There is a phrase that can be heard in Kazakhstan in almost any conversation about justice: "Our laws don't work." It is uttered with varying intonation, from bitterness to cynicism, but almost always without evidence. This is a convenient position, because if the system a priori does not function, then there is no need to demand anything from it, and one's own obligations before the law can be considered conditional. But what if this statement is not a fact, but a natural psychological defense that prevents us from seeing real shifts?

Let us start with the most common thesis, that "the courts are corrupt and there is no justice." However, data from the Bureau of National Statistics for October–November 2025 paint a different picture. Those who trust the judicial system – 63.2 percent, those who partially trust it – 28.7 percent, those who rather distrust it – 2.3 percent, those who distrust it – 1.6 percent (Bureau of National Statistics of the Agency for Strategic Planning and Reforms of the Republic of Kazakhstan, sample survey "Level of Public Trust in Law Enforcement Agencies and the Judicial System," October–November 2025 – stat.gov.kz). The Prosecutor's Office is trusted by 66.2 percent of respondents, the police by 65.3 percent (ibid.). This is, of course, not absolute harmony, but it is a fundamentally different picture from the one painted by the commonplace and abstract claim that no one trusts anyone.

In this situation, dynamics also matter, because absolute trust in the judicial system has grown over three years from 55.2 percent in 2023 to 63.2 percent at present (Bureau of National Statistics, data cited in the speech of the Chairman of the Supreme Court, Aslambek Mergaliyev, January 2026 – qazinform.com). A growth of eight percentage points over three years is not at all an imitation of reforms, but a measurable shift in mass consciousness in quantitative terms.

Critics often say that the Supreme Court is merely a fiction and that cassation does not work. But since July 1, 2025, three independent cassation courts have begun operating in Astana, and in the short period of their work they have reviewed over 6,500 cases, which has made it possible to substantially increase the effectiveness of judicial protection and to increase the share of corrected judicial errors (Senate of the Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan, off-site meeting of the Committee on Constitutional Legislation, the Judicial System and Law Enforcement Agencies, April 24, 2026 – senate.parlam.kz).

Moreover, in the first five months of operation, the cassation courts registered more than 14,000 complaints and protests, whereas in the first half of the year the Supreme Court received 9,700 cassation petitions. The growth was 45 percent (Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan, data cited in the article by the Chairman of the Supreme Court, Aslambek Mergaliyev, "Justice Without Barriers," December 2025 – prg.kz). This means a simple thing, showing that citizens and business have begun to seek protection more often, because a real mechanism for reviewing decisions has appeared. If the laws "did not work," no one would spend time and money on cassation complaints.

There is another indicator that is difficult to explain by imitation: the share of sanctioned motions for detention in custody decreased from 74.5 percent in 2024 to 62.5 percent in 2025 (Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan, results of 2025, published in December 2025 – qazradio.fm), which means that courts are increasingly refusing investigators' requests for arrests, that is, they work not as a stamping shop, but as a filter.

The case of Kuandyk Bishimbayev deserves separate discussion, perhaps the loudest trial in the history of Kazakhstan. The trial was broadcast live, millions of citizens watched it in real time, and it was precisely this public pressure, and not a "directive from above," that became the catalyst for specific legislative changes. In April 2024, the President signed Law No. 72-VIII, which criminalized domestic violence (the official text was published on the "Adilet" portal – adilet.zan.kz, Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated April 15, 2024 No. 72-VIII ZRK). A month later, Bishimbayev was sentenced to 24 years of imprisonment. The law, which received the name of the deceased Saltanat Nukenova, toughened liability for domestic violence; this is not an abstract "work on mistakes," but a direct example of how a public demand turns into a legal norm that is applied.

Moreover, this effect is measurable: the level of complete trust in the judicial system grew from 55.2 percent in 2023 to 62.0 percent in 2024, in the police – from 57.5 percent to 64.3 percent, in the Prosecutor's Office – from 57.1 percent to 66.1 percent (Bureau of National Statistics, data cited in the speech of the Chairman of the Supreme Court, Aslambek Mergaliyev, January 2026 – qazinform.com). In other words, the openness of justice did not destroy trust, but strengthened it.

