Kirja edastamine

ANNEX C6.pdf

ANNEX C6: Standard Twinning Administrative compliance and eligibility grid

Because of the nature of Twinning, the Contracting Authority should as a general principle seek

clarification from the Member State in case of doubt linked to the documentation provided.

Grid completed by _____________________________________ Date completed ____

FORMAL CRITERIA (to be checked before the selection meetings)

I. IDENTIFICATION DATA

Publication number

Twinning Fiche title and number

Financing decision title and number

Applicant (Lead Member State)

Applicant 2 (junior Member State, if applicable)

Applicant 3 (junior Member State, if applicable)

Beneficiary Administration

II. ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLIANCE

Yes No

1. The proposal is complete and in the correct format

2. The proposal includes the CVs of PL, RTA and Component Leaders

3. The full contact details for both the NCP and the lead Member State applicant are provided

4. The proposal is sent from the email address of the NCP of the lead Member State

III. ELIGIBILITY Yes No

1. The proposed PL, RTA and Component Leaders are eligible (nationality, formal years of experience) and meet the criteria

2. The proposed project duration does not exceed the maximum allowed

3. The Lead applicant body is a Member State administration or a registered mandated body

4. The applicant 2 body is a Member State administration or a registered mandated body

5. The applicant 3 body is a Member State administration or a registered mandated body 1

1 If applicable, in case of even larger consortia, insert additional rows for assessment of more junior Member States.

IV. COMMENTS (Specify any missing information or documents) 2

Does the proposal fulfil the administrative and formal criteria? YES NO 



2 In case of incomplete information, further information and/or documents may be requested.

Annex C1 Twinning fiche.pdf

1

ANNEX C1: Twinning Fiche1

Project title: Support to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan to

Strengthen Institutional Capacity of the Court and the Court’s Office

Beneficiary administration: Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Twinning Reference: KZ 22 NDICI JH 01 25

Publication notice reference: EuropeAid/183959/DD/ACT/KZ

EU funded project

TWINNING TOOL

1 In case of different language versions of the Twinning Fiche it must be clearly indicated which language version prevails.

2

1. Basic Information

1.1 Programme: Support to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan to

Strengthen Institutional Capacity of the Court and the Court’s Office (direct

management), financing year 2023

1.2 Twinning Sector: Justice and Home affairs (JH)

1.3 EU funded budget: €2,000,000

1.4 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): SDG 16 (Promote peaceful and inclusive societies

for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective,

accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels)

2. Objectives

2.1 Overall Objective(s):

To contribute to strengthening the effectiveness, independence, and transparency of

constitutional justice in Kazakhstan in alignment with international and European

democratic standards and best practices.

2.2 Specific objective:

The specific objective of this Twinning project is to enhance the analytical and

institutional capacities of the Constitutional Court of Kazakhstan and to promote the

efficiency of constitutional review processes. This objective includes:

 Strengthening the Court's ability to coherently and consistently interpret and apply

human rights standards and principles as well as constitutional principles and doctrines

through the provision of international and national expertise;

 Promoting effective legal monitoring of the state of compliance by relevant stakeholders

with the legal positions of the Constitutional Court;

 Ensuring robust safeguards for personal data protection in the Court’s data processing

practices, in compliance with relevant legal standards and principles of data privacy;

 Promoting the legal awareness of the general public and increased interaction with civil

society and the media;

 The Court’s institutional capacities strengthened in accordance with a long-term

development vision.

By achieving this objective, the project will bolster public trust in constitutional justice and

reinforce the Court's role as a guardian of fundamental rights and freedoms.

3

2.3 The elements targeted in strategic documents i.e. National Development Plan/Cooperation

agreement/Association Agreement/Sector reform strategy and related Action Plans.

3. Description

3.1 Background and justification:

Kazakhstan has made significant strides in advancing its legal and governance systems,

particularly with the re-establishment of the Constitutional Court as part of broader

constitutional reforms. The Court plays a pivotal role in safeguarding fundamental rights,

ensuring compliance with constitutional provisions, and fostering the rule of law. However,

as Kazakhstan continues to align itself with international democratic standards, the

Constitutional Court faces complex challenges that require capacity-building and

institutional strengthening, both in terms of building effective processes and procedures, and

in terms of developing human capital.

While Kazakhstan had a Constitutional Court in 1992 – 1995, it had limited powers as

individual citizens could not petition it directly, and was later abolished and replaced by the

Constitutional Council in 1995. On 5 June 2022, a constitutional referendum was held that

abolished the Council and re-established the Constitutional Court, with expanded powers.

The Constitutional Court currently accepts petitions from individual citizens, courts, as well

as executive and legislative bodies, the Prosecutor General’s Office and the national human

rights institution.

Guided by the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and Constitutional Law on the

Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Constitutional Court is autonomous

and independent of citizens, organizations, State bodies, and officials. The Constitutional

Court is separate from the three-tiered system of general courts, and is required to abstain

from reviewing the cases that fall under the jurisdiction of general courts.

The Constitutional Court consists of 11 judges, including the Chairperson and the Deputy

Chairperson. The Chairperson is appointed by the President with the consent of the Senate

of the Parliament. The Deputy Chairperson is appointed by the President on the proposal of

the Chairperson from among the judges. The President appoints four judges, three judges are

appointed by the Senate and the Mazhilis of the Parliament.

As the guardian of constitutional supremacy, the rule of law, and the protection of

fundamental rights and freedoms, the Constitutional Court has a multifaceted mandate,

including the following:

Constitutional review: Evaluating the constitutionality of laws, regulations, and

government actions to ensure alignment with the Constitution.

Protection of fundamental rights: Serving as a final arbiter in disputes involving

fundamental human rights and freedoms, providing citizens with recourse against violations.

4

Interpretation of constitutional provisions: Offering authoritative interpretations to clarify

constitutional principles and resolve ambiguities in legal provisions.

Balancing powers: Acting as a check on the legislative, executive, and judicial branches,

ensuring adherence to constitutional limits and principles.

