed

The 1993 Constitution solved many transition-era tasks, but political and legal practice soon showed the need for a more stable design. The **1995 Constitution** introduced that new architecture.

## What it changed

The 1995 Constitution:
- defined the state-power system more clearly
- strengthened the role of the presidency
- established a more stable parliamentary and governmental framework
- structured the judiciary and executive institutions more clearly
- consolidated the system of rights and freedoms

It became the core legal framework for Kazakhstan’s political and constitutional development in the decades that followed.

## Why it lasted so long

The 1995 Constitution remained in force for about **30 years**. That longevity itself shows that it provided a meaningful level of institutional continuity and stability.

At the same time, it was amended at different stages. The system was not frozen; it adapted gradually.

## Reform within continuity

Later amendments to the 1995 Constitution were aimed at:
- adjusting the political system
- clarifying relations between state institutions
- modernizing specific constitutional mechanisms
- responding to new public and legal demands

## Why it matters for 2026

The 2026 constitutional project does not erase the 1995 Constitution from history. Instead, it builds on it.

The basic foundations of statehood remain, but:
- the architecture of power is updated
- rights guarantees are expanded
- the accumulated experience of 30 years is re-evaluated

To understand 2026, it is essential to understand 1995 as the main constitutional framework of the current system.

→ [Read the full text of the 1995 Constitution](/constitution-1995?lang=en) - The 1995 Constitution became the basis of Kazakhstan’s modern state system
- It remained in force for about 30 years
- It was amended repeatedly over time
- The 2026 project updates this framework rather than erasing it

History

constitution-history-1995 faq history History

Canonical Constitution.my explainer with card-level checked official sources.

State Foundations

Popular Sovereignty

Constitution and Applicable Law

President

Kurultai

Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 1995 (official archive publication)


Question: Myth: “Everything changes the next day after the referendum”

Myth: “Everything changes the next day after the referendum” No. Citizens voted on March 15, the key laws were signed on June 5, and the Constitution entered into force on 1 July 2026. The legal system does not transform overnight: elections, decrees, and institutional launch follow in sequence. ## Why this myth appears

A referendum can look like a one-day switch. But constitutional change works through a sequence of legal and institutional steps.

## The actual calendar

| Date | What happens |
|---|---|
| **15 March 2026** | Referendum and approval of the new Constitution |
| **16 March – 30 June** | Transition period: the state keeps operating under the 1995 framework while preparing the launch of the new model |
| **5 June 2026** | Key constitutional laws on the President, the Kurultai, and the Kazakhstan People's Council are signed |
| **1 July 2026** | The new Constitution entered into force |
| **August 23, 2026** | Kurultai deputy elections |

## Why it takes time

- State institutions continued to function without a legal vacuum; Parliament under the 1995 model ceased its powers on July 1.
- The presidential decree and CEC calendar have now been published; voting is scheduled for August 23.
- Ordinary legislation must be aligned with the new Constitution over time.

## Main idea

The referendum is the point of approval, not the final operational step. Legal entry into force, elections, and institutional launch happen one after another. - The referendum took place on 15 March 2026, and the Constitution entered into force on 1 July 2026
- Key constitutional laws were signed on 5 June 2026
- Kurultai deputy elections are scheduled for August 23, 2026
- Existing institutions continued during the March 16 – June 30 transition period; the former Parliament ceased its powers on July 1
- Implementation is gradual rather than immediate

Myths

referendum-myth-change-next-day faq myths Myths

Constitutional Amendments

Entry into Force

Transitional Provisions

Alignment of Legislation

Preliminary official results of the March 15, 2026 national referendum

Central Referendum Commission of Kazakhstan

Official publication of the 2026 Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Official constitutional documents


Question: Myth: 'If the Constitution Was Adopted by Referendum, It Must Be Perfect'

Myth: 'If the Constitution Was Adopted by Referendum, It Must Be Perfect' A referendum confers legitimacy – but not perfection. The US Constitution began by enshrining slavery. Kazakhstan's 1995 Constitution required 56 amendments in 2022. Every constitution is a compromise. That is precisely why the 2026 Constitution builds in mechanisms for renewal: the Constitutional Court, amendments, and the Khalyk Kenesi. ## The myth

"The people voted for it – so the Constitution is perfect and nothing in it needs to change."

## The facts

A referendum confers **legitimacy** – the right to speak in the name of the people. But legitimacy is not the same as perfection.

