Digital Accessibility in Kazakhstan: Ziyat Abdykaimov

Kazakhstan is often praised for its rapid digital transformation, but how accessible are its public services to persons with disabilities? In an interview with Novastan, Ziyat Abdykaimov, an expert in assistive technologies and accessibility at Nazarbayev University, discusses the barriers facing blind people, the potential and limitations of artificial intelligence, accessible voting and the gap between legal guarantees and everyday reality.

Kazakhstan has emerged as one of Central Asia’s leaders in digitalisation, with an expanding range of online public services, banking applications and electronic administrative procedures. Yet technological progress does not necessarily translate into greater accessibility. For people with visual impairments, poorly designed interfaces can make even essential services difficult or impossible to use independently.

Ziyat Abdykaimov has experienced these challenges both personally and professionally. After studying at Indiana University in the United States and Nazarbayev University in Astana, he went on to work in assistive technologies and information accessibility. His experience spans higher education, digital services and initiatives aimed at improving the independence and participation of persons with disabilities in Kazakhstan and neighbouring Kyrgyzstan.

In this interview, he explains why digital accessibility is about much more than technology, how artificial intelligence is changing everyday life for blind users, and what Kazakhstan must do to ensure that digital transformation benefits everyone.

From personal experience to professional work

Novastan: You have been working on information accessibility and assistive technologies for many years. Can you recall a particular experience from your personal life or professional practice that had a significant influence on how you understand accessibility? What led you to this field?

Ziyat Abdykaimov: My understanding of accessibility was shaped by my experience studying at Indiana University in 2014. There, I saw that support for students with disabilities could be organised as a well-coordinated system involving a large number of university departments. For the first time in my life, conditions were created that allowed me to concentrate on my studies rather than expend my energy overcoming barriers and advocating for my own needs.

This experience broadened my understanding of what we call an accessible environment. It is not only about having specialised equipment or adapting physical spaces on campus. It is important for a university to have established policies and procedures, and for its staff and teaching faculty to know how to ensure access to the learning process, both in the classroom and throughout the educational environment, according to the needs of each individual student.

Before studying in Indiana and working at Nazarbayev University, I had worked as a computer literacy instructor at a rehabilitation centre for blind and partially sighted people. There, I saw how learning to use computers and assistive technologies could expand a person’s ability to independently search for information, communicate, study and carry out everyday tasks. At the same time, even a good command of technology does not help if the digital environment – websites, electronic documents and online services – is inaccessible.

All these experiences, together with my master’s degree in inclusive education, led me to work professionally in the field of accessibility. For me, it is a question of independence and equal opportunities: people should have both the skills and the tools they need, while the environment in which they study, work and access services should provide them with the same opportunities as everyone else.

When digitalisation becomes an obstacle

Kazakhstan is often presented as one of the most digitalised countries in Central Asia. But how accessible is this digitalisation to everyone? Could you give a specific example of a government service, banking application or other digital platform that someone with a visual impairment finds difficult or impossible to use independently? What exactly is the problem?

A good example is the Aleumet social services portal. It was designed as a platform through which persons with disabilities can select and receive assistive devices and services guaranteed by the state. The service is intended specifically for persons with disabilities and should therefore take into account the needs of users with different impairments as a priority. In practice, however, a user with a visual impairment encounters barriers at every step. Working with the portal’s interface is practically impossible, or possible only with a very limited number of components and functions. Many controls are not recognised by screen readers, making it impossible to perform the necessary actions independently.

A screen reader is a software. By itself, it does not make interfaces accessible; it does not “see” the screen as an image or interpret controls in the way a person does, based on their external visual characteristics. If developers ignore accessibility requirements and fail to include the parameters required by assistive technologies, the screen reader does not receive all the information necessary to use a digital product properly. The interface of a poorly developed product fails to provide accessible names for elements, does not communicate their states, roles or errors, disrupts the focus order, uses visual elements without accessible alternatives, and so on.