In light of its vital responsibilities, it is critically important that the Constitutional Court fully

realize its potential as a robust and independent institution:

Capacity for coherent human rights interpretation: The Court must align its decisions

with international human rights norms and principles, particularly in areas like equality, non-

discrimination, and personal freedoms. Limited experience in comparative constitutional

analysis and inconsistent application of international human rights standards may pose risks

to judicial coherence and credibility.

Procedural and operational efficiency: The Court needs to be able to manage the

increasing caseload efficiently, minimizing the risk of potential delays and procedural

backlogs.This requires a focus on streamlining workflows, optimizing resource allocation,

and ensuring timely resolution of cases.

Public trust and awareness: Public understanding of the Court’s role and accessibility to

its mechanisms is growing, but requires further investment. Enhancing transparency and

engagement with civil society is essential to build confidence in the Court’s impartiality and

effectiveness.

Data protection and digitalization: The growing reliance on digital tools in judicial

processes necessitates robust safeguards for personal data protection, especially in light of

global privacy standards.

Key focus areas for the Twinning Project will include:

 Enhancing the Court’s analytical and interpretative capacities to ensure consistent

application of human rights standards.

 Strengthening public outreach and awareness to build trust and enhance citizen

engagement with constitutional justice.

 Establishing robust personal data protection measures in line with international privacy

standards.

Through these interventions, the project aims to solidify the Constitutional Court’s role as an

independent and effective institution, contributing to Kazakhstan’s broader democratic

reforms and alignment with global standards of constitutional justice

5

3.2 Ongoing reforms:

Kazakhstan is the first Central Asian partner to have concluded an Enhanced Partnership and

Cooperation Agreement (EPCA) with the EU. The EPCA was signed in December 2015 and

entered into force on 1 March 20202.

Cooperation in the area of freedom, security and justice is one of the key EPCA priorities,

with Article 235 (Rule of law and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms)

declaring the commitment of the Parties to “attach particular importance to the promotion of

the rule of law, including the independence of the judiciary, access to justice and the right to

a fair trial, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.”

As already mentioned, the Constitutional Court was established on 5 June 2022 as a result of

a referendum amending the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

In addition to constitutional reform, of specific relevance to the activities of the

Constitutional Court is the ongoing digitalization reform, in particular the Concept of Digital

Transformation, ICT Development and Cybersecurity for 2023 – 2029. Kazakhstan is

prioritizing the use of digital technologies in the public sector, including promoting access

to justice, and the Concept is relevant to streamlining Court workflows and boosting their

efficiency.

3.3 Linked activities:

Within the framework of the Central Asia Rule of Law Programme (2020–2024),3

implemented by the Council of Europe [European Commission for Democracy through Law

(Venice Commission)], the Kazakh justice system – including the Constitutional Court of

the Republic of Kazakhstan – received EU-funded support focused on institutional

strengthening and promoting human rights.

The TAIEX INTPA instrument provided targeted support to the Constitutional Court of the

Republic Kazakhstan, including the facilitation, in co-operation with the Constitutional

Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan, of a one-day workshop on constitutional Complaints

and Access to Constitutional Justice in April 2024. Further, in November 2024, TAIEX

INTPA, facilitated, in co-operation with the Constitutional Court of the Republic of

Kazakhstan, a one-day workshop to enhance professional development in the conduct of

constitutional proceedings. In December 2024, TAEIX INTPA, approved a proposal

submitted by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan to conduct study tour

for judges and case officers in Europe in 2025.

The Twinning project will support the implementation of the Rule of Law priority under the

EU–Kazakhstan Cooperation Facility 2022–2023 (NDICI–MIP 2022–2023). In May 2023,

2 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/documents-publications/treaties-agreements/agreement/?id=2015045 3 https://pjp-eu.coe.int/en/web/central-asia/institutional-support

6

the government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the European Union signed a Financing

Agreement on the Facility. The objective of this facility is to advance the objectives of the

Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (EPCA) between the European Union

and the Republic of Kazakhstan, which came into full effect on 1 March 2020.

Kazakhstan is actively pursuing horizontal public administration reforms aimed at enhancing

governance, transparency, and efficiency. International partners, notably the European Union

(EU) and the Council of Europe, support these efforts. The EU has expressed strong support

for Kazakhstan's economic and political reforms, emphasizing the importance of these

initiatives in strengthening bilateral relations. (ref: Council of the European Union)

In the realm of policy and legislative development, Kazakhstan has been working to improve

the inclusiveness and transparency of its intergovernmental processes. The OECD has

assessed the country's public integrity strategies, evaluating aspects such as evidence-based

problem analysis and the use of diagnostic tools. (ref: OECD Public Integrity Indicators).

Regarding impact assessments, the OECD has highlighted the importance of public

consultations on new draft laws, particularly those affecting businesses, accompanied by

thorough impact assessments. (ref: OECD) This underscores the need for regulatory and

budgetary evaluations to inform policy decisions.

Inter-ministerial and public consultations are integral to Kazakhstan's reform agenda. The

OECD's review of the central administration emphasizes the significance of inclusive and

transparent inter-institutional and public consultations in developing public integrity

strategies. (ref: OECD Public Integrity Indicators)

In summary, Kazakhstan's ongoing public administration reforms are bolstered by support

from the EU and other international partners. The country is making strides in policy

development by emphasizing evidence-based analyses, conducting impact assessments, and

fostering inclusive consultations to enhance governance and public integrity.

3.4 List of applicable Union acquis/standards/norms:

On an international level, this project aligns with the goals outlined in SDG 16 of the Global

Agenda 2030, which focuses on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, ensuring access

to justice for all, and establishing effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions. While

there is no EU golden standard regarding constitutional justice per se (moreover, Article 5

(2) of the Treaty on European Union expressly establishes that “the Union shall act only

within the limits of the competences conferred upon it by the Member States in the Treaties

to attain the objectives set out therein. Competences not conferred upon the Union in the

Treaties remain with the Member States”), the good practices of individual EU MS in the

interpretation of fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the

European Union are at the core of this twinning project.

