The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
30
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
TYPE
Original Research
PAGE NO.
30-33
10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue05-07
OPEN ACCESS
SUBMITED
17 March 2025
ACCEPTED
13 April 2025
PUBLISHED
15 May 2025
VOLUME
Vol.07 Issue05 2025
CITATION
Dmitriy Rakhmanov. (2025). Some issues of improvement of legislative
regulation of scientific and expert support of the parliamentary activity of
Uzbekistan. The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology,
7(05), 30
–
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue05-07
COPYRIGHT
© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.
Some issues of
improvement of legislative
regulation of scientific and
expert support of the
parliamentary activity of
Uzbekistan
Dmitriy Rakhmanov
Chief Researcher, Department of Parliamentary Research Institute under
the Legislative chamber of the Oliy Majlis of the Republic of Uzbekistan
Abstract:
The article undertakes a thorough analysis of
the challenges associated with the legislative
framework for scientific and expert support within the
parliamentary activities of the Republic of Uzbekistan. It
is important to acknowledge that, despite the measures
that have been implemented, the interaction between
parliament and the scientific community requires
further development. The necessity of strengthening
scientific and expert support of parliamentary activity in
the context of modern reforms is emphasized. The
article puts forth a series of recommendations to
enhance the legislation, including the formation of
scientific and expert councils within the chambers of the
Oliy Majlis and the elucidation of the process for
obtaining feedback from scientific institutions on draft
legislation. The implementation of these proposals is
expected to enhance the quality of the lawmaking
process and the effectiveness of parliamentary control,
thereby fortifying the role of the Parliament of
Uzbekistan in democratic transformations.
Keywords:
Parliament of Uzbekistan, scientific-expert
support, legislation, lawmaking, scientific-expert
council, parliamentary control, review.
Introduction:
The evolution of parliamentarism in
Uzbekistan is concomitant with the quest for optimal
methods to enhance the efficacy of interaction between
the legislative branch and the scientific and expert
community.
Following
the
establishment
of
independence, a series of legal and institutional
measures have been implemented with the objective of
engaging scientists and specialists in the legislative
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
31
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
process.
The ongoing phase of reform in Uzbekistan
—
which
includes the democratization of the system of state
governance and the enhancement of parliament's
role
—
raises the bar for the scientific validity of its
decisions.
The
dynamics
of
transformations
necessitate a closer collaboration between the
Chambers of the Oliy Majlis and professionals from
various spheres (economics, finance, law, social policy,
etc.), as well as with leading representatives of the
scientific community. In the contemporary age,
scientific rigor is imperative in the formulation and
implementation of legal frameworks, ensuring that
legislation aligns with the demands of the present era
and the national development objectives.
The pertinence of the subject matter is especially
evident in the context of the tasks delineated by the
President of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Shavkat
Mirziyoyev, during the inaugural session of the
Legislative Chamber of Oliy Majlis of the V
convocation. The head of state underscored the
imperative for substantial enhancement in two
domains: the legislative process itself and the
instruments of parliamentary oversight.
Among the priority directions articulated by the
President are the expansion of the format for public
participation, the establishment of constructive
cooperation between committees and ministries, the
strengthening of parliamentary control over the
execution of the State Budget, and the establishment
of the Parliamentary Commission on Public Initiatives.
The effective implementation of these initiatives is
unfeasible without reliance on the findings of scientific
research and analytical developments. Consequently,
it is objectively necessary to strengthen cooperation
with the scientific community.
Accordingly, the fundamental objectives of the
parliamentary reform, as delineated by the President,
engender an objective necessity for systematic
fortification of scientific and expert support,
institutionalization
of
its
mechanisms,
and
involvement
of
research
centers,
academic
institutions, and independent experts in the activities
of the Legislative Chamber.
The objective of this article is to identify the existing
problems in the legal regulation of the involvement of
scientific and expert potential in the work of the
Parliament, to analyze foreign experience in this area,
and to formulate specific proposals to amend the
legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
Concurrently, the level of interaction between
Parliament and the scientific community remains
inadequate and requires further development.
Problem statement
To date, the national legislation of Uzbekistan has laid
the foundations for the participation of external experts
and scientific institutions in parliamentary activities,
which need to be further developed. While numerous
nations have established consultative bodies of
scientists affiliated with legislative entities, the
organizational framework of the Chambers of the Oliy
Majlis has not yet constituted a scientific-expert council
under the Chambers' direction. However, scientific-
expert councils have been established under each
committee of the Legislative Chamber. However, the
involvement of experts is episodic, more often in the
form of consultations at the initiative of deputies or
committees. The absence of an institutionalized form of
cooperation with the scientific community can be
considered, in a sense, a limitation of opportunities for
the systematic use of scientific knowledge in the
legislative, control and analytical, and representative
work of parliamentarians.