This is particularly critical for government services and banking applications. If a government service or a bank’s mobile application is inaccessible to screen readers, users lose the ability to manage their own finances, electronic digital signatures and documents independently. They may be forced to ask third parties for assistance with operations involving sensitive personal and financial data.

Artificial intelligence in everyday life

Today, AI-based applications can describe images, recognise text and help people navigate their surroundings. Do you use such tools yourself? Could you describe a situation in which AI proved genuinely useful or, conversely, made a mistake that could have had serious consequences? How well do these technologies work with the Kazakh and Russian languages?

Yes, I use AI-based tools for working with texts, searching for information, analysing, organising and summarising information, and other tasks for which sighted people also use them. One feature that is particularly useful for blind users is image description. Normally, a screen reader can read a textual description of an image if its author has provided one, but quite often that description is simply missing.

There is, however, an important limitation: an AI model can confidently describe something that is not actually present in an image or incorrectly identify an important detail. For that reason, I certainly do not rely on it as my only source of information when reading important documents, carrying out financial transactions or navigating physical spaces.

As for Russian and Kazakh, the quality depends on the particular application, model and task. I would not give a general assessment without a detailed comparison and analysis, which would require examining the subject more closely. The problem with Kazakh is not so much with language models as with the fact that the main screen-reading applications, both for desktop and mobile operating systems, lack high-quality speech synthesisers that can read Kazakh. The only exception is iOS and macOS, where such a synthesiser was introduced in 2024.

What does this mean in practice? A screen-reader user receives all information through the voice of a speech synthesiser and interacts with a smartphone or computer interface through it. If no such voice exists for your native language, you are either forced to use Russian or remain completely cut off from the flow of information and excluded from the digital environment.

Independent voting and the right to political participation

In August 2026, you participated in developing special Braille voting templates. How were these materials developed and tested? What problems were identified and corrected? Can a blind voter in Kazakhstan today genuinely cast a ballot independently, without another person’s assistance, while preserving the secrecy of their vote?

I worked on the voting template together with other experts and Braille specialists. In this kind of work, it is important to check not only the Braille text itself, but also whether the template corresponds to the ballot paper: voters must understand where the option they want is located and be able to place their mark in the correct position.

The template presented by the Central Election Commission was produced in Kazakh and Russian. Over several rounds, we submitted comments and proposals to improve the tactile orientation elements and corrected inaccuracies in the Braille text. All our comments were accepted and the corrections were made. I would like this practice to become systematic and to be applied not only at the national but also at the local level, including the upcoming 29 November elections to the maslikhats, Kazakhstan’s local representative bodies.

The template makes independent and secret voting possible, but its availability alone is not sufficient to ensure that every voter can exercise their right to vote. It is important that Braille materials are delivered to polling stations on time and in proper condition, that they correspond to the specific ballot paper, and that election commission staff receive instructions and know how to provide them without influencing a person’s choice.

What accessible technologies actually change

Nazarbayev University’s library uses various assistive technologies that allow students with disabilities to work with educational materials. Could you describe a specific case in which adapting equipment, learning materials or the university environment helped remove a significant barrier for a student? What was required to implement this solution, and what prevents similar practices from being introduced in other universities in Kazakhstan?

I can give an example from my own experience as a student. In 2015, when I enrolled in a master’s programme at Nazarbayev University, the library acquired a workstation equipped with assistive hardware and software for blind and partially sighted users. This gave me the technical ability to work with library collections, electronic databases and educational resources within the university environment. Later, I myself began working in assistive technologies and accessibility. When I enrolled, it was the first time Nazarbayev University had admitted a student with a visible and complex disability, and the Graduate School of Education, the library and other responsible departments had to quickly determine how to provide a blind student with access to academic literature, learning management systems, library collections and many other resources. The experience was quite successful. I defended my dissertation and graduated a year later.

It demonstrated how much depends on the environment and an institution’s willingness to change it. However, purchasing equipment is only part of the solution. Students must be able to receive educational materials on time and in full, know how to use the technology, and teaching staff and other university employees must understand what needs to be adapted and how. That is why, after completing my master’s degree, I was invited to stay and work at the university library as a specialist in assistive technologies and information accessibility. This is how my personal experience gradually became my professional work.