7

3.5 Components and results per component

Component 1: Strengthening analytical and institutional capacities of the Court

This Component aims to enhance the Constitutional Court’s capacity to ensure the coherent

and consistent interpretation of constitutional provisions, with special attention paid to

human rights standards, equality, and non-discrimination.

Mandatory result 1.1: The Court's ability to coherently and consistently interpret and

apply human rights standards and principles as well as constitutional principles and

doctrines strengthened through the provision of international and national expertise

The understanding and practical application of international human rights standards in

constitutional jurisprudence will be improved through specialized training and comparative

legal analysis. Some implementation options may include designing and delivering targeted

training sessions for judges and court analysts. Specific areas, such as freedom of expression,

equality, non-discrimination, and privacy, are recommended for prioritization.

Sub-result 1.1.1: A framework for consistent interpretation of equality and non-

discrimination principles developed and pilot-tested

A framework will be created and pilot-tested to guide judges and legal analysts in interpreting

and applying principles of equality and non-discrimination in their decisions, which will

contribute to enhanced ability of the Court to consistently interpret and apply human rights

standards and principles, as well as constitutional principles and doctrines.

Mandatory result 1.2: Effective legal monitoring of the state of compliance by relevant

stakeholders with the legal positions of the Constitutional Court promoted

A methodology will be created to monitor the enforcement of the Court’s decisions in a

consistent manner, with the monitoring findings to factor into future policymaking on

improving compliance.

Component 2: Enhancing personal data protection

This Component will aim to strengthen the Court’s capacity to manage data securely and

transparently while adhering to international data protection standards.

Mandatory result 2.1: Safeguards for personal data protection strengthened in the

Court’s data processing practices, in compliance with relevant legal standards and

principles of data privacy

This mandatory result will involve a review of the existing data protection policies and

protocols for alignment with globally recognized standards and best practices, such as the

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or equivalent frameworks. It will be

supplemented by a monitoring and evaluation mechanism for ongoing compliance with data

protection standards if/where formalized by relevant policies adopted by domestic actors. It

8

might includes expert support to drafting or revising policies to ensure proper handling,

access, sharing, and retention of sensitive data in accordance with the applicable domestic

legislation and international norms.

Sub-result 2.1.1: Awareness and capacity among court staff increased with regard

to data protection principles and practices

Achieving this sub-result entails building the knowledge and skills of court staff to properly

handle data in accordance with the new policies.

Component 3: Institutional capacity building and public outreach

This Component aims to develop a long-term development vision for the Constitutional

Court, including an action plan to promote knowledge transfer and exposure to international

best practices, as well as to foster greater public awareness of the Constitutional Court’s role,

enhance accessibility, and promote transparency in its operations.

Mandatory result 3.1: The legal awareness of the public promoted and interaction with

civil society and the media increased

Sub-result 3.1.1: A public outreach action plan developed

This sub-result focuses on the development of a public outreach action plan, including

awareness campaigns on constitutional rights and the Court’s functions, and capacity

building of judges and staff on proper conduct in the media space. This will include designing

and executing a comprehensive communication plan to educate the public about:

 The constitutional rights guaranteed to citizens under the law.

 The role, mandate, and decision-making processes of the Constitutional Court.

 How individuals can utilize the court to address grievances related to constitutional

issues.

 Methods of submitting Amicus Curiae expert opinions by civil society and the expert

community.

This sub-result will also help attract civil society organizations, legal consultants and

independent experts to build a pool of external expertise to support the Constitutional Court.

Sub-result 3.1.2: Accessibility in Court communications improved

This sub-result will focus on promotingtheaccessibility of relevant information. Examples

include (the list is illustrative and non-prescriptive):

 Creating plain-language guides and brochures explaining the steps to file a constitutional

complaint.

 Developing infographics, videos, or online tools (e.g., a complaint submission portal)

that demystify court processes.

9

 Developing internal content accessibility guidelines and making resources available in

multiple formats, including in Braille and audio versions, to promote accessibility and

ensure inclusivity.

Mandatory result 3.2: The Court’s institutional capacities strengthened in accordance

with a long-term development vision.

This mandatory result will support the Court in formulating a long-term development vision

and building its institutional capacity in a systematic and sustainable manner.

Sub-result 3.2.1: A long-term action plan developed to strengthen the capacity of

the Constitutional Court

This sub-result aims to ensure the sustainable development of the court’s institutional

resources and human capital by (the list is illustrative and non-prescriptive):

 Assessing current capacities and identifying gaps in skills, resources, and/or

infrastructure.

 Developing a comprehensive action plan that outlines objectives, training programs, and

timelines to build judicial, research, analytical and administrative expertise.

 Including specific measures for continuous professional development, such as regular

training sessions, mentoring programs, or scholarships for advanced studies.

It will be supported by developing a sustainable framework for continued collaboration with

international constitutional justice institutions.

Sub-result 3.2.2: A study visit, peer-to-peer exchanges, and workshops with EU

constitutional courts organized to share best practices

This result focuses on fostering knowledge transfer and exposure to international best

practices by (the list is illustrative and non-prescriptive):

 Organizing study visits where judges and court analysts from Kazakhstan's

Constitutional Court visit EU constitutional courts to observe their operations, decision-

making processes, and innovations.

 Facilitating peer-to-peer exchanges where Kazakhstani and EU judges engage in

dialogue to share experiences and challenges.

 Conducting workshops on specialized topics such as case management, judicial ethics,

or the use of technology in constitutional justice.

These activities provide opportunities to learn from established institutions, adopt proven

strategies, and build professional networks.

Sub-result 3.2.3: Institutional resilience and adaptability improved to address

evolving legal and societal challenges

This sub-result might involve (the list is illustrative and non-prescriptive):

10

 Enhancing operational flexibility, such as developing a proposal on technology for

virtual hearings or efficient case management.

 Establishing protocols to address emerging issues like cybersecurity, environmental law,

or human rights in digital contexts.

