How Kazakhstan is dealing with domestic violence
After Bishimbayev: How Kazakhstan is dealing with domestic violence
07.07.2026
Article published on the Vlast.kz website
Experts feel that harsher punishments are not being supported by meaningful rehabilitation for domestic violence offenders.
Following the high-profile case of the murder of Saltanat Nukenova by former Minister of the Economy Kuandyk Bishimbayev, Kazakhstan passed the Saltanat law to ensure the protection of women and the safety of children. Since spring 2024, mandatory psycho-correctional programmes for domestic violence offenders have been introduced. However, official statistics show a rise in repeated incidents of abuse, while experts point to shortcomings in the new system such as the programmes’ short duration and a shortage of specialists.
The Saltanat Law
In mid-April 2024, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev signed a law to ensure the protection of women’s rights and the safety of children, which meant that domestic violence causing minor bodily harm would now be reclassified as a criminal offence. The legislation became known as Saltanat’s law in memory of Saltanat Nukenova. The Bishimbayev case brought the issue of domestic violence to the forefront of public debate, as well as highlighting the inadequacy of existing protection mechanisms.
Furthermore, in June 2024, a system of mandatory psycho-correctional programmes for domestic violence perpetrators was introduced under the law. Non-criminal domestic violence offences included under Article 73 of the Administrative Offences Code carry a maximum penalty of five days’ detention for a first-time offence.
According to Ministry of Interior figures, the number of Article 73 cases has nearly doubled in recent years: 25,844 were recorded in 2020, compared to 47,587 in 2023. In order to illustrate this trend, we have created a dedicated website featuring a visual depiction of the official statistics.
After legislative changes that expanded the list of recordable offences, the number of reported incidents rose significantly. In 2024, 74,296 were recorded under Article 73 of the Code, increasing to 82,478 in 2025, according to the Ministry.
However, the number of perpetrators that were ultimately sanctioned tells rather a different story. Official statistics show that last year, 34,059 people received administrative punishment, while 55% of cases were dismissed with no action taken. In other words, reports of domestic violence offences are more likely to go unpunished.
The trajectory across the entire period is stark. In 2020, 25,844 cases were recorded, with penalties imposed on 25,028 individuals – a near match. By 2025, the gap between the number of cases initiated (82,478) and those prosecuted (34,059) had widened to 48,419. The system is recording violent incidents more frequently, but responding to them much less often.
The problem of recidivism
The Ministry of the Interior did not respond to our request for statistics on repeat domestic violence offences.
In order to gain at least some understanding of the scale of recidivism in 2024-2025, we randomly selected around 200 court rulings under Article 669 of the Administrative Offences Code, which covers violations of court-imposed behavioural restrictions (such as a ban on alcohol consumption, or the requirement to report to the police).
An analysis of Sud.kz information has shown that repeated acts of domestic abuse were linked to a pre-existing court ruling in 45% of cases examined in 2024, and 51% in 2025. In short, amongst those who have already come to the attention of the system, the number of repeat offences is on the rise.
The response from the police and the courts
A call to the police is what kick-starts the process. After being contacted by neighbours, children or the victim themselves, the police file a report under Article 73 of the Administrative Offences Code.
In repeat violent incidents, the district police officer will not only consider imposing a penalty, but also whether to refer the perpetrator to a psycho-correctional programme, twenty hours of community service, or up to five days’ administrative arrest. If the police are called out again they will record the incident once more and the offender charged under Part 2 of Article 73 of the Code.
The district police officer then submits a petition to the court to order a referral for a psycho-correctional programme. If granted, the offender is required to take a course lasting between three and twelve months, with the judge’s decision forwarded to a medical organisation, the Ministry of the Interior explained. If the aggressor refuses to undergo psychological rehabilitation, the police will compile an administrative report under Article 669 of the Code.
However, this does not replace either criminal or administrative liability: the fine or punishment remains in force, while work with a psychologist is added as an attempt to change a perpetrator’s behaviour and break the cycle of violence.
Repeat offences within one year of the imposition of an administrative penalty are punishable by 40 hours community service, or 10 days’ administrative detention.
According to data provided by the Ministry of Health, systematic statistics on referrals for psycho-correctional programmes have only been collected since 2025 when the new system became fully operational.
