Abstract
Based on the original investigation of the decisions and membership of the Constitutional Tribunals in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, and secondary analysis of jurisprudence and history of such Tribunals in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, in this chapter, we argue (1) that there is a high level of heterogeneity in the degree to which judicial independence and assertiveness is exhibited by courts in the four countries across various periods, (2) that level of political competition and formal institutional design cannot alone explain varying trajectories of judicial power and subsequent judicialization of politics, and (3) that, in the context of patronal politics, a careful look at informal political dynamics provides a useful lens through which independence of the judiciary can be explained.