Ex-deputy of the Parliament of Kyrgyzstan, Iskhak Masaliev, agrees with arguments of lawyers that the approval of Sadyr Japarov as the Prime Minister was illegitimate. He should not be recognized as the head of Government. Iskhak Masaliev told 24.kg news agency.
According to him, the legitimacy of the decisions adopted on October 10 at the meeting of the Parliament in Ala-Archa state residence can be challenged in court. It is possible to return the situation to a legal framework with the approval of the head of the Cabinet only through the Parliament, but not at a dubious meeting without a quorum, but at a full-fledged meeting.
«If tomorrow the President Sooronbai Jeenbekov signs a decree appointing Sadyr Japarov as head of Government, it will be the collapse of the system. To be honest, I do not understand at all what is happening with the head of state and my former colleagues, what or who are they all so afraid of? Where is the President? One gets the feeling that Sooronbai Jeenbekov is being held somewhere by force. Why didn’t he come to the meeting of the Parliament on Saturday? Where are the deputies loyal to him, his brother Asylbek Jeenbekov, Torobai Zulpukarov? Where are they all? Vice Speaker Aida Kasymalieva says that she is threatened by the deputy Urmat Samaev, nicknamed Champion, and the Prosecutor General’s Office does not react and does not initiate a case. Why?» the ex-deputy wonders.
Did the protesters on October 5 want this? No. They only demanded to cancel the election results. A legal bacchanalia occurred as a result.
Iskhak Masaliev
He believes that Sadyr Japarov could not agree with the head of the Kyrgyz Republic about his premiership, otherwise Sooronbai Jeenbekov would have recommended the deputies to approve his candidacy. «Sooronbai Jeenbekov should resign now under no circumstances. We will simply roll into a legal pit,» Iskhak Masaliev noted.
On October 10, the Parliament of Kyrgyzstan approved Sadyr Japarov’s candidacy for the post of head of the Cabinet at an extraordinary meeting. Lawyers questioned the legality of the decision of a part of the deputies — a number of parliamentary procedures were violated.