One can argue about the methodology of the World Justice Project, but one cannot ignore the very fact that in the Rule of Law Index 2025, Kazakhstan ranked 66th out of 143 countries and first among the CIS states, raising its index from 0.53 to 0.54 (World Justice Project, WJP Rule of Law Index 2025, press release dated October 28, 2025 – worldjusticeproject.org). For comparison: Uzbekistan – 81st place, Russia – 101st, Belarus – 97th (World Justice Project, ibid.; also confirmed in a publication by ztb.kz, December 2025). Moreover, the WJP separately notes that Kazakhstan is an exception to the global trend of shrinking civil liberties, where the indicators – "Freedom of opinion and their free expression," "Freedom of assembly and association," and "Civic participation" – have not declined in the country, whereas in 71–73 percent of the world's countries they have fallen (World Justice Project, WJP Rule of Law Index 2025, section "Kazakhstan and Global Trends" – worldjusticeproject.org). This does not mean that everything in Kazakhstan is ideal, but it means that the country is moving in a direction opposite to the global trend of authoritarian rollback. And this, too, is the work of laws and institutions.

Why, then, is the thesis about non-working laws so tenacious? The answer lies not in the legal, but in the psychological plane. The first mechanism is learned helplessness. If a person once encountered a bureaucratic wall or injustice and could not achieve their goal, their psyche develops a defensive reaction in which "nothing will change anyway." This is not an analysis of reality, but a way of not spending psychic energy on a mental struggle. The problem is that such an attitude reproduces itself: not believing in the law, a person does not seek protection, and by not seeking it, accordingly, does not gain the experience that could restore that belief.

The second mechanism is the diffusion of responsibility – "If everyone violates the law, then I can too." Legal nihilism is convenient because it removes personal responsibility. The President of the country, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, directly called this position unacceptable: "Legal nihilism is not our companion; we are for common sense and law-abidingness" (Akorda, speech at the ceremony of awarding scientists, April 2026 – inform.kz). And this is not just rhetoric. Kazakhstan has approved the Concept for Promoting the Ideology of Law and Order for 2025–2030, which aims to form zero tolerance for offenses and a respectful attitude toward the law (Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated April 1, 2025 No. 200, published on the "Adilet" portal – adilet.zan.kz).

The third mechanism is cognitive dissonance. It is psychologically difficult for a person who publicly declares that laws in our country do not work to admit that the situation is changing. This would mean admitting that their previous position was incorrect, and it is always easier to hold on to a familiar thesis, ignoring new data.

In refuting the thesis about "non-working laws," it is important not to fall into the other extreme, called denial of problems. In Kazakhstan, there are indeed spheres where trust remains low; for example, only 51.2 percent trust the anti-corruption service, and 47.2 percent trust the economic investigation service (Bureau of National Statistics, same survey, October–November 2025 – stat.gov.kz). There are questions about the transparency of public procurement, the protection of entrepreneurs' rights, and the speed of case review. But these are problems of a working system, not proof of its non-existence.

The difference is fundamental: one can say that the courts work insufficiently effectively and demand improvements, or one can say that the laws do not work and demand nothing. The first position is civic, and the second is defeatist.

The statement "laws don't work" is, in fact, not a diagnosis of the system, but a diagnosis of the one who utters it. It is convenient because it removes the need to act – not to go to court, not to file a cassation appeal, not to demand observance of one's rights. But this position has a price, because the one who refuses in advance to seek protection really does remain without protection.

Official figures say otherwise: trust in the courts is growing, cassation courts are reviewing thousands of cases, and high-profile trials are changing legislation. However skeptical it may sound, Kazakhstan leads the CIS in the rule of law. This is, of course, not an ideal picture, but it is a working system in the process of improvement.

The question is not whether laws work in Kazakhstan, but only whether we are ready to use what already works and to demand what does not yet work. Law is not only text on paper; it is also the readiness of society to believe in it and to use it.

Kazbek AKHMETOV,
psychologist, doctoral student
at Al-Farabi Kazakh National University