After a bogus trial that many dissenters believe was politically motivated, authorities in Kazakhstan have jailed two critics of the government who posted critical messages on Facebook, EurasiaNet reports. The jailing comes two days after Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev called for snap parliamentary elections for March as the nation heads for hard times economically due to low oil prices.
President Nazarbayev, who has been in power since Kazakhstan gained its independence, has always been notorious for cracking down on dissent; no legitimate political opposition exists, and all media is state-run. For this reason, many people in Kazakhstan turn to the internet and social media to voice their dissent against the government. However, in recent years, even this haven has been increasingly monitored. In this case, Yermek Narymbayev and Serikzhan Mambetalin were posting on Facebook about an unpublished book from around two decades ago by an anti-government activist, Murat Telibekov (who is, coincidentally, now being investigated by the government). And because of these postings, this month they were convicted by a Kazakh court for “inciting ethnic strife and insulting the honor and dignity of the Kazakh nation.” Under the vague charge of incitement of ethnic, religious, tribal, or social strife, Mambetalin was sentenced to two years in prison, while Narymbayev, who had been in incredibly ill health throughout the trial, was sentenced to three years.
Although the government claims that no trial in Kazakhstan is politically motivated, this trial almost certainly was. In the virtual world of the internet, Narymbayev and Mambetalin were very vocal critics of the Nazarbayev Regime, yet do not protest physically. Because of that, the government decided to latch onto a collection of weak Facebook posts and raise bogus charges against the dissenters. To say that the trial was only a formality would be accurate. The charge of “inciting ethnic strife” is often used by the Kazakh government to silence dissidents, and civil rights groups have long urged Kazakhstan to abolish this charge. But let’s be honest: even if they did, they would simply create a similar crime to jail political activists in the country. Political dissent in Kazakhstan was largely confined on the internet; now, President Nazarayev is trying to clamp down on this platform of criticism as well.
This sentencing comes at a time of uncertainty for the largest economy of Central Asia, an economy which is in decline. International sanctions on Kazakhstan’s biggest trading partner, Russia, are certainly a factor. But this weakening economy is in large part due to the falling oil prices, which have affected many countries in the post-Soviet sphere; petroleum and crude oils make up over half of Kazakhstan’s total exports. This has most certainly made officials in Astana uneasy, as for the past two decades they have touted the successes of the economy as testament to their good leadership. Whenever President Nazarbayev is confronted with criticism of his abysmal human rights record, he always deflects it with claims that he has brought stability and even prosperity to Kazakhstan. If that statement would have been considered a stretch a few years ago, it certainly would be considered a stretch today. For the country’s economy is not stable, nor is it prospering; it is shrinking.
In response to this crisis, Nazarbayev recently decided to hold snap parliamentary elections in March. The Parliamentary Elections were originally scheduled for the Fall of 2016. Early elections are not necessarily new for the Central Asian nation; in fact, they are actually quite common. And each time, Kazakh elections are blasted for not having a legitimate opposition. This election will be no different, as Kazakh voters choose mainly between three nearly-identical parties that each back the President. The point of the early elections, as stated by the Kazakh government, is to get a mandate from the people that the government is doing the right thing. However, when there is no tangible opposition in elections, how can the government get a mandate? The answer is, of course, that they can’t. Each election in Kazakhstan, pro-government forces get well over 95% of the vote because citizens cannot see any other alternative. It only gives the government yet another propaganda tool to tell anyone watching them that they are acting on the wishes of the people.
There is also something of a cruel irony to this entire situation. President Nazarbayev claims to want a mandate from the people that he is doing a good job. And two days after he called for the early elections, Narymbayev (who, keep in mind, was nearly too ill to stand trial) and Mambetalin, the dissidents on Facebook, were sentenced to three and two years in prison, respectively. When in crisis, it is typical, if deplorable, for authoritarian regimes such as Nazarbayev’s to crack down on critics within their country more than they usually do. But when trying to get a mandate from the people to move forward on the current course, it would probably be wise to actually listen to the people instead of maneuvering the electoral system to create zero chances that it will not go according to plan. However, Nazarbayev is not interested in what the unfiltered masses have to say. And if they become too loud or too annoying, then he will lock them up.
Newborn Republic 