The mechanism for obtaining feedback from a scientific
institution on a draft law requires clarification.
According to the Law "On the procedure for the
preparation of draft laws and their submission to the
Legislative Chamber of the Oliy Majlis of the Republic of
Uzbekistan," the subject of legislative initiative
possesses the right to transmit the project for review to
other subjects of the right of legislative initiative, as well
as interested bodies, including non-governmental
organizations and scientific institutions, subsequent to
the completion of work on the project and the conduct
of expertise on it. However, submission for review to
scientific organizations is permitted exclusively
subsequent to the completion of all requisite
assessments. A pertinent inquiry emerges: what form
should such a review take, given that by the time it is
drafted, the project may have already undergone
scientific and legal evaluations? At the culmination of
the investigative process, what form will the anticipated
novel information or evaluation take from the scientific
institution? In accordance with the prevailing norm, the
aforementioned points are not disclosed. Consequently,
the institute of feedback from scientific organizations is
not operating at its full potential, as its purpose and role
in the lawmaking process remain ambiguous. It is
imperative that the law clearly delineate the inquiries to
be addressed by a scientific institution in order to
ensure the efficacy of this procedure. The absence of
regulatory oversight in this domain impedes the efficacy
of integrating academic science into the evaluation of
draft legislation.
Analysis of foreign experience
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
32
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
The international practice of developed democratic
countries demonstrates that high-quality lawmaking is
unthinkable without effective scientific and expert
support. Parliaments worldwide have established
special mechanisms and bodies for the scientific
analysis and evaluation of draft laws. In particular, the
formation of scientific-expert councils is a common
practice within the parliamentary system. These
councils are established to provide expert advice to
lawmakers on draft legislation. They are comprised of
distinguished scientists and experts in their respective
fields, who serve in an advisory capacity. The existence
of such advisory structures in the parliaments of
numerous nations worldwide serves to substantiate
their perceived significance. States with a long
tradition of parliamentarianism have established
independent analytical units. For instance, in the
United States, Congress relies on the research of the
Congressional Research Service (CRS) to provide MPs
with objective scientific information when considering
policy issues. Similarly, the United Kingdom has the
Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology
(POST). In numerous post-Soviet and Eastern European
countries, there are scientific expert structures
operating under the leadership of the parliament or in
close affiliation with it. The most institutionalized
models are those of Lithuania, Poland, and Hungary.
Consequently, a global trend has emerged: the
institutionalization of scientific and expert support for
parliaments.
The foreign experience of legislative regulation of
expert examination of draft laws is also noteworthy.
Numerous countries have instituted procedures for
the scientific evaluation of normative acts.
Furthermore, legislative acts frequently include explicit
references to the necessity of incorporating
contemporary scientific data and technological
advancements during the process of lawmaking.
Moreover, the involvement of the academic
community in parliamentary control is a widespread
practice in foreign countries. Parliaments engage in
cooperative relationships with academic institutions,
research institutes, and expert-analytical centers,
colloquially referred to as "think tanks," to oversee the
implementation of legislation, evaluate the efficacy of
government programs, and formulate strategic
recommendations. The integration of scientific
knowledge and legal decision-making processes has
been demonstrated to enhance the quality of these
decisions and to increase public confidence in them.
A review of the experiences of other countries reveals
several key elements that are conducive to effective
parliamentary oversight. These elements include the
presence of permanent expert councils within the
parliament, interaction with independent scientific
organizations during various stages of the legislative
process, and the utilization of scientific findings for
parliamentary oversight. These elements can function
as a point of reference in the process of reforming the
legislative framework for the scientific and expert
support of the activity of the Chambers of the Oliy
Majlis.
Suggestions
In light of the identified concerns and in accordance
with the most effective international practices, it is
imperative to implement the following amendments
and supplements to the legislation of the Republic of
Uzbekistan. These enhancements are intended to fortify
the scientific and expert assistance of the Parliament.
