SDG 16: Strengthening the capacity of

judges in Kazakhstan to promote access to justice and rule of law in

environmental matters

Summary
This case study focuses on the approaches for strengthening the capacity of judges in Kazakhstan to
promote access to justice and rule of law in environmental matters. In practical terms, this work results
in the quality of handling environmental cases. For example, a situation around the KokZhailyau ski
resort can be considered. On 4 November 2018, public hearings were held in Almaty, Kazakhstan, on
the construction project of the ski resort. As recorded on the video footage and in media articles, the
developer claimed that the “zero option”, i.e. cancelling the project, to date was not considered by the
city authorities. Following on this information, environmental nongovernmental organization “Green
Salvation” submitted a request to the competent public authority for information on the availability of
“zero option”. On 26 November 2018, the competent public authority answered the request claiming
that the term “zero option” came about through appeals of this non-governmental organization and
there was no precise interpretation of this term. The non-governmental organization challenged such
response in court as inadequately answered. The Economic Court recognized the response by the
public authority concerned to be inadequate with the requirements of the Aarhus Convention and the
Kazakh legislation on freedom of information and ordered the competent public authority to provide
the applicant with the reliable information.

Situation
The problems of environmental protection and compliance with environmental law are important for
Kazakhstan. The Supreme Court monitors and controls the quality and quantity of environmental
cases. In all areas there are specialized economic courts that deal with environmental disputes
between government agencies and legal entities. District court considers such disputes if one of the
parties of the dispute is an individual. Administrative offenses are dealt with, in specialized
administrative courts. Criminal cases in the field of environmental law are considered by specially
trained judges. Appeals against judicial acts of courts of first instance are considered by special judges
of regional courts.

The quality of handling environmental cases given their legal and technical complexity remains in a
particular focus. For example, a situation around the Kok-Zhailyau ski resort can be considered. On 4
November 2018, public hearings were held in Almaty, Kazakhstan, on the construction project of the
ski resort. As recorded on the video footage and in media articles, the developer claimed that the
“zero option”, i.e. cancelling the project, to date was not considered by the city authorities. Following
on this information, environmental non-governmental organization “Green Salvation” submitted a
request to the competent public authority for information on the availability of “zero option”. On 26
November 2018, the competent public authority answered the request claiming that the term “zero
option” came about through appeals of this non-governmental organization and there was no precise

1
interpretation of this term. The non-governmental
organization challenged such response in court as inadequately answered. The Economic Court
recognized the response by the public authority concerned to be inadequate with the requirements of
the Aarhus Convention and the Kazakh legislation on freedom of information and ordered the
competent public authority to provide the applicant with the reliable information.

Strategy
To help strengthening expert capacity of judges, the following forms of capacity building on the
application of environmental legislation were introduced: (a) Training programs for graduate students
in the Institute of Justice; (b) Training programs for judges in the training courses; (c) Training of judges
in the Supreme Court; (d) Training of judges in the training centers of the regional courts; (e) Coaching
and mentoring and (f) International judicial cooperation.

The special arrangements were adopted to collect the necessary statistics with regard to
environmental cases. This allows to inform environmental decision-making and law-making with the
outcomes of law enforcement and judicial practice.

To improve efficiency of the administration of justice, a number of e-justice initiatives were introduced.
Wholly audio, - and video recording of all processes was introduced and conducted, in the courts there
are observation rooms, where everyone can track controversies. An electronic document management
system was installed. When the application arrives to the court, the applicant receives an SMS-message
with the notification of his/her registration. For five days, the judge shall decide on the acceptance or
rejection of the application to the court proceedings, on this decision the plaintiff shall also be notified
via SMS. Further indicated that the application is accepted, it is in proceeding of the judge, as well as a
notice of the time, place and date of the meetings shall be sent. In practice, the courts also use a
«hybrid mail»: summons or judicial act shall be forwarded by email to the recipient's post office, where
they are printed out and delivered in a single day.