**No constitution in history has been perfect:**

- **US Constitution (1787)** – enshrined slavery. It took 78 years and a civil war to pass the Thirteenth Amendment. There have been 27 amendments in 237 years
- **French Constitution** – the current one is the fifth (1958). Each of the previous four addressed the challenges of its time and became outdated
- **Kazakhstan's Constitution (1995)** – was optimal for the transition period. But over 30 years, contradictions accumulated: the 2022 reform introduced 56 amendments, and the 2026 Constitution changes 84% of the text

**Why this happens:**
- A constitution is a **compromise** among groups, interests, and values
- Society changes – what worked in 1995 does not work in 2026
- Practice reveals problems that cannot be foreseen at the 2026 Constitutioning stage

## Mechanisms for renewal in the 2026 Constitution

The Constitution provides for its own updating:
- **Amendments** – through the Kurultai (qualified majority) or referendum
- **Constitutional Court** – interprets provisions, adapting them to new realities
- **Khalyk Kenesi** – a feedback channel from society, with the right of legislative initiative
- **Constitutional laws** – specify principles without changing the Constitution itself

## Why this myth exists

There is a desire for a "final answer": vote once and never have to think again. But a constitution is a living document. Criticism and renewal are signs of a mature society, not disrespect. - A referendum confers legitimacy but does not guarantee perfection
- US Constitution – 27 amendments in 237 years; Kazakhstan 1995 – 56 amendments in 2022
- The 2026 Constitution builds in renewal mechanisms: amendments, the Constitutional Court, Khalyk Kenesi
- Criticising a constitution is normal practice, protected by freedom of expression

Myths

myths-constitution-always-good faq myths Myths

Supremacy of the Constitution

Limits on Rights Restrictions

Constitutional Amendments

Constitutional Court Opinion

Constitutional Law on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan


Question: Myth: “If a referendum has only one question, there is no real choice”

Myth: “If a referendum has only one question, there is no real choice” A single-question referendum is not automatically fake, invalid, or meaningless. If the issue submitted is a unified constitutional project, one question can reflect a yes-or-no decision on the project as a whole. The key issue is not the number of questions but whether citizens have enough information to make an informed choice. ## Why people say this

Many people assume that “real choice” must mean several separate questions. That intuition is understandable because citizens may want to approve some changes and reject others.

## Why one question can still be legitimate

In constitutional referendums, the object of voting is sometimes a **single coherent project** rather than a list of unrelated amendments. In that case, one question can logically ask whether citizens support the project as a whole.

## What really matters

The quality of a referendum depends less on the number of questions and more on whether:

- the full text is published in advance
- citizens can study what is being proposed
- explanatory materials are available
- public discussion is open and meaningful
- people have enough time to understand the proposal

## Is more always better

Not necessarily. Too many separate questions can also create problems:

- voters may become confused
- the process may become overly technical
- the logic of the reform as a whole may be lost

## The real risk

The real danger is not “one question” by itself. The real danger appears when:

- the text is unclear
- the process lacks transparency
- people do not understand what they are voting on
- information is one-sided or incomplete

## Main idea

“One question means no choice” is too simplistic. What matters is whether the voter understands the substance of the choice. - One question does not automatically make a referendum invalid or meaningless
- 15 March 2026 – the vote took place on March 15: one question, accept or reject the Constitution as a whole
- A single question may be logical for a unified constitutional project
- The key issue is informed choice, not just the number of questions
- Transparency and access to the full text matter more than formal question count

Myths

referendum-myth-one-question faq myths Myths

Popular Sovereignty and Referendum

Citizen Participation

Amending the Constitution by Referendum


Question: Myth: “Boycott is the strongest political response”

Myth: “Boycott is the strongest political response” A boycott is not the same as a “No” vote. The official record counts turnout and votes cast, not a separate boycott category. Final turnout on March 15, 2026 was 73.12%, and 87.15% of participants voted in favor. A “No” vote affected the result; non-participation was not counted as a protest vote. ## Why boycott can seem attractive

For some citizens, boycott expresses a refusal to recognize or legitimize the process. This may feel like a morally or politically strong stance, especially where trust is low.

## The practical weakness of boycott

In a referendum, boycott usually does not translate into a direct substantive position. It does not clearly show:

- which norm you oppose
- whether you reject the whole project
- what alternative you support

## Why participation has more direct effect

Participation allows a citizen to:

- vote in favor
- vote against
- influence the numerical result directly
- be counted in the official outcome

Boycott, by contrast, often affects the process only indirectly.

## When boycott could have mattered

A boycott could have affected the legal validity of the vote only if final turnout had fallen **below 50%**. Actual turnout on March 15, 2026 was **73.12%**, so the threshold was met.

## Main idea

Boycott may be a political gesture, but voting is the clearest way to affect the formal result of a referendum. - Boycott does not count as a direct "no" vote – the protocol records only turnout and votes
- Participation is the clearest way to affect the official result
- Boycott may have symbolic political meaning but weaker formal effect
- Final turnout on March 15, 2026 was 73.12% – the participation threshold was met
- In referendum mechanics, voting is the more direct instrument

Myths

Popular Sovereignty and Referendum

Citizen Participation

Decision Adoption Conditions

Constitutional Court Opinion


Question: Myth: 'A Referendum Is Always Better Than Parliament Because the People Decide'

Myth: 'A Referendum Is Always Better Than Parliament Because the People Decide' A referendum does not replace parliament – it complements it for fundamental questions. Voting on a budget or a tax code with a simple Yes/No is not feasible. The 2026 referendum is the appropriate case: 84% of the text is new, and the structure of power is fundamentally different. ## The myth

"Let the people decide everything through referendums – what do we need parliament for?"

