International Financial Institutions Express Concern Over the “LGBT Propaganda” Bill
The proposed amendments introducing a ban on so-called “LGBT propaganda” in Kazakhstan are not an abstract ideological debate or a question of “foreign values”. These are policy decisions that directly affect human rights, public safety, civic space, and the country’s future. Today, attention to this issue is coming not only from human rights organizations but also from international development banks that have invested billions of dollars in Kazakhstan over many years in infrastructure, energy, urban development, water systems, social reforms, and economic growth.
The Human Rights LGBTQIA+ Initiative REQUEST is conducting direct and systematic advocacy specifically with development banks, including the World Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the European Investment Bank (EIB), and the Asian Development Bank (ADB). This work goes beyond public statements or symbolic appeals. It involves formal correspondence, official responses, and direct discussions with institutions that make decisions affecting critical development projects in the country.
In its response, the World Bank states explicitly that the developments are “sad and deeply concerning”, and that both the country team and global teams are “closely monitoring the situation”. The Bank emphasizes that discrimination and pressure against vulnerable groups are taken into account when assessing project contexts and implementation risks. In practical terms, this means that such legislation is already being considered a risk factor for development.
The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, one of the largest investors in Kazakhstan’s economy, noted in an official communication that it is “closely monitoring the situation in all countries of operation”. The Bank’s response states directly that discrimination against LGBTQIA+ people leads to “significant socio-economic losses, including increased poverty and annual income losses”. The EBRD also stresses that its clients are required to “respect the rights and dignity of people across the spectrum of sexual orientation and gender identity”, and that legislative changes are assessed as contextual and investment risks. These concerns were also discussed in dedicated meetings with representatives of the Bank’s Board of Directors.
The European Investment Bank confirmed in its official reply that it remains “firmly committed to the principles of non-discrimination, diversity, and inclusion”. The Bank indicated that legislative initiatives of this type “may affect the environment in which the EIB operates”, creating “heightened operational and reputational risks” and potentially requiring enhanced due diligence for projects. This sends a clear signal that discriminatory laws make investment environments more complex and less sustainable.
The Asian Development Bank recalled that its mandate focuses on “promoting economic growth and social inclusion,” and that project implementation requires “inclusive and meaningful consultations with a broad range of stakeholders, including civil society, at all stages of the project cycle”. When participation becomes unsafe, development projects themselves are placed at risk.
The key point should be stated clearly. Amendments introducing a ban on “LGBT propaganda” are not only an attack on LGBTQIA+ people. They represent a broader challenge to civic space, trust with international partners, and the multi-billion-dollar development financing on which the country relies. International development banks are already documenting these risks in official correspondence, policy language, and working-level dialogue.
They are watching this situation.
They are documenting it.
They are drawing conclusions.
And these conclusions shape decisions.
REQUEST will continue its international advocacy with development banks, because the protection of human rights is not an “add-on” to development. It is its foundation.