Translation of Ekaterina’s post (RUS)

The referendum scheduled by the Provisional Government for 27 June is fast approaching. Contrary to the people’s expectations and calls by certain political groups after recent events in the south of the country to cancel or postpone the vote, the Provisional Government is taking neither step.

On 16 June the Provisional Government passed a decree titled “On Changes to the Decree of 21 April ‘On the Referendum of the Kyrgyz Republic,’” which stated the following: “The Referendum shall not take place in a state of war or emergency. In cases where a state of emergency is declared in individual regions, a referendum can take place if the number of voting citizens living in these territories is less than half of the number of citizens of Kyrgyzstan registered to take part in the referendum.”

Opponents of the referendum say that the situation in the south has not yet stabilized, that the country is still in mourning, and that it hasn’t even been 40 days since the beginning of the tragic events. On 20 June, the head of the Osh region branch of the Ministry of Interior, Omurbek Suvanaliev, resigned. He said his decision was motivated by the fact that the government refused to postpone the referendum despite the difficult situation in the south.

Moreover, to have a more convincing referendum, the Provisional Government declared there would have to be a minimum 30% voter turnout, but subsequently removed this threshold. Omurbek Tekebaev, a member of the Provisional Government, said this was caused by “a difficult situation in a time of deficit.”

The main reason for not cancelling the referendum – and for holding it in the first place – is that it would finally legitimize the government in Kyrgyzstan.

In reality, there were two ways of legitimizing the government. Kurmanbek Bakiev’s resignation was processed by the Zhogorku Kenesh (parliament), which then elected Rosa Otunbaeva as speaker, making her automatically the acting head of state. The ZK could have been dissolved and early parliamentary and presidential elections held.

However, had this course of action been taken, the Provisional Government would have been vulnerable to its own criticism: since 2007 the opposition has been claiming that the parliamentary elections were rigged.
This is why they chose to go with the second option: holding a referendum.

The national vote carries several risks, among which experts have highlighted the following. First, there is no guarantee that the referendum will be held in a manner safe for the citizens of Kyrgyzstan. Second, it threatens to divide the political elite, whose one half will be for the referendum and the other against. Third, it is expensive, while resources are needed for humanitarian aid.

And the big picture will not really be affected by how people vote in the referendum. If the country votes “for,” then it will have approved the draft of the constitution and Rosa Otunbaeva’s candidature as president during the transitional period. If the majority votes “against,” then we will keep our current constitution; there will be no president during the transitional period; and members of the Provisional Government will continue to exercise their duties until early presidential and parliamentary elections are held.

If the referendum is not held, it is unclear what will happen to the Provisional Government, what political forces will take its place, and whether there will be peace in the country. Experts say the situation in the country will get worse and competing political factions would emerge, further destabilizing the situation. In the end, all this could lead to peacekeeping forces entering Kyrgyzstan and the country being governed externally.