## The facts

A referendum and a parliament solve different problems.

**When a referendum is needed:**
- A new constitution – the foundation of the state, requiring the highest legitimacy
- Questions of sovereignty and territory
- Fundamental values on which society must speak directly

**When parliament is more effective:**
- Budget – thousands of line items, compromises between sectors and regions
- Tax code – hundreds of pages of technical provisions
- International treaties – negotiations and legal expertise
- Current legislation – hundreds of acts per year; a referendum on each is impossible

**Risks of "referendum on everything":**
- Voter fatigue – in Switzerland, referendum turnout is often below 40%
- Populism – a complex question is reduced to Yes/No
- Manipulation of the wording – a question can be phrased to steer the answer

## The 2026 Constitution – exactly the right case

A new constitution is a fundamental choice. 84% of the text is new. A unicameral Kurultai replaces a bicameral parliament; parliamentary functions expand from 13 to 23; the Khalyk Kenesi, the Vice President, and new rights are introduced. This is not a technical amendment – it is a choice of direction for the country. Such a decision belongs to the people.

## Why this myth exists

Disillusionment with parliament: "deputies do not represent our interests." But the solution is not to abolish parliament – it is to make it more effective. The new Constitution does exactly that: all 145 Kurultai deputies are directly elected, with quotas for women, young people, and people with disabilities. - A referendum is for fundamental questions (constitution, sovereignty)
- Parliament is more effective for current legislation (budget, taxes, treaties)
- 2026 Constitution: 84% of text is new, parliamentary functions expand from 13 to 23 – the right case for a referendum
- After adoption, current laws are passed by the Kurultai (145 deputies), not by referendum

Myths

myths-referendum-vs-parliament faq myths Myths

Popular Sovereignty and Referendum

Kurultai

Amending the Constitution by Referendum

Constitutional Law on the Kurultai of the Republic of Kazakhstan


Question: What changed after the Constitution entered into force?

The Constitution has been in force since July 1, 2026. New rights are already being applied, the key constitutional laws have been published, and the next public phase is the Kurultai elections scheduled for August 23, 2026.

What changed after the new Constitution was adopted? On 15 March 2026, citizens of Kazakhstan approved the new Constitution in a referendum. Key constitutional laws were signed on June 5, the Constitution took effect on July 1, and on the same day the decree calling Kurultai elections was signed. Kurultai deputy elections are scheduled for August 23, 2026. ## Key Points
After the referendum of March 15, 2026, the constitutional reform moved from drafting to implementation. It is now important to distinguish between what has already been signed, what has been in force since July 1, and what still awaits a separate decree or organisational step.

## What Has Already Happened
- On **June 5, 2026**, the signed constitutional laws on the President, the Kurultai, and the Kazakhstan People's Council were published.
- The basic model of the new institutions is already fixed in the official texts.
- The Constitution entered into force on July 1, while the institutional transition continues until the new bodies are formed.

## What Has Been in Force Since July 1, 2026
- The new Constitution became the Basic Law of the country.
- The 1995 Constitution ceased to apply.
- New constitutional guarantees are in force, including the reduction of detention without court to 48 hours. Citizen applications to the Constitutional Court have been accepted since January 1, 2023; the new Constitution preserves that mechanism.

## What Is Expected Next
- On **July 1, 2026**, the President signed the decree calling Kurultai elections.
- The first elections to the unicameral Kurultai are scheduled for **August 23, 2026**.
- The appointment of the Vice President depends on the formation of the Kurultai and its consent to the nominee.
- The law on the Kazakhstan People's Council has been in force since July 1, and its Secretariat was created on July 2. No separate official date for approving the membership or holding the first session has yet been published.

## Facts
- March 15, 2026 – referendum and adoption of the new Constitution
- June 5, 2026 – key constitutional laws signed
- July 1, 2026 – Constitution entered into force
- August 23, 2026 – Kurultai deputy elections
- July 2, 2026 – Secretariat of the Kazakhstan People's Council created; the first-session date has not yet been published

Current Focus

what-changed-after-vote faq post_referendum After the Referendum

Popular Sovereignty and Referendum

Referendum Adoption Procedure

Entry into Force

Transitional Provisions

Alignment of Acts

Decree establishing the Secretariat of the Kazakhstan People's Council

Decree calling the Kurultai election for August 23, 2026