Cholpon Dzhakupova, MP from Bir Bol faction:
- Rumors about the dissolution are spread everywhere. Question is when that will happen: before or after the presidential election?
As the preliminary results of the voting for deputies of local councils had shown, the Social Democratic Party's position is very precarious, and the president's rating had dropped.
The referendum showed fragmentation of society, not consolidation, as it was expected. 16 percent against, and plus those, who spoiled ballots, is a huge figure. It is also not in favor of the current government.
It is extremely risky to hold elections now because neither the Social Democrats nor the president get the expected support. And what for? This Parliament is fully controlled by the head of state. Can it be more obedient?
But when the new president comes, then he will be able to dissolve this convocation in order his party to win a majority in the elections. If the next, of course, will not be a social democrat. So talks about the early dissolution of the sixth convocation are not groundless.
Tamerlan Ibraimov, a political scientist:
- The dissolution of Parliament is possible. Changes to the Constitution concerned also the authority of the branches of power, which in itself is a logical reason for the early elections. However, judging by all indications, the current authorities, likely, will not risk and try to change the composition of the Parliament, which they are largely satisfied with. Early elections to the Parliament will be only in the case, if the incumbent president and the parliament lose mutual understanding on the key issues of the organization of power before the presidential election in fall 2017.
Election is always a risk. For example, the composition of the Parliament will not satisfy the President, or will turn out to be so that the oligarchic interests of the deputies will much more prevail over the public. That is, generally speaking, the early elections - is the risk of increased instability.
Emil Juraev, a professor of political science:
- The dissolution of Parliament is quite possible. For example, we hotly discussed the decision of Cholpon Dzhakupova to resign as deputy on January 1, 2017. And one of her arguments - she swore as a deputy on 2010 Constitution. Consequently, after the adoption of the amendments not only she, but all the people's representatives are in fact illegitimate, because the powers of the Parliament and the government had changed. Although both the President and the Speaker say that the convocation will work till the end of its term. But it is more correct to dissolve it within the legal framework.
On the other hand, it may be perceived negatively as by the ruling party so by other political organizations. And the results of the local elections showed how the prestige and influence of the Social Democrats have fallen, and it has no such a support, which it had in 2011-2012. On the basis of it, it is now extremely disadvantageous to dissolve the Parliament.
Zaynidin Kurmanov, professor, political analyst:
- There are prerequisites for the dissolution. If only because the president will, unlikely, want to leave Parliament for the time when he steps out of big politics, whose members will delve into his past and actively use the collected compromising material on him. When Almazbek Atambaev resigns, then the Parliament will turn out to be dominated by out-of-control Omurbek Tekebayev, who will not abandon attempts to continue a campaign against the head of state.
Moreover, if to arrange early parliamentary elections, it can be used to remove from the political arena potentially strong presidential candidates, who will make all efforts to get into the new convocation of the Parliament. Thus, they just will not have the money for the presidential race.
The dissolution is, of course, unprofitable for parties that gained a minority of votes in the elections in 2015, because they have a minimum if not zero chance to get into the highest legislative body again. As for the Social Democratic Party, the elections to the local councils have shown - the party does enjoy support of the population. Its rating is catastrophically low.
Therefore, the dissolution is the beneficial to the "heads", but not to those who are in parliament now.
The more the authorities insist that Parliament works till 2020, the stronger the belief, that the days of these deputies are numbered.
Asel Koduranova, head of Committee on Constitutional Legislation and State Structure of Parliament:
- I see no reason to dissolve Parliament. The President made it clear at a meeting with reporters that the convocation would work till the end of its term. Regarding the talks that we are illegitimate after the referendum, so sorry, this is completely untrue.
Show me where it is specified in the amendment that the powers of deputies are dramatically increased or cut down?
The amendments relate only to the president and the prime minister. And then, the version of the Basic Law has not changed completely. Therefore, it is unfounded to say that we are not legitimate.
Azamat Tynaev, an expert:
- It's difficult for me to give a coherent answer, because I am not much well versed in the intricacies of the legal procedure on scheduling early parliamentary elections.
But taking the political situation into account, I think that the dissolution of the Parliament is currently unlikely. There are not much formal reasons for the termination of powers of the Parliament. And they all are quite exotic in our conditions.
The voluntary decision on dissolution? MPs are unlikely to make such a move, even having received a direct order from the president. Corporate solidarity will enable them to safely ignore such an instruction. And the mandates were too expensive for them.
Parliament can be dissolved in case of insuperable contradictions with the government. Then the president will have a choice - either to support the Parliament or to send Cabinet to resign, or take the side of the Prime Minister and appoint early parliamentary elections.
But it is difficult to imagine what a conflict should happen in order the showdown between the Parliament and the government to reach such an extreme stage.
The third variant is the most impractical - if three fractions three times in a row fail to create a ruling coalition with a ready-made solution on the program, structure and composition of the government formed by them. All of these assumptions are based on the real situation in Parliament, where a consensus on any matter, except for the issue of the termination of work of the 6th convocation, will be always found in any case.
And it is written nowhere that the current Parliament loses authority in case of adoption of the amended Constitution at the referendum. It is important for deputies to hold out until April, as there will be even less legal possibilities to dissolve Parliament six months before the next presidential election.
My personal opinion - let it work. Not because I like it, but just because the next convocation may be even worse.