 Conducting scenario planning or simulations to prepare for potential crises or high-

impact cases.

 Promoting a culture of continuous improvement through regular performance

evaluations and reforms.

3.6 Means/input from the EU Member State Partner Administration(s)*:

3.6.1 Profile and tasks of the PL:

The Project Leader shall be a senior staff member at an EU MS public (governmental) body.

Minimum requirements for the PL’s profile are:

 At least a Master’s degree or its academic equivalent in Law or equivalent professional

experience of 5 years.

 At least 3 years of relevant experience in the judiciary system, as part of the overall

professional experience.

 Experience managing complex projects.

 Excellent command of English, both spoken and written.

 Knowledge of Kazakh and/or Russian would be an asset.

The PL will implement the following tasks:

 Overall coordination, guidance and monitoring of the project preparation and

implementation.

 Preparing the project progress reports with support of RTA.

 Ensuring timely achievement of the project result.

 Co-chairing the project Steering Committee.

 Provision of legal and technical advice and policy analysis whenever needed.

 Taking appropriate decisions for the smooth and effective implementation of the project.

3.6.2 Profile and tasks of the RTA:

The RTA should be a civil/public servant from an EU MS, under the conditions set in the

Twinning Manual. He/she will be responsible for the day-to-day implementation of the

project. Minimum requirements for the RTA’s profile are:

 At least a Master’s degree or its academic equivalent in Law or equivalent professional

experience of 5 years.

 At least 3 years of relevant experience in the judiciary system.

 Demonstrated very good knowledge of relevant EU legislative and institutional

arrangements.

11

 Demonstrated very good interpersonal, communication and facilitation, training,

presentation, networking, negotiation, analytical and organisational skills, ability to work

effectively in a multicultural/multinational environment with consideration of different

stakeholders’ interests.

 Proven working experience (at least 6 months) in a country of the European

Neighbourhood or any country of the CIS and / or Ukraine is an asset.

 Excellent command of English, both spoken and written.

 Knowledge of Kazakh and/or Russian would be an asset.

The PL will implement the following tasks:

 Organisation and planning of the project activities both technically and administratively,

overall supervision of the project implementation and coordination of all activities, as

well as conducting the project administration.

 Guiding the team members and coordination of their activities according with the defined

work plans, for ensuing timely delivery of the project outputs.

 Technical input to the project whenever needed and provision of advice in his/her field

of expertise.

 Organisation and supervision of the short and medium-term experts’ work.

 Assisting the PL in preparing the project progress reports.

3.6.3 Profile and tasks of Component Leaders:

Component Leader - Component 1:

 At least a Master’s degree or its academic equivalent in Law or equivalent professional

experience of 5 years.

 At least 3 years of relevant experience performing research and analytical functions for

the justice system in an EU MS.

 Demonstrated very good interpersonal, communication and facilitation, training,

presentation, analytical and organisational skills, ability to work effectively in a

multicultural/multinational environment with consideration of different stakeholders’

interests.

 Excellent command of English, both spoken and written.

 Knowledge of Kazakh and/or Russian would be an asset.

Component Leader – Component 2:

 A Master’s degree or its academic equivalent in Law, Public Administration or related

discipline or equivalent professional experience of 5 years.

 Demonstrated familiarity with the EU data protection legislation and at least 3 years

experience implementing data protection safeguards in an EU MS.

12

 Demonstrated very good analytical and organisational skills, ability to work effectively

in a multicultural/multinational environment with consideration of different

stakeholders’ interests.

 Excellent command of English, both spoken and written.

 Knowledge of Kazakh and/or Russian would be an asset.

Component Leader – Component 3:

 At least a Master’s degree or its academic equivalent in Public Administration, Law or a

related discipline or equivalent professional experience of 5 years.

 At least 3 years of experience in the public sector, which should include the development

of institutional strategies for public sector agencies, including in the justice sector, in an

EU MS.

 Demonstrated very good interpersonal, communication and facilitation, training,

presentation, analytical and organisational skills, ability to work effectively in a

multicultural/multinational environment with consideration of different stakeholders’

interests.

 Excellent command of English, both spoken and written.

 Knowledge of Kazakh and/or Russian would be an asset.

3.6.4 Profile and tasks of other short-term experts:

Expert on Communications

 At least a Master’s degree or its academic equivalent in Communications or a related

discipline or equivalent professional experience of 5 years.

 At least 3 years of relevant experience developing communications and public outreach

strategies for public sector agencies, including justice system partners, including in an

EU MS.

 Demonstrated very good interpersonal, communication and facilitation, training,

presentation, analytical and organisational skills, ability to work effectively in a

multicultural/multinational environment with consideration of different stakeholders’

interests.

 Excellent command of English, both spoken and written.

 Knowledge of Kazakh and/or Russian would be an asset.

Expert on Accessibility

 A university degree in Graphic Design, Communications or a related discipline or

equivalent professional experience of 3 years.

 At least 3 years of relevant experience designing accessible communication materials for

various audiences, including in an EU MS.

 Demonstrated very good interpersonal, communication and facilitation, training,

presentation, analytical and organisational skills, ability to work effectively in a

13

multicultural/multinational environment with consideration of different stakeholders’

interests.

 Excellent command of English, both spoken and written.

 Knowledge of Kazakh and/or Russian would be an asset.

* Contracting authorities should note that if using "minimum" as reference since proposals

not meeting this requirement will have to be considered non-compliant and the joint

experience of the team (PL, RTA, Component Leaders) in such cases cannot compensate for

the minimum requirement not being met.

* Contracting authorities are invited to carefully consider the level of private sector expert

input and define the maximum level accepted if possible.

4. Budget

EUR 2,000,000.

5. Implementation Arrangements

5.1 Implementing Agency responsible for tendering, contracting and accounting: European

Union Delegation to Kazakhstan

Contact person:

Mr. Nicola FRANCESCHETTI

Programme Manager | Kazakhstan and Central Asia | Cooperation Section

Email: [email protected] | Landline: +7 (7172) 97 45 97

Delegation of the European Union to the Republic of Kazakhstan

62 Kosmonavtov Str., Z05E9E1, Astana, Kazakhstan

5.2 Institutional framework

Beneficiary's Administration: Office of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of

Kazakhstan; The Department of International Cooperation and Organizational Support of the

Office of the Constitutional Court is a responsible structural unit responsible for operational

management and close cooperation with a partner.

