ODIHR Legal Reviews, Assessments and Guidelines

Summary: The Preliminary Opinion notes that the legal definition of “terrorism” and so called “extremism”-related offences in the Criminal Code of Kazakhstan would benefit from further amendments in order to comply with the principles of legal certainty, foreseeability and specificity of criminal law, and to ensure that only “violent extremism” is criminalized. It also concludes that the draft amendments introduce some new provisions which have the potential to unduly restrict freedom of movement and to choose one’s residence, the right to freedom of expression – particularly in terms of access to the Internet and other communication tools, as well as the right to freedom of religion or belief.

Summary: Overall, ODIHR questions whether a specific law on countering so-called “extremism” should be retained at all, given the inherent difficulty of providing a legal definition of the term “extremism” and the serious human rights concerns arising from vague and overbroad definitions and provisions. If the Law is nevertheless retained, it should be substantially revised to ensure its compliance with OSCE commitments and international human rights standards and to reflect the need to safeguard legitimate activities, especially the exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms and activities of human rights and humanitarian organizations.