The establishment of the Scientific and Expert Advisory
Council was overseen by the Chambers of the Oliy
Majlis. In order to establish permanent scientific and
expert advisory councils under the leadership of the
Legislative Chamber and the Senate, it is proposed to
amend the Constitutional Laws "On the Legislative
Chamber of the Oliy Majlis of the Republic of
Uzbekistan" and "On the Senate of the Oliy Majlis of the
Republic of Uzbekistan." These amendments will clearly
define the status of the council, its functions, tasks,
rights, and duties. Within the framework of legislative
provisions concerning the procedural regulations of the
chambers, it is imperative to establish a comprehensive
procedural framework for the establishment and
operations of the scientific-expert council. This
procedural
framework
should
encompass
the
composition of the council, which includes prominent
scientists and experts in diverse fields, the mechanisms
for selecting its members, the organization of its
meetings, and the form of recommendations and
conclusions it produces. The establishment of such
councils serves to institutionalize a dialogue between
parliament and the scientific community. The council
has the capacity to undertake a preliminary review of
the conceptual frameworks underlying new laws, to
furnish feedback on key draft laws that is grounded in
scientific principles, and to propose initiatives designed
to enhance the quality of legislation.
The following is a clarification of the procedure for
requesting feedback from scientific institutions. To
ensure the efficacy of the feedback mechanism from
scientific organizations, it is imperative to amend the
Law "On the procedure for preparing draft laws and
their submission to the Legislative Chamber of the Oliy
Majlis of the Republic of Uzbekistan." The law should
explicitly enumerate the inquiries to which the
proponent of a legislative initiative anticipates receiving
a response when transmitting a draft for evaluation to a
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
33
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
scientific institution. For instance, the text could
stipulate that the review of the scientific institution
should contain the following:a) an assessment of the
theoretical validity of the concept of the project;b) an
analysis of the scientific data, statistics, and foreign
experience
used
in
the
project;
andc)
recommendations for improving the project from a
scientific point of view. Furthermore, the existing
policy that mandates the submission of projects for
review solely after expert evaluation must be
reexamined. It is imperative to establish a mechanism
that facilitates the dissemination of draft legislation to
scientific institutions at earlier stages, in conjunction
with other expert reviews. In addition, the
development of a standard methodology for the
preparation of such reviews is recommended, with the
aim of unifying their form. The regulation of these
aspects will facilitate the organic integration of
academic science into the legislative drafting process.
Specialized institutes (e.g., the Institute of Philosophy
and Law of the Academy of Sciences, sectoral research
institutes) will be capable of providing expert opinions
that legislators can consider during the finalization of
draft laws.
CONCLUSIONS
The analysis indicates that to advance the
development of domestic parliamentarism, it is
essential to establish a new level of scientific and
expert support for legislative activities. The article
identifies and scientifically substantiates some
promising directions for improving the legislative basis
of such support. The primary conclusions and
proposals derived from this study are as follows:
The parliament's adoption of scientific and expert
support through institutionalized mechanisms is
imperative.
The enhancement of mechanisms of interaction with
scientific institutions is imperative.
The present study posits that the expansion of
scientific expertise in support of parliamentary control
is a pivotal factor in the enhancement of governance
and decision-making processes.
In conclusion, it should be emphasized that the
proposed measures to improve the legislative
framework for scientific and expert support of the
parliamentary activity of Uzbekistan correspond to the
modern trends of developed parliamentarism and the
urgent needs of the country. The implementation of
these measures will empower the parliament to adopt
legislation that is more scientifically substantiated,
enabling more effective monitoring of their
implementation
and,
consequently,
a
more
comprehensive fulfillment of its role within the system
of state power. The enhancement of the connection
between scientific research and the legislative div is a
crucial element in the effective execution of reforms
and the advancement of democratic processes within
the Republic of Uzbekistan.
REFERENCES
The Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On the
procedure for the preparation of draft laws and their
submission to the Legislative Chamber of the Oliy Majlis
of the Republic of Uzbekistan”
Information message on the speech of the President of
the Republic of Uzbekistan Shavkat Mirziyoyev at the
first session of the Legislative Chamber of the Oliy Majlis
of
the
V
convocation.
https://president.uz/ru/lists/view/7711
Congressional Research Service. (n.d.). About the CRS.
USA.gov.
Retrieved
April
24,
2025,
from
https://www.usa.gov/agencies/congressional-
research-service.
Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST).
(n.d.).
Parliament
of
the
United
Kingdom.
www.parliament.uk/post.
European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS). (n.d.).
European Parliament. www.europarl.europa.eu.
Parliamentary Office for the Evaluation of Scientific and
Technological Choices (OPECST). (n.d.). Parliament of
France.
https://www.assemblee-
nationale.fr/11/documents/index-oecst-gb.asp.
Scientific Council of the Seimas of the Republic of
Lithuania (Seimo Mokslo taryba), Official website of the
Seimas of Lithuania
Scientific Advisory Board to the National Assembly of
Hungary
(Tudományos
Tanácsadó
Testület),
Országgyűlés hivatalos oldala
Polish Sejm Research Bureau (BAS - Biuro Analiz
Sejmowych), Biuro Analiz Sejmowych
