Abstract
This article examines a parliamentary development in post-Soviet Kazakhstan during 2007-2012 years from historical and institutional point of view. It exclusively deals with the formation and development of the sixth post-Soviet Parliament of Kazakhstan, which was technically called the fourth convocation of Parliament. Authors analyse the parliamentary reforms of 2007 and its consequences and impact for the development of parliamentarism and party system in Kazakhstan. A case study of this particular convocation of modern Kazakh legislature allows us to make an in-depth research and helps us to better understand main peculiarities of legislative development during the period of 2007-2012. Article concludes that the forth convocation of the Parliament of Kazakhstan, which functioned during the 2007-2012, proved to be even more unanimous and homogenous in terms of both party affiliations and political orientations in comparison to its predecessors. On the one hand, this kind of solidarity contributed to the political stability and smooth political reforms; on the other hand, homogeneity of the Parliament impacted the lack of competitiveness and hampered the development of party factions and deputy groups within Parliament and the development of party system per se. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n6s1p335
Highlights
IntroductionThese states were faced with a huge task of building democratic state institutions, which was not an easy thing to do
The Republic of Kazakhstan is one of the fifteenth states which had appeared after the dissolution of the Soviet Union
General scientific mainstream in Kazakhstan comes to an agreement that constitutional reforms of 2007 meant to be the turning point for parliamentary development and establishing a multi-party system in Kazakhstan
Summary
These states were faced with a huge task of building democratic state institutions, which was not an easy thing to do. The Kazakh SSR Supreme Soviet formally was granted wide and unlimited executive and legislative powers within republic, but was accountable to Moscow on matters of budget and federal jurisdiction. This situation had changed all over communist states at the second half of 1980s with the beginning of the Mikhail Gorbachev’s era His reforms of perestroika and glasnost “were to a great extent responsible for the subsequent developments in the whole Communist Bloc” Democratic oppositions in these countries gradually became stronger, which eventually brought to the collapse of the communist regime
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
