In 2007, 337 members of the Assembly of the People of Kazakhstan participated in the elections of deputies from the Assembly.

The parliamentary elections are the first to be held since a 2009 amendment to the constitutional law on elections, which guarantees seats to the second placed party, even if they do not reach the 7 percent threshold set for entrance into the Majilis.

Explain why the party “Nur Otan” is dominating in Kazakhstan party system? What is the role of other political parties in it?

he main and leading political party of Kazakhstan is People’s Democratic Party Nur Otan. Therefore, in the performance of all the major and influential cases concerning the country dominates this party. Of course, the party carries out the affairs of the country, which permitted by the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, by the Law of Republic of Kazakhstan "On Political Parties", by the other normative legal acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Charter and program of the party.

Party Nur Otan was created on January 19, 1999, by transforming of the public association. According to the Charter of party, the main purpose of Nur Otan is to achieve the construction of an economically strong, democratic, secular, legal and social state with a development of civil society, the modern competitive political system by the methods of administrative and political work, and in accordance with the program of the Party, one of the objectives is to participate in social, economic and political reforms of country [1]. Of course, all of the reforms of public, economic and political system in Kazakhstan were started a bit earlier, almost immediately after gaining independence on the elaborated program of Head of State. This was not a spontaneous and easy decision, by this time was a little preparation, as there was a strong need for a large-scale change in the country. However, this period was characterized by a reduction process after the collapse of the USSR, and after this period was alternated the Asian financial crisis of 1997-1998. Despite the fact that there were changes for the better than first time, but this time was not distinguished with particularly rise in the socio-economic sphere of Kazakhstan. It is only since the new millennium the Kazakhstan’s economy has begun to grow rapidly and expand. By that time, Kazakhstan is more or less recovered, identified themselves new horizons that helped guide confidently into the future.

In all, there are three fundamental documents of the party – the "Program", "People's Platform" and "Action Strategy of PDP Nur Otan", which play a significant role in the implementation of all the plans and objectives of the party. The key document of the "Nur Otan" party is the People's Platform "For the prosperity of Kazakhstan and well-being of Kazakhstan citizens: how can we improve the lives of every citizen of the country", which reflecting the prospective vision of the country. In the People's Platform clearly defined the tasks to those targeted efforts of the party in the coming years. This People's platform covered the spheres of social and economic development of the country, including education and science, culture, ethnic harmony, the democratization of society, youth policy, the environment, etc. It is constantly working on the implementation all of the clauses and paragraphs of the People's Platform. A key element in the implementation of this platform is the systematic monitoring of the implementation. The analysis is based on the monitoring of exact and numerical data, provided by the central and local authorities.

Changes and reforms in the political system of independent states of Central Asia and Kazakhstan.

In spite of positive developments in recent years, criminal justice policy in the region remains punitive. Large prison populations, attributed to the over-use of pre-trial detention and custodial sanctions, have created problems of overcrowding and poor conditions of pre-trial detention. The absence of separate juvenile justice systems, poor measures to support the reintegration of offenders back into the community and the detention of political prisoners remain persistent problems. Violence in prison, and self-mutilation by prisoners in particular, poses key challenges to prison authorities in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan.

The abolition of the death penalty is the subject of ongoing debate within the region. Turkmenistan abolished the death sentence in 1999, Kyrgyzstan in 2007 and Uzbekistan in 2008. Kazakhstan and Tajikistan introduced a moratorium on executions in 2003 and 2004 respectively.

The Soviet era has left a legacy of secrecy and paranoia that pervades the criminal justice system. Government officials and prison administrators are highly resistant to public monitoring and publishing information about prison systems. The lack of transparency and openness undermines public accountability and reform efforts.

PRI’s Central Asia programme is focused on reducing the prison population, improving prison management through the promotion of human rights standards, increasing the transparency of criminal justice systems, improving prisoners’ health and abolishing the death penalty.

Programme activities centre on building the capacity of local NGOs to contribute to penal reform efforts and supporting and promoting good practice. PRI also works directly with government departments and prison administrations to assist in legislating and implementing criminal justice reforms.

In Kazakhstan, PRI has helped develop a network of public monitoring boards to act as an oversight mechanism for places of detention. We have also supported legislative changes to enable public monitoring to take place. Following consultation by the Ministry of the Interior, PRI has pressed for access to police cells by monitoring boards.