5.3 Counterparts in the Beneficiary administration:

The PL and RTA counterparts will be staff of the Beneficiary administration and will be

actively involved in the management and coordination of the project.

Postal address: Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan 13 Mangilik El

Avenue, 010000, Astana, Republic of Kazakhstan

14

5.3.1 Contact persons: Ms. Zhanna NAZAROVA, Head of Department of International Cooperation and Organizational

Support

E-mail: [email protected], tel: +7 (7172)57 63 66 Mr. Nurysh TASBULATOV, Deputy Head of Department of International Cooperation and

Organizational Support

E-mail: n.tasbulatov@gmail.com, tel : +7 (7172) 57 63 66 Ms. Zhuldyz KAMZINA, Sector Lead - International Relations

E-mail: [email protected], tel: +7 (7172) 57 63 66

Postal address: Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 13 Mangilik El

Avenue,010000, Astana, Republic of Kazakhstan

5.3.2 PL counterpart

Ms. Zhanna NAZAROVA, Head, Department of International Cooperation and

Organizational Support

Postal address: Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 13 Mangilik El Avenue

010000, Astana, Republic of Kazakhstan

5.3.3 RTA counterpart

Mr. Nurysh TASBULATOV, Deputy Head, Department of International Cooperation and

Organizational Support

Postal address: Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 13 Mangilik El Avenue

010000, Astana, Republic of Kazakhstan

6. Duration of the project

The overall execution period of the Twinning contract is 24 months.

The implementation period of the Action will last 21 months. The execution period of the

contract shall enter into force upon the date of notification by the Contracting Authority of

the contract signed by all parties, whereas it shall end 3 months after the implementation

period of the Action.

7. Management and reporting4

7.1 Language

4 Sections 7.1-7.3 are to be kept without changes in all Twinning fiches.

15

The official language of the project is the one used as contract language under the instrument,

i.e. English. All formal communications regarding the project, including interim and final

reports, shall be produced in the language of the contract.

7.2 Project Steering Committee

A project steering committee (PSC) shall oversee the implementation of the project. The

main duties of the PSC include verification of the progress and achievements via-à-vis the

mandatory results/outputs chain (from mandatory results/outputs per component to impact),

ensuring good coordination among the actors, finalising the interim reports and discuss the

updated work plan. Other details concerning the establishment and functioning of the PSC

are described in the Twinning Manual.

7.3 Reporting

All reports shall have a narrative section and a financial section. They shall include as a

minimum the information detailed in section 5.2 (interim reports) and 5.3 (final report) of

the Twinning Manual. Reports need to go beyond activities and inputs. Two types of reports

are foreseen in the framework of Twining: interim quarterly reports and final report. An

interim quarterly report shall be presented for discussion at each meeting of the PSC. The

narrative part shall primarily take stock of the progress and achievements via-à-vis the

mandatory results and provide precise recommendations and corrective measures to be

decided by in order to ensure the further progress.

8. Sustainability

The project is designed to build institutional capacity of the Constitutional Court, which,

given the full commitment of the Court, is expected to translate into long-term sustainability.

All components of the projects are heavily focused on the development of internal guidance,

tools and other knowledge products, which contributes to sustainability. In addition, the

development of a full-fledged case management system under Component 2 is envisaged to

support long-term efficiency of constitutional review, which is an important component of

sustainability in the long run.

Finally, Component 3 is designed specifically to bolster institutional resilience and

adaptability, and address long-term capacity building needs, which will further buttress the

sustainability efforts under the project.

9. Crosscutting issues (equal opportunity, environment, climate etc…)

Implementation of constitutional review is fundamental to promoting and protecting human

rights and ensuring equality and non-discrimination. The project (and specifically Mandatory

Result 1.1) will contribute to better understanding and practical application of international

16

human rights standards in constitutional jurisprudence, as well as ensure consistency in the

interpretation of equality and non-discrimination principles.

Further, by fostering greater public awareness of the Constitutional Court’s role and

enhancing accessibility under Mandatory Result 3.1, the project will contribute to stronger

public trust in the institution, resulting in a larger share of population – both individual

citizens and CSOs protecting human rights and pursuing gender equality – seeking recourse

to constitutional review in cases involving human rights, equality and non-discrimination.

10. Conditionality and sequencing

There are no preconditions defined for this Twinning Project.

11. Indicators for performance measurement

Please see Annex C1a: the Simplified Logical Framework Matrix.

12. Facilities available

The Constitutional Court will host the MS experts on its premises. The EU MS experts will

be provided with office space, security-related arrangements and facilities for capacity-

building events.

Computer hardware (notebooks and printers) and requisite software for the project team,

which is essential to support daily work both on site and remotely, will be budgeted in the

project within the global ceiling of EUR 20,000 foreseen for the purchase of goods. Goods

purchased with project funds become the property of the Beneficiary at the end of the project

provided a handover certificate is signed by both PLs and the items are registered in the asset

register of the Beneficiary.

