Kazakhstan is preparing to put an end to a year-long debate over its transition to a single time zone (UTC+5). However, opposition to the change has evolved beyond public discontent. Critics, including well-known public figures, are now considering the creation of a political party with the goal of overturning what they argue is one of the most unpopular government decisions in the country’s history.
Even a year later, many citizens remain unconvinced of the benefits of the time zone shift, while the government continues to defend it with unwavering determination.
Origins of the Controversy
Discussions about adopting a single time zone in Kazakhstan have surfaced multiple times over the years. In 2021, the proposal failed to gain widespread approval. However, in the fall of 2023, a clutch of parliamentary deputies once again pushed for unifying the country’s time zones, citing public requests and scientific studies.
Supporters of the transition argued that a single time zone would eliminate time barriers between regions, improve transport coordination and business operations, and enhance government and emergency service interactions. Advocates also referred to the Barcelona Declaration on Time Policy (adopted in October 2022), which suggests that maintaining permanent time zones aligned with solar time is beneficial for health, the economy, and safety. Additionally, they pointed out that 175 countries operate within a single time zone, whereas only 22 nations use multiple zones.
Despite earlier resistance, the government proceeded with the change. At midnight on March 1, 2024, Kazakhstan moved its clocks one hour back, effectively adopting UTC+5, barring a few regions.
Public Backlash and the Petition Movement
The reaction was swift. On April 22, 2024, an online petition titled “Return the Time Back” appeared, addressed to President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev and key ministers, including those responsible for energy, health, and labor. The petition was also directed to the head of KazNII Oncology and Radiology, though the reason for this remains unclear.
Petition organizers listed several negative effects of the time change:
- Increased darkness during morning and evening hours, impacting public safety and economic activity.
- Disruptions to biological rhythms leading to fatigue, reduced productivity, and poorer sleep quality.
- Economic losses, as changes in daylight hours affected certain industries.
The petition quickly gathered over 50,000 signatures, compelling the government and parliament to formally consider the issue. On June 21, 2024, an initial public hearing took place, where opponents of the time zone shift voiced their concerns. However, after three rounds of discussions, no changes were made, and Kazakhstan remained in UTC+5.
Renewed Opposition in Parliament
Despite the government’s firm stance, opposition to the change resurfaced in September 2024 when deputies returning from summer recess reported that the time zone issue was the most frequently raised concern among voters.
Prime Minister Olzhas Bektenov reaffirmed that the decision was final but instructed the Ministry of Health to conduct a three-year study on the impact of UTC+5 on public health. This announcement only fueled opposition claims that the transition was an unwarranted experiment affecting 15 million citizens, the number of people living in regions affected by the time change.
Opponents also noted that while supporters claimed economic and logistical benefits, no tangible evidence had been presented, nor had the government directly refuted the concerns outlined in the petition.
From a geopolitical perspective, the only notable advantage of UTC+5 was that Astana and Tashkent, the capitals of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, respectively, were now in the same time zone. Previously, Astana’s time matched Bishkek’s.
Political Implications and Allegations
In December 2024, opponents of the time zone change held a press briefing in Almaty. Former diplomat Kazbek Beisebayev, now a public figure, accused three Mazhilis deputies, Yerkin Abil, Murat Abenov, and Berik Beisengaliev, of spearheading the initiative.
Beisebayev claimed that these deputies, representing the Kostanay and Kyzylorda regions, pushed the proposal through parliament, where a government working group was formed to justify the decision. He criticized the scientific experts behind the transition, noting that one was a construction specialist and the other had a background in agricultural science, questioning their expertise on time zone policies.
Beisebayev also criticized the government’s reliance on the International Alliance for Natural Time, arguing that it was merely a non-governmental advocacy group rather than an authoritative scientific body.
President Tokayev’s Response
Earlier in 2025, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev acknowledged the public discontent surrounding the time zone change in an interview with Ana Tili.
“The government is confident in its decision and believes Kazakhstan should have a single time zone,” Tokayev stated. “The Barcelona Declaration also advises against frequent time changes. However, I recognize that public concerns have been raised, and such matters require thorough discussion. That is why parliament has held hearings with scientists, experts, and regional representatives. We have agreed to conduct a comprehensive study on the effects of the time change, with findings to be presented by March 1.”
Government Study and Final Decision
The government study, presented at a Cabinet meeting and a session of the ruling Amanat party, concluded that the time change had no significant negative impact on public health, energy consumption, productivity, education, traffic safety, or crime rates. Officials stated that the research involved 40 key indicators, using data analysis, surveys, and pre- and post-transition comparisons.
Amanat party representatives accepted the government’s findings, recommending an information campaign to communicate the scientific validity of the UTC+5 transition to the public. They also suggested that local authorities work with scientists and public figures to address concerns.
To mitigate dissatisfaction in East Kazakhstan, which was most affected by the shift, local governments adjusted work schedules in several districts. The Minister of Trade and Integration, Arman Shakkaliev, noted that revised working hours (8:00 AM – 5:30 PM) had been positively received in areas such as Katon-Karagai, Markakol, Zaisan, and Kurchum. Similar adjustments could be implemented in other regions if necessary.
Addressing the findings of the study, on March 14, President Tokayev stated that the “fears and suspicions of public activists who questioned the decision were not confirmed. I agree with the arguments of the government and the vast majority of deputies, as well as experts: we have a vast territory, and our population is relatively small. Therefore, there should be a single time zone in our country. This approach will simplify state management, help optimize logistics and many business processes. I think that this should end the discussion, and there is no need to politicize this issue.”
The Birth of a Political Movement?
Despite the government’s stance, however, opponents of the time zone change are now considering political action as their only remaining option.
In a Facebook post, Kazbek Beisebayev declared: “Today, the government and parliament have given us a clear ‘No.’ Under these circumstances, our only remaining path is the political route. It is time to create a new political party. Our platform will focus on political reforms that allow citizens to have a real say in governance. This spring and summer, we must do everything possible to register our initiative with the Ministry of Justice. We cannot delay; we must act now.”
It is unlikely that Kazakhstan’s government anticipated that a simple time zone adjustment could potentially spark political mobilization.
> >
This story was updated on March 14, 2025, to reflect comments made on the issue by President Tokayev.