In 2025, the courts referred 987 people to healthcare bodies in domestic abuse cases. This figure provides an early snapshot of the number of offenders being brought into the programme. The legal obligation to undergo pyscho-correctional treatment was introduced under the 2024 law, but the practical roll-out, including development of the system, was only launched last year, which made it possible to obtain the first reliable nationwide data, and demonstrate initial progress being made in the work with repeat offenders.
Who does the work with offenders
Once the court has ordered participation in the programme, the perpetrator’s case is referred to the healthcare system. According to the Ministry of Health, there are around 2,000 psychologists working in State medical facilities, of whom 1,163 are based in polyclinics and other primary care organisations.
Officially, the psychological treatment of aggressors within the healthcare system is structured in three phases: initial assessment, treatment and evaluation.
Clinical psychologist Konstantin Popandopulo says that, in practice, a typical course last three months and includes 13 sessions, the exact duration of which may vary depending on the case.
However, according to Zulfiya Bayaskova, Chair of the Union of Crisis Centres, this is not enough. “Ideally, the programme should last up to six months, and only after that time can we honestly say whether a person is prepared to change their ways. Unfortunately, many judges today set a duration of just one or two months, which is fundamentally wrong”.
Crisis centres and rehabilitation
Victim crisis centres fall under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection and operate within the framework of specialist social services, which provide support to domestic violence victims.
According to Bayaskova, the system is short of specialists, there are no standardised operating procedures and, most importantly, no statistics that illustrate a reduction in reoffending among those who have completed the programme. For her, the key purpose of rehabilitation is to teach offenders to accept responsibility for their actions, build a collaborative relationship with the victim, and learn how family arguments can be resolved without resorting to violence.
Prior to the introduction of mandatory court-ordered programmes in Kazakhstan, some crisis centres attempted to work with offenders on a voluntary basis. One of the first such projects was launched in Taldykorgan by the Regional Women’s Support Centre CSO, led by Zhanar Nurmkhanova.
“We decided to start working closely with men who have committed domestic abuse in the hope that psychological and rehabilitative work would help reduce repeat incidents and break the cycle of violence within the family”, said Nurmkhanova.
The centre’s experience was presented at various fora as an innovative model for preventing domestic violence through working directly with offenders.
Thirty-eight men voluntarily sought help at the centre between 2018 and 2023. According to Nurmkhanova, not a single repeat domestic violence incident has been recorded among those who took part. Most men who attended were personally motivated to change, which reduced the risk of them reoffending.
Nurmkhanova notes that even short-term work can bring positive results. She explains that, based on follow-up calls and feedback from participants and their spouses, there has been a decrease in aggressive behaviour and an improvement in family relationships.
The project had to be halted in 2024 due to legislative changes and the introduction of State rules for working with male perpetrators. Now, rehabilitation programmes must be organised on a mandatory basis, mainly by specialist and medical institutions. Consequently, responsibility for these functions has been transferred to Government agencies, making the continuation of the project no longer feasible in its previous format.
How the system works in Central Asia
Tynchtykbek Bakytov, a psychologist and expert on gender and masculinity who has contributed to the development of programmes for offenders in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, explains that such programmes are mandatory in Kyrgyzstan. When a protection order is issued to a victim, the perpetrator is required to take a course, which lasts approximately 30 hours.
Similar programmes also exist in Tajikistan, but they are currently being operated on a pilot basis and not yet mandated by law, although they are already being implemented in certain regions. Typically, the programmes consist of 21 sessions, combining individual and group work. The key message they are trying to convey to participants is that violence is a choice, not an inevitable reaction.
According to the expert, when moving from the theory to practical implementation in Central Asian countries, a number of systemic limitations emerge, which the expert attributes to the particular characteristics of both the existing system in Kyrgyzstan and the pilot model in Tajikistan.
“One cannot realistically expect people to alter behaviour formed over decades in just 20 sessions”, says Bakytov, stressing that meaningful change requires long-term monitoring and support, which is currently non-existent in the region.
Kazakhstan officially introduced psycho-correctional programmes for violent abusers in June 2024, yet statistics show a rise in repeat incidents, which Baysakova attributes to a shortage of specialists within State programmes.
Despite the tightening of legislation since the high-profile Bishimbayev case, the system for combating domestic violence in Kazakhstan has mainly undergone procedural changes. The effectiveness of the new measures in protecting victims and reducing reoffending remains uncertain and requires further analysis and refinement.
Ruslin Bazarbayev, Khadisha Eleusin and Azhar Shynbay are all students at the International School of Journalism at Maksut Narikbayev University.