ANNEXES TO PROJECT FICHE

1. The Simplified Logical framework matrix as per Annex C1a

17

ANNEX C1a: Levels of an intervention logic

18

19

Annex C1a; Simplified Logical Framework

Description

Indicators (with

relevant baseline

and target data)

Sources of

verification

Risks

Assumptions

(external to

project) To enhance the

1. Global Rank in

World Justice Project

Rule of Law Index

(2024 – 0.54, 2028 –

0.75)

2. Human Rights and

Rule of Law Country

Score according to

the Fragile State

Index (2024 – 6.8,

2028 – 3.5)

1. World Justice

Project Rule of

Law Index

2. Fragile State Index

The pace of progress Kazakhstani authorities

Overall Objective

effectiveness,

independence, and

transparency of

constitutional justice

in Kazakhstan in

alignment with

in the legislative and

executive branches

does not match the

pace of constitutional

justice reforms

are fully committed to

strengthening

constitutional justice

international and

European democratic

standards and best

practices

20

To enhance the

analytical and

institutional

capacities of the

Constitutional Court

of Kazakhstan and to

promote the

efficiency of

constitutional review

processes

1. Percentage of

population who

perceive

Constitutional Court

as trustworthy (TBC

following baseline

survey (2025), TBD

based on outcomes

of baseline survey

(2027))

1. Survey of general

public

2. Survey of

Constitutional

Court analysts

N/a N/a

Specific (Project)

Objective(s)

2. Percentage of

Constitutional Court

analysts report high

or very high

confidence in their

analytical capacities

(TBC following

baseline survey

(2025), TBD based

on outcomes of

baseline survey

(2027))

Mandatory

results/outputs by

components

Component 1: Strengthening analytical and institutional capacities of the Court

21

Mandatory result

1.1: The Court's

ability to coherently

and consistently

interpret and apply

human rights

standards and

principles as well as

constitutional

principles and

doctrines

strengthened

through the

provision of

international and

national expertise

1. Percentage of

Constitutional Court

analysts report high

or very high

confidence in their

analytical capacities

(TBC following

baseline survey

(2025), TBD based

on outcomes of

baseline survey

(2027))

2. Percentage of judges

and analysts trained

in advanced legal

research and

constitutional

interpretation (all

judges and analysts

covered within the

implementation

period, with at least

50% trained on each

of the following

topics: equality and

non-discrimination;

privacy and personal

data protection;

freedom of

expression and

access to

information)

1. Survey of

Constitutional Court

analysts

2. Training evaluations

and attendance

reports

N/a Judges and analysts are

motivated to learn

22

Sub-result 1.1.1: A

framework for

consistent

interpretation of

equality and non-

discrimination

principles developed

and implemented

1. A framework to

guide judges and

legal analysts in

interpreting and

applying principles

of equality and non-

discrimination

developed (no such

framework as of

2024; framework

fully developed by

the 20th month of the

project)

1. Framework as

developed

N/a N/a

Mandatory result

1.2: Effective legal

monitoring of the

state of compliance

by relevant

stakeholders with

the legal positions

of the

Constitutional

Court promoted

1. Methodology

developed to

monitor the

enforcement of the

Court’s decisions in

a consistent manner

(no such

methodology as of

2024; methodology

fully developed by

the 20th month of the

project)

1. Methodological

guidance as

developed

N/a N/a

Component 2: Enhancing personal data protection

23

Mandatory result

2.1: Safeguards for

personal data

protection

strengthened in the

Court’s data

processing

practices, in

compliance with

relevant legal

standards and

principles of data

privacy

1. The existing data

protection policies

and protocols

reviewed for

alignment with

globally recognized

standards and best

practices (review

completed by the

12th month of the

project)

2. A monitoring and

evaluation

mechanism

developed for

ongoing compliance

with data protection

standards if/where

formalized by

relevant policies

(mechanism

developed by the

20th month of the

project)

1. Review as

completed

2. Monitoring and

evaluation

mechanism as

developed

Low priority assigned

to data protection by

Court leadership

Data protection

prioritized by Court

leadership

24

Sub-result 2.1.1:

Awareness and

capacity among court

staff increased with

regard to data

protection principles

and practices

1. Percentage of court

staff trained in data

protection and

cybersecurity best

practices (TBC as of

2024; at least 90%

by the 24th month of

the project)

1. Training evaluation

and attendance

reports

N/a Staff committed to

learning

Component 3: Institutional capacity building and public outreach

25

Mandatory result

3.1: The legal

awareness of the

general public

promoted and

interaction with

civil society and the

media increased

1. Number of public

outreach programs,

awareness

campaigns, and

civic education

initiatives

conducted annually

(TBC as of 2024; 6-

8 in year 2 of the

project)

2. Number of capacity-

building activities

for judges and staff

on communication

skills and conduct

in the media space

conducted annually

(TBC as of 2024;

2-3 in year 2 of the

project)

1. Reports of the

public outreach

activities conducted

2. Reports of capacity-

building events

N/a N/a

Sub-result 3.1.1: A

public outreach

action plan

developed

1. Public outreach

action plan

fully developed

1. Public outreach

action plan as

developed

N/a N/a

26

Sub-result 3.1.2:

Accessibility in

Court

communications

improved

1. Number of

accessible

explanatory

materials published

(TBC as of 2024; at

least 1 per in each

of the following

categories: Braille;

audio; digital text;

large print; child-

friendly – by the

20th month of the

project)

2. Percentage of

accessible

judgments

published (TBC as

of 2024; 80% by

the 20th month of

the project)

1. Explanatory

materials as

published

2. Judgments as

published

N/a Accessible materials

can be easily

prototyped and

reproduced locally

27

Mandatory result

3.2: The Court’s

institutional

capacities

strengthened in

accordance with a

long-term

development vision

1. An assessment of

the current

capacities

undertaken

2. Recommendations

for long-term

institutional

strengthening

formulated

1. The assessment

report

2. Summary of

recommendations

N/a The Court leadership

prioritizes institutional

capacity strengthening

Sub-result 3.2.1: A

long-term action plan

developed to

strengthen the

capacity of the

Constitutional Court

1. Long-term action

plan developed

and put forward

for discussion

1. The long-term

action plan as

developed

N/a N/a

Sub-result 3.2.2: A

study visit, peer-to-

peer exchanges, and

workshops with EU

constitutional courts

organized to share

best practices

1. Number of

capacity-building

events (0 as of

2024, at least 10 by

the 20th month of the

implementation)

2. Institutional

partnership with an

EU MS

Constitutional Court

established

1. Reports of capacity-

building events

2. Correspondence and

other records of the

partnership

N/a N/a

28

Sub-result 3.2.3:

