Kazakhstan made right choice taking as basis French model of constitution - expert

Mr. Thomann, in your opinion, which role has the Constitution played in development of Kazakhstan as an independent state?

I think that the Constitution of Kazakhstan which is based on the French model promotes development of your country. It is necessary to say, that each country should have its own path of development, adopting laws on the basis of a constitution. At the same time it is needed to compare different world models to take the best from each of them, and this was done in your country.

The time showed that such a model became the most appropriate for Kazakhstan, hence it allowed to ensure political stability, public concord, economic development of the state as well as effective protection of human rights and freedoms.

And why, in your opinion, the French model of constitution is more suited to Kazakhstan?

France's Constitution was adopted in very difficult times. In that time the country experienced decolonization and needed reconstruction and solution of a lot of problems after the World War II. We needed a hierarchical power structure to address the existing difficulties.

Your country gaining independence in 1991 was in the difficult transition period. Kazakhstan had to build a strong nation-state, liberalize economy. All this should have been done in conditions of the international instability and in an era of the multipolar world. As a result, Kazakhstan made a right choice selecting the French model of constitution which is based on a presidential form of government.

What are the advantages of the presidential form of government?

I must say that the presidential form of government is a symbol of the country's consolidation. It is easier to represent a single nation state in the international arena. In addition, during the transitional period of comprehensive reforms the country faces many problems that can be solved only in the presence of a strong central government that can respond quickly to a changing environment. That is better to do this when the state is strong. Even if some issues can be resolved at the local level, the transitional period requires centralization. So, I think, that the Kazakhstan's Constitution with strong presidential rule is more suited to Kazakhstan.

In addition, the Fundamental Law embodies what the government intends to become in the future. I believe that the Constitution, in which there is a unifying factor, as the President, - means that the country intends to play a greater role in world politics and to be recognized in the international arena.

Is it needed to make further amendments to the Constitution?

I think the Constitution should be as compact as possible; it must be readable, so that people clearly understand its goals and objectives. Once adopted, the Fundamental Law must be amended and adapted to a changing environment on the basis of the secondary law. In my opinion, the Constitution must be stable as far as possible since it is the identity of the country. If it is constantly changing, you can lose your identity and destabilize the political situation in the country.

In your opinion, is it possible to change Kazakhstan's form of government - from the presidential to parliamentary, or is it better to continue the current path?

This decision is up to the people of Kazakhstan. However, I do not think you want to change the Constitution. In accordance with your geopolitical system, you have a very large country by area, which is a home to a lot of minorities. If you change the form of government to parliamentary, decentralize the system, you will encounter many challenges, including a threat to the country's unity.

For example, in the 1950s France formed a nation-state with a strong central government. There are politicians who want to return to a parliamentary system, but do not get support from the people who know that this will change the individuality of the country. You have, I think, the same thing.

Thanks you for the interview!