Listen to the article
Kazakhstan Rejects Petition Against Anti-LGBTQ Law as Senate Deliberation Looms
Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Culture has rejected a petition opposing the controversial law banning “LGBTQ propaganda,” citing technical violations in the submission. The law, which passed the lower chamber of Kazakhstan’s parliament (Majilis) last month, is scheduled for Senate consideration next week.
If enacted, the legislation would prohibit the promotion of “non-traditional” sexual orientations, with violators facing potential fines and prison terms. The bill represents a significant tightening of restrictions on LGBTQ expression in the Central Asian nation.
According to reporting from independent Kazakh news outlet Vlast.kz, the petition was published on November 17 on the government’s Epetition platform but was subsequently rejected. The ministry claimed the petition lacked the applicant’s place of residence and email address in its description—despite the rights groups’ insistence that this information was included in the private submission.
The ministry also argued that since the law had already received approval from the Majilis, “the head of a government agency does not have the right to make a decision revising laws adopted by parliament.”
QUEER KZ, Feminita, and Education Community—the organizations behind the petition—released a statement condemning the rejection as “illegally blocked.” They pointed to a troubling inconsistency in the ministry’s reasoning, which went beyond technical issues to claim the petition posed a “threat to the constitutional order, public order, and the population of Kazakhstan.”
“The refusal is clearly political and discriminatory based on sexual orientation and gender identity,” the statement asserted. “[The ministry] restricts the rights of the LGBT community to participate in public affairs, hindering open discussion of the law and depriving LGBTQ+ organizations of the opportunity to legally express their opinions.”
Kazakhstan’s Epetition platform, launched only in April 2024, has already faced criticism for appearing to function more as a government rubber stamp than a genuine channel for civic engagement. Vlast.kz reported in September that “citizens’ requests are strictly filtered from above,” with authorities independently deciding which petitions to allow or reject without meaningful public input.
The contrast in how petitions are handled appears starkly political. Last year, a petition proposing the very ban on “LGBTQ propaganda” that is now becoming law collected the required 50,000 signatures at what Vlast described as “an unfathomable pace.” Reports emerged that public sector employees and students were coerced into signing that petition. Despite lacking the same identifying information in its public portion that the ministry now cites as grounds for rejection, that pro-ban petition passed moderation without issue.
Meanwhile, LGBTQ activists in Kazakhstan face mounting pressures. Recent reporting indicates they are already experiencing the type of harassment they fear will become widespread if the law passes—including intimidation by anti-LGBTQ groups, arbitrary arrests, and preemptive cancellations of their events.
The Senate was originally scheduled to begin discussions on the draft law on December 4. However, in an unexpected development, the draft was removed from the agenda on December 3—coinciding with a meeting between Deputy Senate Speaker Zhakip Asanov and European Union Ambassador Aleshka Simkich. While the official readout from this meeting did not mention the anti-LGBTQ legislation, the timing has raised questions about possible international pressure.
Adding to the diplomatic context, European Council President Antonio Costa arrived in Astana on December 4 for meetings with President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev. The confluence of these high-level European diplomatic engagements and the sudden delay in the Senate’s consideration of the controversial legislation suggests potential international concerns about Kazakhstan’s human rights direction.
As the Senate deliberation looms, the rejection of this petition highlights growing tensions between Kazakhstan’s international image as a modernizing state and its domestic policies toward minority rights.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.


10 Comments
While I understand the desire to maintain traditional values, legislation that restricts LGBTQ expression often has unintended negative consequences for social cohesion and human rights. I hope the Kazakh government will carefully weigh the pros and cons.
Agreed, finding the right balance between preserving cultural traditions and protecting individual freedoms is a complex challenge. Meaningful public dialogue will be crucial.
This proposed law seems to be part of a broader trend of increasing restrictions on LGBTQ rights in parts of the world. I’m concerned about the potential chilling effect it could have on free speech and the lived experiences of LGBTQ individuals in Kazakhstan.
Yes, it’s a concerning development that merits close scrutiny. I hope the Kazakh government will take a more inclusive and rights-based approach as they continue to deliberate on this issue.
The government’s dismissal of the petition on technical grounds suggests a lack of genuine engagement with public concerns. I hope the upcoming Senate deliberations will involve substantive, transparent, and inclusive discussions to ensure the legislation balances cultural values with individual freedoms.
Absolutely. Meaningful public consultation and a commitment to upholding human rights should be key considerations as the Kazakh government moves forward on this sensitive issue.
This proposed law seems concerning for LGBTQ rights and freedom of expression in Kazakhstan. I’m curious to hear more about the reasoning behind it and the potential implications if enacted.
Agreed, restricting LGBTQ expression through legislation is a worrying trend we’ve seen in some countries. I hope the Kazakh government will carefully consider the broader impacts before moving forward.
The government’s rejection of the petition on technical grounds is disappointing, as it suggests a lack of genuine engagement with public concerns over this issue. A more transparent and inclusive process would be ideal.
Yes, the dismissal of the petition raises questions about the government’s willingness to genuinely consider public feedback on this sensitive legislation.