Kyrgyzstan
After two revolutions that ousted authoritarian presidents in 2005 and 2010, Kyrgyzstan adopted a parliamentary form of government. Governing coalitions proved unstable, however, and corruption remains pervasive. Unrest surrounding the annulled 2020 parliamentary elections led to significant political upheaval and the violent repression of opponents of nationalist politician Sadyr Japarov.
Research & Recommendations
Kyrgyzstan
| PR Political Rights | 4 40 |
| CL Civil Liberties | 21 60 |
Overview
After two revolutions that ousted authoritarian presidents in 2005 and 2010, Kyrgyzstan adopted a parliamentary form of government. Governing coalitions proved unstable, however, and corruption remained pervasive. Unrest surrounding the annulled 2020 parliamentary elections led to significant political upheaval and the violent repression of opponents of nationalist politician Sadyr Japarov, who became president through a rapid series of appointments and resignations under pressure. Constitutional changes adopted in 2021 concentrated political power in the presidency and reduced the size and role of the parliament. Both the judiciary and extralegal violence have since been used to sideline President Japarov’s political opponents and media and civil society critics.
Democratic resilience will increasingly depend on stronger coordination among countries that share a commitment to freedom, the rule of law, and accountable governance.
International support for democratic institutions, civil society, and independent media has been associated with modest but meaningful improvements in democratic governance, and it is far less costly than the military outlays necessitated by rising authoritarian aggression.
Young people are increasingly dissatisfied with democracy—not because they reject its principles, but because they see institutions failing to deliver on them. Programmatic work should create clear pathways for meaningful political participation, from voting and policy engagement to community organizing and public leadership, so that young people can translate their expectations into agency.
Kyrgyzstan
| A Obstacles to Access | 12 25 |
| B Limits on Content | 17 35 |
| C Violations of User Rights | 16 40 |
Overview
Internet freedom in Kyrgyzstan continued to decline during the coverage period, as the government established a state monopoly on international internet traffic and reassigned the oversight responsibilities of the former Ministry of Digital Development and Innovative Industries to the president’s office. Independent journalists and activists saw their prison sentences commuted yet were still subjected to probation and travel bans.
Access to the internet is under threat as authoritarian powers continue to create barriers for people to freely express themselves online. Internet shutdowns, throttling, and platform blocking remain among the most common tools of digital repression. At the same time, digital technologies serve as a lifeline for people seeking to expose human rights violations to the outside world and hold dictators accountable.
Protecting privacy online is essential to safeguarding free expression in repressive contexts. Without strong privacy protections, journalists and human rights defenders may self-censor out of a fear of reprisal. Rapid advances in AI—and the growing threat of automated vulnerability exploitation—heighten these risks, leaving civil society organizations increasingly vulnerable to sophisticated cyberattacks.
Kyrgyzstan
| DEMOCRACY-PERCENTAGE Democracy Percentage | 10.71 100 |
| DEMOCRACY-SCORE Democracy Score | 1.64 7 |
Executive Summary
In 2023, authoritarianism persisted in Kyrgyzstan as the government pursued repressive policies. President Sadyr Japarov and his close ally, Head of the State Committee of National Security (GKNB) Kamchybek Tashiyev, consolidated power in the executive branch, undermining the balance of power and the system of checks and balances. Despite facing continued repression and harassment, Kyrgyzstan’s most vibrant democratic institutions, civil society and independent media, remained resilient by continuing their work and bringing attention to the government’s repressive measures.
The future of European democracy and security is now inextricably linked to the fate of Ukraine. European Union (EU) and NATO member states must not only invest far more—and more efficiently—in their collective defense, but also provide Ukraine with the assistance it needs to roll back Russian advances and build a durable democracy of its own.
In addition to defending the international order from emboldened autocrats, democratic governments must attend to democratic renewal within Europe, particularly among nascent democracies.
Military aggression from autocracies in the region has underscored the dangers of exclusion from democracy-based organizations like the EU and NATO, galvanizing the political will of policymakers in aspiring member states and generating further public pressure to undertake long-sought democratic reforms.