Kazakhstan is poised to introduce classic jury trials, moving away from a hybrid system in which the outcome of criminal cases is decided by professional and citizen judges working in tandem.

On March 13, the Majilis, the lower house of parliament, gave its backing in a first reading to legislation regulating how those juries will operate.

Once the bill is adopted, decisions in cases tried by jury will be decided by 11 individuals without interference from the judge, who will then deliver their verdict. This scenario is familiar in the West, but a rarity in most of the former Soviet space.

Backers of the change have argued the reform will ensure a more objective consideration of criminal cases. The momentum for the shift has been building for some time.

“Under Kazakhstan’s constitution, authority stems from the people. Based on that provision, it is logical and justified … that justice be administered by the representatives of the people themselves through the introduction of the classical model of a jury trial,” Bakhtiyar Buleuliyev, a law professor, wrote in government newspaper Kazakhstanskaya Pravda last year.

Kazakhstan introduced its current hybrid system in 2007. In the early years, jury trials were reserved exclusively for especially serious crimes, ones envisioning the death penalty and life imprisonment. From 2007 to 2009, around 50 cases were tried by juries. The criteria for jury trials have since been broadened to cover offenses punishable by imprisonment for periods of more than 12 years.

Verdicts are decided by 10 jurors and the judge in a secret ballot. Only the accused can choose to have a jury trial.

The proposed reform has earned buy-in from senior figures in the judiciary. In an interview earlier this year, Supreme Court judge Nazgul Rakhmetullina echoed Buleuliyev’s evaluation.

“It is the classical model that best meets the goals and intent of creating the institution of jury trials, when the citizens of the country themselves issue a verdict that is based on their inner convictions,” Rakhmetullina said.

The possibility is that classic jury trials may culminate in a greater number of acquittals. It is already the case that more people are acquitted under the hybrid system, better known as the continental jury trial system.

As senior Supreme Court judge Abdrashit Zhukenov revealed in November 2022, jury courts in Kazakhstan tend to acquit in 10 percent of the cases under their consideration.

“In general courts, this figure is 1.5-2 percent,” Zhukenov told state news agency KazInform.

Sentiment among lawyers certainly indicates a groundswell for change.

A survey of lawyers conducted in 2017 by the Almaty-based Legal Policy Research Center revealed a strong desire for change. Of the 128 lawyers queried, nine out of every 10 expressed dislike for joint deliberation and decision-making by judges and jurors. The most common ground for dissatisfaction was the perception that judges were influencing or pressuring juries.

Discussions around this broader topic have acquired particular salience in recent days with the opening of a high-profile trial in Astana.

At the center of this drama is Kuandyk Bishimbayev, a 43-year-old former top-ranking minister, who stands accused of murdering his wife, Saltanat Nukenova.

The judge presiding over the case, Aizhan Kulbayeva, agreed to a petition from Bishimbayev’s lawyers on March 12 for the verdict to be considered by jury.

With public awareness around the issue of domestic abuse on the rise, there have been widespread calls among the public for Bishimbayev to face the maximum penalty. Lawyers for the ex-minister have described this clamor as an unjust form of pressure on the courts.

Pundits have suggested this is an attempt by Bishimbayev to seek a lenient outcome.

“If he had not chosen a jury trial, where he has a better chance to argue his position, then the result would have been what was demanded by public opinion, up to and including life in prison,” lawyer Vitaly Voronov said in an interview on the HyperBorey YouTube channel.

The Bishimbayev saga highlights the current predicament in a fuller context.

On one hand, the justice system in Kazakhstan is perceived by many experts and rights activists to be sorely lacking in scope for independent action. Freedom House articulated that thought in its 2023 Freedom in the World country report on Kazakhstan.

“The judiciary is effectively subservient to the executive branch, with the president nominating or directly appointing judges based on the recommendation of the Supreme Judicial Council, which is itself appointed by the president,” the report stated. “Judges are subject to political influence, and corruption is a problem throughout the judicial system.”

In this optic, the authorities could in cases like that of Bishimbayev be expected to place their thumb on the scales to prevent public outcries.

Even under jury trials, as they are currently arranged, suspicions linger about the court’s susceptibility to meddling.

This point was made by Gulnara Bazhkenova, the editor in chief of news website Orda.kz, during an interview on her YouTube channel with seasoned rights activist and lawyer, Yevgeny Zhovtis.

“We have comments from people saying that [Bishimbayev’s people] have bought the jurors,” Bazhkenova said.

Zhovtis responded that the solution to this is to ensure that the public have clear and transparent accounts of what is happening in the courts. That means the media need to be granted full scope to convey that information, he said.

“Make trials open. Because public opinion has a strong effect,” he said. “In that way, you will get rid of all these rumors and assumptions.”