Institutional

resilience and

adaptability

improved to address

evolving legal and

societal challenges

1. The

Court’s

institutional

capabilities to

absorb and recover

from external

shocks analyzed

2. A set of

recommendations

to improve

institutional

capabilities to

absorb and recover

from external

shocks developed

3. Number of tools and

resources developed

to address emerging

challenges

1. Analysis report

2. Summary of

recommendations

3. Tools and

resources as

developed

Limited access to

administrative

data and statistics,

also considering

the

relatively short time

that the Court has

been operational

N/a

29

Annex C7.pdf



ANNEX C7: Evaluation Grid Twinning Selections

This Evaluation Grid covers both the written proposal and the presentation

PROJECT DATA

Publication number

Twinning fiche title and number

Financing decision title and number

Applicant (lead Member State)

Applicant 2 (junior Member State, if

applicable)

Applicant 3 (junior Member State, if

applicable)1

Duration ____________Months

Total Budget

Date selection Meeting

Selection committee is to note that the FULL EVALUATION GRID will be shared with

NCP through which the proposal was submitted.

FORMAL CRITERIA (to be checked before the selection meetings)

The institutions proposed by the MS are public administrations or/and have registered as mandated bodies?

The proposal contains the CVs of PL, RTA and the CVs of the Component Leaders?

Do the PL and RTA fulfil the minimum requirements?

Are the Full details of a contact person for lead MS provided?

1 If applicable, in case of even larger consortia, insert additional rows for assessment of more junior Member States.

Does the MS proposal fulfil the formal criteria? YES NOT

EVALUATION GRID- SUBSTANTIAL CRITERIA

Scoring guidelines

This evaluation grid is divided into sections and subsections. Each subsection must be given

a score between 1 and 5 in accordance with the following guidelines:

Score Meaning

1 very poor

2 poor

3 adequate

4 good

5 very good

These scores are added to give the total score for the section concerned. The totals for each

section are then listed in section 4 and added together to give the total score for the proposal.

1. Operational capacity

A. Resident Twinning Adviser and Project Leader

Score

1.1 How adequate is the expertise of the proposed RTA to the task foreseen

(Knowledge of the issues to be addressed and experience in implementing the

Union acquis/reform area of cooperation)?

/2 x 5

1.2 How satisfactory is the management experience and capacity of the MS

proposed project leader and the administration to which the PL belong (including

staff and its ability to handle the project budget)?

/5

1.3 How satisfactory is the previous project coordination and management

experience of the Resident Twinning Adviser? Could any potential lack of

experience (although meeting minimum) be compensated by other members of

the team?

/5

1.4 How satisfactory is the previous project management experience of the

project leader and the administration to which the PL belongs?

/5

Total Score

/25

Comments

B. Component Leaders and their availability

Score

1.5 How adequate for the tasks (specific expertise) are the proposed Component Leaders from the Member State(s) and do they all come from "own staff"?

/5

1.6 How satisfactory is the technical experience of the proposed Component

Leaders?

/5

Total Score

/10

Comments

C2. MS Junior Partner Score

1.7 How good is the complementarity with the Lead MS Partner? /5

1.8 How adequate is the expertise of the proposed MS Junior Partner for the

tasks foreseen to be covered by them?

/5

Total Score

/10

Comments

If a total score lower than “adequate” (27 points) is obtained for section 1, the proposal

will be eliminated by the Evaluation Committee. The evaluation grid must nevertheless

be completed.

2 When section C is not applicable (when there is no Junior Partner), the 5 points of 1.7 will be transferred to 1.5 and the 5 points from 1.8 will be transferred to 1.6.

2. Relevance Score

2.1 How relevant are the concepts and ideas behind the strategy and

methodology presented to the needs of the Beneficiary administration and

how does it link with the Twinning Project Fiche?

/5

2.2 How adequate are the plans for initial and subsequent work-plan

preparations including the plans/ideas for communication and visibility

actions?

/5

2.3 How well does the MS administration administrative model correspond to

the needs identified in the Twinning Project Fiche?

/5

2.4 How does the proposal take into account other sector initiatives and / or

previous projects avoiding duplication and creating synergies?

/5

Total Score /20

Comments

If a total score lower than “good” (16 points) is obtained for section 2, the

proposal will be eliminated by the Evaluation Committee. The evaluation

grid must nevertheless be completed.

3. Methodology Score

3.1 Is the overall concept behind the ideas and the proposal coherent? /5

3.2 Is the proposed methodology adequate for the needs as expressed in the project Fiche?

/5

3.3 Are the results (in terms of concrete mandatory results/outputs and impact on specific and overall objectives) possible to measure?

/5

3.4 Do the Member State(s) foresee to cover all Components areas stated in the Twinning Project Fiche?

Are there examples of key activities proposed which are consistent with the mandatory results/outputs and the objectives?

/5

Total Score /20

Comments

4. Sustainability

Score

4.1 Is the action likely to have a tangible impact on its target groups? / 5

4.2 Is the proposal likely to have multiplier effects? (including scope for

replication and extension of the outcome of the action and dissemination of

information.)

/ 5

4.3 Are the expected results of the proposed action sustainable and are

ideas/strategies/ for sustaining results realistic?

/ 5

Total Score: /15

Comments

TOTAL SCORE /100

1. Operational Capacity A. Resident Twinning Adviser and Project leader

B. Component Leaders

C. MS Junior Partner

/25

/10

2. Relevance /20

3. Methodology /20

4. Sustainability /15

5. Conclusion and Recommendations

STRONG POINTS:

WEAK POINTS:

Particular comments:

ASSESSMENT & CONCLUSION

Please write your conclusion using one of the following options: Selected/Not

Selected

CONCLUSION:

..................................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................................

.......

Signatures:

......................................................................................................................................................

...

......................................................................................................................................................

........

Date: ........................................................

