Abstract The aim of the study was to analyse the mechanisms of constitutional and legal responsibility of high-ranking officials in the Kyrgyz Republic, based on legislation and law enforcement practice. To achieve this aim, regulatory legal acts defining the status of an official were studied, and specific cases of accountability were analysed. According to the results of the study, the current legislation of the Kyrgyz Republic defines the term official in general, but does not provide steps or justifications for holding senior public bodies accountable in accordance with the Constitution or the law. Such individuals were brought to court irregularly and often for political reasons, which undermined trust in state institutions, as confirmed by the review of practice over the past 10 years. The decisions of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court on these matters were fragmented and did not constitute long-term judicial practice. Furthermore, it was found that these procedures lacked sufficient legal transparency, while parliamentary and public oversight mechanisms were weak.
Chynybaeva et al. (Thu,) studied this question.