What Does the Proposed Word Change in Kazakhstan’s New Constitution Draft Mean?

Tashkent, Uzbekistan (UzDaily.com) — At the beginning of 2026, the draft of the new Constitution in Kazakhstan generated wide resonance in public opinion and in international media. The focus of the discussions was a single wording change: whereas the current Constitution states that Russian is used in state institutions “on an equal basis” with Kazakh, it was announced that in the new draft this wording would be changed to “alongside Kazakh.” This planned amendment was interpreted by some circles as a “downgrading of the status of the Russian language.” Is that really the case?

First and foremost, the legal framework must be clarified. The current Constitution of Kazakhstan stipulates that Kazakh is the sole state language, while Russian is officially used on an equal basis with Kazakh in state institutions and local self-government bodies. In this context, Russian holds an official functional status within public administration.

An examination of the new draft indicates that this status is preserved. What has changed is the wording that defines the use of the Russian language, rather than the substance of the norm itself. In other words, the amendment concerns terminology, not the elimination or restriction of Russian’s practical use. Moreover, Kazakh officials and constitutional law experts have explicitly stated that the revision constitutes a technical and terminological adjustment and does not abolish the de facto use of Russian in the public sphere.

However, the issue must be addressed not only from a legal but also from a symbolic perspective. In the construction of a nation-state, the state language is one of the fundamental elements of sovereignty and historical identity. Since gaining independence, Kazakhstan has been observed to define strengthening the position of the Kazakh language in public life as a strategic objective. This is the most natural and inherent consequence of statehood. Today, demographic data also support this process: the overwhelming majority of the country’s population consists of Kazakhs, and the sphere of use of the Kazakh language is naturally expanding. This situation is the result of historical and social transformation, not of any exclusionary policy.

Some media outlets and commentators in Russia evaluate the mentioned change as a “concealed loss of status.” They even argue that it could negatively affect Moscow–Astana relations. However, when the proposed amendment in the Constitution is read carefully, it becomes clear that the use of Russian is not prohibited; on the contrary, it continues to exist within the official framework. From the perspective of international law, a state’s determination of its own constitutional terminology is a natural consequence of its sovereign right.

In Kazakhstan, Russian has been an important language of communication for many years. Today it continues to be actively used in urban life, trade, media, and public administration. Official statements emphasize that this reality is not ignored by Kazakh authorities. It is observed that the new regulation does not remove Russian from public life; it merely more clearly establishes the central position of Kazakh as the state language.

Moreover, when international examples are examined, it is seen in many cases that the practice of dual official languages does not always guarantee social unity. In the nation-state model, a common state language is accepted as one of the main elements of political unity. In this context, positioning Kazakh more clearly at the constitutional level is a natural step toward strengthening Kazakhstan’s institutional identity as an independent state.

In conclusion, it is not accurate to evaluate the wording change in the Constitution as an exclusion of the Russian language. The current picture shows that the actual use of Russian in the country will continue and that it will maintain its place in official institutions. At the same time, placing only Kazakh at the center of the state language at the constitutional level and defining it in this manner is the most natural choice of Kazakhstan within the framework of its sovereign rights.

Indeed, many multiethnic states adopt a single state language in the name of public unity and institutional integrity. For example, in the Russian Federation, despite the presence of numerous ethnic communities, Russian is the sole state language at the federal level. Similarly, Kazakhstan may prefer to structure its constitutional order around the Kazakh language. This is one of Kazakhstan’s most fundamental sovereign rights.

This approach is not a regression; it is the will to define the status of the state language clearly, precisely, and unequivocally. As a sovereign nation-state, positioning Kazakh more prominently at the constitutional level means strengthening state identity and constitutional clarity. Indeed, even the name Kazakhstan clearly and unequivocally demonstrates that the historical and political subject of this geography is the Kazakh people and the Kazakh language.
 

Ahmet Sağlam

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of UzDaily.