Annex C9 Call for proposals .pdf

ANNEX C9: Standard Twinning - Publication of the Call for Proposals

on the Internet

TWINNING CALL FOR PROPOSALS

issued by the European Commission

1. Publication reference

EuropeAid/183959/DD/ACT/KZ

2. Programme and Financing source

Project title: Support to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan to

Strengthen Institutional Capacity of the Court and the Court’s Office (direct

management)

Programme title: 45033 NDICI/GEO/Asia&Pacific/2023/ACT-60904/EU-KZ Coop

Facility NDICI ASIA [JAD.1096567.1.B2025]

3. Nature of activities, geographical area and project duration

(a) Short description (5 lines) of planned objectives:

The specific objective of this Twinning project is to enhance the analytical and

institutional capacities of the Constitutional Court of Kazakhstan and to promote

the efficiency of constitutional review processes. This objective includes:

 Strengthening the Court's ability to coherently and consistently interpret and apply

human rights standards and principles as well as constitutional principles and doctrines

through the provision of international and national expertise;

 Promoting effective legal monitoring of the state of compliance by relevant

stakeholders with the legal positions of the Constitutional Court;

 Ensuring robust safeguards for personal data protection in the Court’s data processing

practices, in compliance with relevant legal standards and principles of data privacy;

 Promoting the legal awareness of the general public and increased interaction with civil

society and the media;

 The Court’s institutional capacities strengthened in accordance with a long-term

development vision.

(b) Geographical area: Kazakhstan

(c) Maximum project duration: 24 months

4. Overall amount available for this Call for Proposals

EUR 2,000,000.00

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

5. Eligibility: Who may apply?

Only Public Administrations and Mandated bodies as per Twinning Manual of

European Union Member State may apply through European Union Member States’

National Contact Points.

PROVISIONAL TIMETABLE

6. Provisional notification date of results of the award process1

July 2025

SELECTION AND AWARD CRITERIA

7. Selection and award criteria

Selection criteria consider the operational capacity of the Component leaders

mentioned in the proposal: Member State Project Leader, Resident Twinning Adviser

and Component Leaders; the assessment is expressed on a Yes/No basis and a single

negative evaluation of one criterion disqualifies the proposal.

Award criteria consider the merit of the main qualifying aspects of the proposal

and are evaluated applying a scoring system (1 to 5):

Selection and award of the Member State will be based on an evaluation of several

qualitative aspects including but not limited to the proposed methodology, the

experience of the proposed RTA and PL, the experience of the administration in

cooperation projects and the Member State presentation etc.

See Annex C6 of the Twinning Manual: Administrative compliance and Eligibility

grid and Annex C7 of the Twinning Manual.

APPLICATION FORMALITIES

8. Twinning proposal and details to be provided

Twinning proposals must be submitted by the Lead Member State Administration to

the EU Member States National Contact Points for Twinning following the

instructions of the Twinning Manual which must be strictly observed (including the

1 "The Contracting Authority communicates the choice of the selected Twinning partner at the latest within two weeks after

the date of the selection meetings", as per page 40 of the Twinning Manual.

use of the template).

Only one Twinning proposal for Member State can be submitted by the Member

State National Contact Points for Twinning to the Contracting Authority within

the deadline for applications.

The MS application should be submitted to the Contracting Authority via the email

address of Member State National Contact Points for Twinning

9. Deadline for applications

Deadline for submission of Twinning proposals by the National Contact Points to the

Contracting Authority: 10 of June 2025 at 16:00 (Brussels time).

The deadline for submission of Twinning proposals by the EU Member State Public

Administrations to the corresponding National Contact Point is decided by the latter.

Any application received by the Contracting Authority after this deadline will not be

considered.

10. Detailed information

Detailed information on this Call for Proposals is contained in the Twinning Manual

and the specific project Twinning Fiches, which are available at the European Union

Member States National Contact Points for Twinning.

The tentative date(s) envisaged for starting the evaluation committee meetings is:

18 of June 2025

The Member State delegation should always include the proposed PL and RTA(s).

***

E-kiri.eml

From: Anneli Veisson <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2025 3:03 PM
To: Age Inkinen - JUSTDIGI <[email protected]>; Kristin Kaur - JUSTDIGI <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: Call for Proposals-Twinning: EuropeAid/183959/DD/ACT/KZ

Tere,

Edastan üleskutse Twinningu projekti esitamiseks Kasahstanis.

Tervitades,

Anneli

Anneli Veisson
Euroopa Liidu arengukoostöö lauaülem

Arengukoostöö ja humanitaarabi osakond
Välisministeerium
+372 637 7247 | +372 5305 4344
www.vm.ee | Islandi väljak 1, Tallinn

*** TÄHELEPANU *** See e-kiri (kaasa arvatud manused) on mõeldud ainult e-kirja adressaatidele ning võib sisaldada ametialaseks kasutamiseks ettenähtud teavet. Teavet ei tohi ilma saatja selgelt väljendatud loata edasi saata ega mistahes viisil kõrvalistele isikutele avaldada. Juhul, kui Te olete saanud käesoleva e-kirja eksituse tõttu, palun teavitage sellest kohe saatjat ning kustutage e-kiri oma arvutist.

*** ATTENTION *** This e-mail and its attachments may contain official information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be unlawful.

From: DELEGATION KAZAKHSTAN FC <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2025 4:56 PM
Subject: Call for Proposals-Twinning: EuropeAid/183959/DD/ACT/KZ

Dear National Contact Points,

The Call for Proposals: EuropeAid/183959/DD/ACT/KZ has been published today. The published documents are enclosed to this e-mail.

The deadline for submission of Twinning proposals to the Contracting Authority is: 10^th June 2025 at 16:00 (Brussels time).

The proposals will have to be sent to the following e-mail: [email protected] with a copy to: [email protected]

Request for clarification will have to be submitted before 20^th May 2025 (Brussels time).

Could you, please, confirm the reception of this e-mail to: [email protected] and [email protected]?

Note: the tentative date envisaged for starting the evaluation committee meeting is 18^th June 2025.

Best regards,

Delegation of the European Union to the Republic of Kazakhstan

62, Kosmonavtov Str., Z05E9E1, Astana, Kazakhstan

Web-site: http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/kazakhstan