But access to education and opportunities should not depend on whether someone is fortunate enough to study in the capital, in English, and with access to the resources of the country’s most prestigious university. That is why one area of our work involves sharing Nazarbayev University’s experience with colleagues at other universities.

Unfortunately, a narrow understanding of inclusive higher education predominates in Kazakhstan. It is often reduced to installing ramps or providing so-called “inclusion rooms”, while all other aspects of the academic process and student life are overlooked.

Under the general label of “inclusion”, universities often provide one-off payments, benefits, discounts, meal vouchers or even lower the requirements for mastering academic disciplines. The latter is not a formal policy, but teachers may do so consciously or unconsciously.

University support should not consist of lowering requirements and educational standards, but of creating equal opportunities for participation and successful integration into all aspects of university life: academic, research, social, sporting and others. Equality of opportunity between students with disabilities and other students, not merely declared in words and documents but supported by concrete resources, services and assistance, increases the competitiveness of persons with disabilities during their studies and later in the labour market. Only such a comprehensive approach can ensure comparable levels of employment among graduates with disabilities.

Ziyat Abdykaimov at Nazarbayev University. Photo: Courtesy of Ziyat Abdykaimov.

Rights on paper and rights in real life

Kazakhstan ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2015. Could you give an example of a situation in which legislation formally guarantees a particular right, but a person with a disability encounters barriers when trying to exercise it in practice? What usually happens when people try to defend their rights, and how effective are the existing protection mechanisms?

There are many examples of this gap. Take the Aleumet portal again. Access to various forms of social support is guaranteed to users. A person is entitled to an assistive device or service, but to choose and apply for it independently, they must use a digital system. When that system is incompatible with a screen reader, the existence of a right does not ensure that it can be exercised on an equal basis with others. People have to ask for assistance, give someone else access to their electronic digital signature key and disclose personal data.

People try to resolve such problems through complaints and the courts. There is a known case in which a blind activist filed a lawsuit against the organisation responsible for the social services portal, and the court ordered that it be brought into compliance with accessibility requirements. However, the situation did not change. Obtaining a court decision does not mean that the problem has been resolved. There must be oversight of its actual implementation. The very fact that someone has to spend years trying to make a service accessible – one intended, among others, for persons with disabilities – and then demand enforcement of a court decision illustrates the scale of the problem.

Another example of a broader problem is the implementation of the right to work. Article 27 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities establishes the right of persons with disabilities to work on an equal basis with others and to earn a living through work of their own choosing. National legislation also provides for the right to choose a profession, seek employment and receive fair remuneration.

Ziyat Abdykaimov attending a meeting at Kazakhstan’s Senate. Photo: Courtesy of Ziyat Abdykaimov.

In practice, only around 30% of persons with disabilities are employed. For many, obstacles may arise even before an interview. An employer sees information about a candidate’s disability and decides in advance that the person will not be able to cope with the job, will necessarily require an assistant, or that adapting the workplace will be too expensive. Yet the person may have the necessary education and qualifications and understand what conditions they need. As a result, their professional abilities may not even receive an objective assessment.

Barriers do not automatically disappear after someone is hired. For example, a wheelchair user may encounter an inaccessible entrance or toilet, while a blind employee may find themselves unable to use electronic document management systems or corporate software because these cannot be operated with a screen reader. A person with a hearing impairment may be unable to access work meetings and, more generally, any spoken communication. All of this affects not only the ability to carry out work responsibilities, but also participation in workplace life, access to training and opportunities for career advancement.

The concept of reasonable accommodation, enshrined in the Convention, is important here. It refers to necessary and appropriate adjustments in a particular situation that allow people to exercise their rights on an equal basis with others, without imposing a disproportionate or undue burden on an employer. For one employee, this might mean an accessible workstation or adapted equipment; for another, changing the way work materials are provided.