PRI has undertaken research into alternatives to the death penalty, looking in particular at good practice and recommendations relating to life imprisonment and long-term custodial sentences. The research has also highlighted the legislative and operational changes required to support these reforms

For example, the degrees which existed in Kazakhstan before the reforms, as well as in other countries of the former Soviet Union, can not find the proper equivalents in the world educational community. Thus, a former 5-year diploma equals to a Master’s diploma in some countries as Sweden, but in other Scandinavian countries it equals only to a Bachelor’s diploma, and in some countries it is not accepted as one of higher education.Some of them equal this degree to a Master’s degree, some equal it to a PhD. This situation of the discrepancy in national and international degrees and titles very often puts the Kazakhstani scholars in an unequal position with other scholars and restricts their mobility and employment in an international area. There is a hope that the RK Bologna membership could fill this degrees’ and titles’ gap and equal the former degrees with the internationally recognized.

Anyway, the implementation of the principles of the Bologna Declaration allows:

§ to bring educational programs in conformity with the international requirements;

§ to ensure the consistent character of educational programs of different levels;

§ to adapt educational programs to the requirements of the labor market;

§ to adopt a competence based model for specialists’ training;

§ to enhance students’ mobility due to the unification of curricula and programs;

§ to ensure academic freedom of learners through a wider choice of educational programs.

The phenomenon of democracy, its merits and demerits, positive and negative sides.

Perhaps the beginning of a new Millennium is a singularly appropriate time to be writing about something as heady as “global political change”. Although, it is true, the largest nation on earth still seems committed to Marxist rhetoric and institutions, those are maintained and paid for by aggressive, homegrown capitalism. From the perspective of history, the last three decades, and particularly the 1990s, will be remarkable for the rapid, geographically extensive, and unexpectedly easy fall of authoritarian regimes on the Left and the Right. None of this was ever accurately predicted, nor really was it ever, I believe, seriously envisaged, by the institutions inside and outside the democratic world dedicated to the destruction of the other’s system, and which consumed vast, and generally unaccountable, amounts of public money.

Advantages of Democracy

Democracy can provide for changes in government without violence. In a democracy, power can be transferred from one party to another by means of elections. The jurisdiction of the citizens of a nation determines its ruling authority.

Moreover, any government is bound by an election term after which it has to compete against other parties to regain authority. This system prevents monopoly of the ruling authority. The ruling party has to make sure it works for its people for it cannot remain being the authority after completing its term unless re-elected by the people.

This brings in a feeling of obligation towards the citizens. The ruling authorities owe their success in the elections to the citizens of the nation. This results in a feeling of gratefulness towards the people. It can serve as their motivation to work for the people for it is the common masses that have complete power over choosing their government.

Another important advantage of democracy is that the people gain a sense of participation in the process of choosing their government. They get the opportunity to voice their opinions by means of electoral votes. This gives rise to a feeling of belongingness in the minds of the people towards their society.

Disadvantages of Democracy

In a democratic nation, it is the citizens who hold the right to elect their representatives and their governing authorities. According to a common observation, not all the citizens are fully aware of the political scenario in their country. The common masses may not be aware of the political issues in society. This may result in people making the wrong choices during election.

As the government is subject to change after every election term, the authorities may work with a short-term focus. As they have to face an election after the completion of each term, they may lose focus on working for the people and rather focus on winning elections.

Another disadvantage of democracy is that mobs can influence people. Citizens may vote in favor of a party under the influence of the majority. Compelled or influenced by the philosophies of those around, a person may not voice his/her true opinion.

Every form of government is bound to have some shortfalls. Different people have different views about the various political systems. The advantages and disadvantages of any political system have to be weighed carefully in order to arrive at any conclusion.

The positive and the negative of Democracy is that the voice of the people is law. But a better answer would be to say that A democracy is only good if the majority of the people want good things. But if the majority of the people want bad things(or a bad president) then democracy is a horrible idea.

Democracy by definition means the government by people. That means that all the people should be able to have their say in one way another in everything that affects their lives. Dictionaries usually say that this right can either be exercised directly (by every member of a community having the possibility to enter personally, without mediators, his position on a particular issue into the decision making process - modern technology is able to provide this possibility for increasingly larger and larger communities), or through representatives (members of legislative bodies). This second arrangement is then called Representative Democracy.

"Democracy" means rule by the people; people who live in a country are the ones who make the rules. Every go to a Town Meeting, where anyone who wants to speak up about a law or a decision can do so? Then everyone in the room gets one vote? Well, that's democracy.
"Communism" is an economic system. It means that everyone in the society owns all of the land, all of the goods, all of the items produced for trade and sale. There aren't any private companies making profits.

Pros and cons of democracy: Pro: you don't have one ruler or small group making all of the rules. Every person gets as much power as every other. Con: It can be really hard to get things done! You need people to agree with each other.