Trust in Law Enforcement Agencies: What the BNS Survey Shows and Where the Limits of Interpretation Lie

The Bureau of National Statistics has published the results of another survey of public trust in law enforcement agencies and the judicial system. In spring 2026, 72.2% of respondents said they fully trust the police. Full trust in the Prosecutor General’s Office was reported by 70.1% of respondents, and in the judicial system by 69.7%. Partial trust in these institutions was reported by 22.9%, 23.8%, and 22.7%, respectively.

The survey covered 18,005 households across all regions of Kazakhstan. In each household, one person aged 15 to 80 was interviewed. Interviews were conducted during household visits. This sample makes it possible to analyze differences between regions, urban and rural populations, as well as individual socio-demographic groups. (Bureau of National Statistics of the Agency for Strategic Planning and Reforms of the Republic of Kazakhstan)

Administrative statistics show the number of registered offenses. However, they depend on victims’ willingness to turn to government agencies, on the practice of registering complaints, and on changes in legislation. An increase in the number of registered cases may reflect either a deterioration in the situation or more complete recording of offenses.

Therefore, administrative data are supplemented by population surveys. Victimization surveys make it possible to determine whether people have experienced crime, whether they have sought help, and how safe they feel in everyday life. The National Crime Victimization Survey in the United States has been conducted since the early 1970s and captures both reported and unreported crimes. The British Crime Survey is considered the main source for analyzing long-term trends, as it is less dependent on changes in police recording practices. (Bureau of Justice Statistics)

The Kazakhstan survey follows this general logic. It measures not only attitudes toward government bodies, but also subjective safety, reasons for concern, and experience of encountering offenses.

According to the April–May 2026 survey, the fire service recorded the highest level of full trust — 85.6%. It was followed by the police — 72.2%, the Prosecutor General’s Office — 70.1%, and the judicial system — 69.7%. The Anti-Corruption Service — 57% — and the Economic Investigation Service — 53.7% — received lower ratings. (Bureau of National Statistics of the Agency for Strategic Planning and Reforms of the Republic of Kazakhstan)

The differences can be partly explained by the nature of interactions with citizens. The fire service primarily provides assistance, whereas the police, the prosecutor’s office, and investigative bodies have oversight and coercive powers. However, the survey data show only the distribution of assessments. Explaining the reasons for trust requires additional questions about personal experience, the quality of interactions, the fairness of procedures, and the effectiveness of each agency’s work.

67.4% of respondents feel completely safe in their area of residence, while another 27% assess their situation as fairly safe. 5.3% of survey participants feel unsafe or very unsafe.

The reasons for concern show that subjective safety is broader than the level of crime. Most often, respondents cited insufficient street lighting — 23.3%, their own health status — 22%, and fear of going out alone — 15.9%. (Bureau of National Statistics of the Agency for Strategic Planning and Reforms of the Republic of Kazakhstan)

Lighting is primarily a matter of the quality of urban and rural infrastructure. Health status affects the sense of vulnerability. Fear of moving around alone may be linked both to real risks and to the characteristics of the environment, transport, and public spaces.

Therefore, improving the sense of safety is an interagency task. It involves the police, akimats, public utilities, transport systems, healthcare, and social protection. The BNS survey is valuable because it makes it possible to see this broader structure of factors.

The official infographic shows a sharp increase in trust in the police after 2022. However, the structure of the published indicator changed between the 2022 and 2023 surveys.

In autumn 2022, 39.5% of respondents fully agreed with the statement that the police can be trusted, 38% agreed partially, and 15.3% said they had never had any contact with the police. In spring 2023, direct trust categories were used: 57.5% trusted the police, 30.5% trusted them partially, and 3.8% found it difficult to answer. (Bureau of National Statistics of the Agency for Strategic Planning and Reforms of the Republic of Kazakhstan)

At the same time, the wording of the question and the structure of the response options changed. The large category of respondents who had previously reported no interaction with the police disappeared from the published distribution. This created a break in time-series comparability.

This discontinuity does not prove that the increase in trust was solely a statistical effect. Public attitudes toward the police may also have changed. However, the published data do not make it possible to determine what share of the increase is linked to changes in public perceptions and what share is due to the new question format. Therefore, it is advisable to present the indicators before and after 2023 as two separate periods.

For Kazakhstan’s international positioning, it is more appropriate to use studies in which all countries are assessed with the same instrument.

In Gallup’s latest Global Safety Report, based on 2024 surveys, Kazakhstan scored 82 out of 100 on the Law and Order Index. The index combines trust in the local police, feelings of safety when walking alone at night, and experiences of theft and assault. Separately, 67% of respondents in Kazakhstan said they felt safe walking alone at night. (The Global Safety Report)

In the 2025 World Justice Project Rule of Law Index, Kazakhstan ranks 66th out of 143 countries. At the same time, under the “Order and Security” factor, the country is in 42nd place — noticeably higher than its overall position. This points to a relatively strong perception of public order, but it does not imply an equally high assessment of all components of the legal system: government openness, fundamental rights, constraints on government powers, and the quality of justice. (Kazakhstan Ranks 66 out of 143 in the WJP Rule of Law Index)

The Gallup, WJP and BNS indicators complement one another, but they do not form a single scale. BNS measures full and partial trust in national institutions, Gallup asks questions about local police and personal safety, and WJP combines public opinion surveys and expert assessments. Coincidence or divergence in absolute percentages should not automatically be interpreted as confirmation or refutation of the national survey.

The BNS survey is an important statistical instrument. Its strengths are the large sample size, coverage of all regions, regularity, and the combination of questions on trust, safety, and experience of offenses.

The next stage of development is linked above all to transparency. With each release, it would be advisable to publish:

• the exact wording of the questionnaire and a list of changes compared with the previous wave;
• the response rate, the number of refusals, and household replacements;
• confidence intervals for key national and regional indicators;
• description of weighting and handling of missing responses;
• anonymized microdata or controlled access to them for researchers.

This would make it possible to independently verify the results, study regional and social differences more precisely, and separate genuine changes in public opinion from question-wording effects.

The survey results indicate high levels of self-reported full and partial trust in the main law enforcement institutions. They also show that the majority of the population assesses safety in their place of residence positively.

At the same time, the data do not provide sufficient grounds to claim that trust in the police increased solely because of the results of the reforms. The change in the questionnaire in 2023 limits the comparability of the earlier and later waves.

The most substantive result of the survey lies not only in the ranking of government bodies. The survey shows which everyday factors shape the sense of safety and how responsibility is distributed among the law enforcement system, local government, infrastructure, and social services. It is precisely in this capacity that it can become a decision-making tool, rather than merely a source of a single headline indicator.