Kazakhstan has introduced measures to promote employment, including quotas and support for employers creating specially adapted workplaces. But the figures show that the mechanism itself is not yet solving the problem: according to the Ministry of Labour, 8,100 people were employed through the quota system in 2025, representing 48% of the number of positions envisaged. These statistics do not explain the reasons behind every individual case, but they demonstrate the gap between planned targets and actual employment.

When someone believes they have experienced discrimination or a violation of their labour rights, they can seek protection from labour inspection authorities or the courts. In practice, however, proving the reason for a rejection is difficult: an employer will not necessarily say that the decision was related to disability. They may refer to another candidate or simply state that the applicant was unsuitable.

Lessons from other Central Asian countries

You have conducted training on digital accessibility in Kyrgyzstan. What surprised you most while working with local specialists and organisations? Did you encounter problems or initiatives you had not previously seen in Kazakhstan? Are there specific solutions from Kyrgyzstan or other countries in the region that Kazakhstan could adopt?

The contexts and legislation of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan are similar in many respects. Both countries have high levels of penetration of digital services in the public and commercial sectors. The digitalisation of interactions between citizens and the state, as well as other everyday activities, is progressing rapidly and, as a consequence, creating similar barriers for different vulnerable groups.

In August 2024, I conducted a series of digital accessibility workshops in Kyrgyzstan organised by UNDP. Participants included representatives of government agencies, developers, civil society organisations, the community of persons with disabilities and UN agencies. During the workshops, we examined the accessibility of websites, mobile applications, government services and multimedia content.

One practice worth developing in Kazakhstan is bringing together those who commission and develop digital products and the people who will actually use them. During the meetings, we discussed government regulation of digital accessibility, what UNDP could do through its programmes, the requirements and standards that developers need to follow, and the participation and training of end users in the skills needed to test digital products.

What needs to change first?

Imagine that tomorrow you had the opportunity to change one specific practice in Kazakhstan that currently limits the independence of persons with disabilities. What would you choose, and why? How exactly would this change affect people’s everyday lives?

I would change the way digital services are developed and procured: accessibility should become a mandatory requirement for their development, acceptance and subsequent maintenance. Today, the issue often arises only after a service has been launched, when users with different impairments encounter barriers and begin submitting complaints. By that point, thousands of people are already using the service, and correcting errors may require changes throughout the entire product.

We need to start at the planning and procurement stages. A government agency or company commissioning a service should define accessibility requirements in advance, include them in the technical specifications and contract, and allocate time and budget for testing. It should be clear who is responsible for the outcome, which requirements the product must meet and how this will be verified during acceptance. If a service consists of several components, for example, if it uses third-party payment systems, bots or biometric identification, the requirements should cover those as well.

At the design stage, it is important to consider the entire user journey. Can someone find the service they need, understand the conditions, fill in an application, correct an error, sign a document and receive the result? Accessibility specialists need to be involved at this stage: they can help identify obstacles before decisions become embedded in the design and development process.

Developers and testing specialists must understand how the product works with screen readers, text enlargement, keyboard navigation and other methods of interaction. Before launch and acceptance, independent testing of the main user scenarios must be carried out, with the participation of specialists with disabilities. If a barrier is identified that prevents someone from accessing a service, it should be corrected before the product is accepted. This approach is consistent with the recommendations of the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative.

The work does not end after launch. Applications are updated, new services appear, and forms and methods of confirming actions change. Accessibility therefore needs to be checked after significant updates, and users should have a way to report problems and receive a response within a reasonable timeframe. It is also important to verify that reported problems have actually been resolved: developers and users may have different understandings of what it means for an issue to be “fixed”.

If a comprehensive approach is established, it will bring about very concrete changes and results for end users. A person with a disability will be able to independently apply for a government service, check their personal information and receive a response without handing over access to their personal account to relatives or friends. They will be able to order deliveries, pay utility bills, review the terms of banking products without outside assistance, and both purchase and provide services online.

Independence on the internet means being able to study, make one’s own decisions, earn money online and engage in entrepreneurship. That is why I would make accessibility a mandatory part of work on digital services at every stage, from defining the initial requirements to providing support after launch.

By Mathieu Lemoine, Editor-in-Chief for Novastan English.