The electronic appeals system e-Otinish, designed to simplify interaction between citizens and government bodies, has become a source of constant technical problems that seriously hinder the realisation of the constitutional rights of Kazakh citizens. Users of the system regularly encounter situations where the portal does not display up-to-date data regarding appeals, which creates risks of missing important procedural deadlines and jeopardises the principle of fair consideration of cases.
THE SYSTEM FAILS AT THE MOST INOPPORTUNE MOMENT
The problem is systemic in nature. Citizens receive SMS notifications about changes in the status of appeals or their processing, yet on the portal itself — both via the browser and in the mobile application egovmobile — outdated data continues to be displayed. Appeals remain with the statuses "created", "under registration" or "in progress", even though they have already been processed in reality.
Characteristically, after contacting technical support, the problem is temporarily resolved, which indicates that the developers are aware of the existing faults. However, after some time the situation repeats itself, forcing users to once again spend time sorting out technical issues instead of working on the substance of the matter.
VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD
The impact of these malfunctions on compliance with procedural guarantees is particularly alarming. According to Article 73 of the Administrative Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, a hearing is conducted to provide the participant with the opportunity to familiarise themselves with the preliminary decision and express their position. The notification of the hearing must be received no later than three working days before the adoption of the administrative act.
However, how can one familiarise themselves with such a notification in a timely manner if the system does not update the statuses of appeals? Users risk missing a critically important procedure due to technical faults for which they bear no responsibility.
SUBMISSIONS DO NOT COUNT AS A HEARING
A separate issue is the ambiguous practice of applying the hearing procedure. The system interface includes a function for submitting objections to the preliminary decision with the corresponding notification: "You may submit objections to the preliminary decision".
According to Article 73 of the Administrative Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, a hearing may be carried out through "the use of information systems" and "other means of communication that allow the participant of the administrative procedure to state their position".
It would be logical to assume that written objections submitted via e-Otinish should count as a full hearing. However, in practice, there are cases where authorities do not consider such submissions as fulfilling the hearing requirements, creating legal uncertainty.
A VICIOUS CIRCLE OF BUREAUCRACY
The problems with e-Otinish are particularly detrimental to the work of journalists. Despite the fact that media requests have the shortest processing times — just seven working days — the system's technical faults create additional obstacles within already stringent timeframes.
Another serious drawback of the system is the practice of redirecting complaints to the same body against which they are filed. This creates a conflict of interest and contradicts the principles of objective consideration of citizens' appeals.
WHEN DIGITALISATION WORKS AGAINST CITIZENS
The problems with e-Otinish highlight a broader issue — insufficient attention to the quality of digital government services during their operational phase. Creating the system is only half the work. Equally important is ensuring its stable functioning, prompt resolution of faults and continuous improvement of the user experience.
The current situation shows that the system's developers are aware of the existing problems and can fix them, but apparently only do so upon user request. Such a reactive approach is unacceptable for a critically important government system, on whose correct functioning the realisation of citizens' constitutional rights depends.
CONCLUSION
The technical faults of the e-Otinish system have transformed from an annoying inconvenience into a serious threat to the observance of citizens' procedural rights. The system's inability to ensure up-to-date display of information about appeals creates risks of violating the right to a fair consideration of cases and may lead to missing important procedural deadlines.
A fundamental change in the approach to system maintenance is necessary — a shift from reactive fault-fixing to proactive monitoring and problem prevention. Only then can the digitalisation of government services truly serve the interests of citizens, rather than creating additional obstacles for them in asserting their rights.