The parliamentary elections of Armenia were held on June 7, under the conditions of large-scale, systematic and documented frauds.

The purpose of these elections was not simply to determine the representatives of the people or the future orientation of the country. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan was fully aware that it depends on their outcome whether he will continue to lead the country alone for another five years, or whether he will be criminally liable for violating the Constitution and hundreds of laws.

Realizing that this is a fight for his own survival, Pashinyan used all the legal and illegal means at his disposal to get re-elected and avoid imprisonment.

The election frauds started long before the voting day. As part of a series of draconian measures implemented in the months leading up to the elections, Pashinyan ordered the arrest of hundreds of opposition supporters, accusing them of handing out election bribes. However, none of those arrested have yet been tried or found guilty. Furthermore, without any legal basis, he ordered the arrest of several opposition parliamentary candidates with the aim of disrupting their election campaigns and intimidating their supporters. Pashinyan also violated the legislative requirement, according to which he is a member of the parliament in order to arrest the candidate, it was necessary to obtain the consent of the Central Electoral Commission in advance. In addition, he prohibited opposition leaders Gagik Tsarukyan, Robert Kocharyan and Narek Karapetyan from leaving the country on short trips, again without the required approval of the Central Election Commission.

Pashinyan ordered the arrest of the well-known businessman and philanthropist Samvel Karapetyan on the very day that he expressed his support for the Armenian Apostolic Church. After spending months in the pre-trial detention center in harsh conditions, Karapetyan was transferred to house arrest. With this step, Pashinyan effectively deprived a major political opponent of the opportunity to campaign for his party before the elections.

In the weeks leading up to the election, Pashinyan traveled around the country illegally using vast state resources for his political campaign. He was accompanied by government ministers and heads of parliament, who abused their official positions without going on leave.

Contrary to election law, the government forced hundreds of schoolchildren and teachers to attend Pashinyan’s campaign rallies during school hours in order to create the illusion of mass public support. State employees were also subject to such mandatory attendance.

On voter rolls, the Central Election Commission had announced 2.5 million registered voters in a country with a maximum population of three million. These lists included large numbers of children under the age of 18 and hundreds of thousands of Armenians who had emigrated years ago but whose names remained on the voter lists. This discrepancy created ample opportunity for voter fraud, as the government could vote for absentee citizens. Indeed, a number of voters, upon arriving at the polling stations, found out that someone had already voted for them.

Additional electoral fraud occurred when authorities brought large numbers of soldiers to polling stations and instructed them to vote for the prime minister’s party. These soldiers conducted multiple voting by moving between several polling stations, a tactic known as “carousel voting”.

The authorities also created obstacles for those citizens of Armenia who came from abroad specifically to participate in the voting. Upon arrival, many of them were immediately sent to 25-day military training, thus disenfranchising them.

Astonishingly, after only a small fraction of the voting results had been counted on June 7, Pashinyan was quick to announce that his party had won a majority, thus putting pressure on the Central Election Commission to declare him the winner.

After the preliminary counting on June 8, serious inconsistencies appeared between the votes recorded in the polling stations and the total numbers published by the Central Electoral Commission. Hundreds, if not thousands, of votes cast in favor of the opposition parties were undercounted. All three major opposition parties rejected the results, calling them falsified, and demanded new elections and appealed to the Constitutional Court. However, new elections would most likely produce the same result due to the same fraudulent methods used. Moreover, all the members of the Constitutional Court were appointed by Pashinyan’s parliamentary colleagues, which makes it almost impossible to cancel the results.

On June 14, exactly one week after the elections, the Central Electoral Commission announced the final results. Despite the documents submitted by the “Prosperous Armenia” party, which showed many uncounted votes, the Commission claimed that the party lacked several votes to overcome the 4% threshold. As a result, it was announced that Pashinyan’s “Civil Contract” party received 49.75% of the votes, securing 64 parliamentary mandates, “Powerful Armenia” party – 23.27% – 29 mandates, and “Armenia Alliance” – 9.9% – 12 mandates. Pashinyan’s party secured about 60% of the seats in parliament, despite receiving only 49% of the public vote, as the remaining 15 parties did not pass the 4% threshold and their votes were redistributed, mostly in favor of Pashinyan’s party.

However, Pashinyan’s party failed to secure the necessary two-thirds majority to adopt the new Constitution demanded by President Ilham Aliyev. Therefore, Azerbaijan will refuse to sign the Peace Treaty widely praised by Pashinyan. This result puts Pashinyan in a very awkward position, as he campaigned on the promise of peace while accusing the opposition of being “war parties”.

Over the past week, there have been large-scale discussions in Armenia about whether the opposition parties should take their mandates in the rigged parliament or give them up and boycott them. Both options have their advantages and disadvantages. They will announce their decision soon.

Regardless of whether the opposition parties decide to take the seats or not, they must take the following two important steps:

1. Unite all opposition forces and jointly call hundreds of thousands of Armenians to flood the streets of Yerevan and other cities to participate in continuous protests until Pashinyan’s resignation.

2. Form a “shadow cabinet” by appointing opposition politicians to unofficial ministerial positions. This structure will lead the process of removing Pashinyan from office and will prepare the smooth transfer of power after his removal.

Harut Sassounyan

www.TheCaliforniaCourier.com

Translation: Ruzanna Avagyan

—

The Hungarian Parliament has approved the constitutional amendment limiting the prime minister’s term of office to a maximum of eight years, two terms.

This decision is particularly noteworthy because it is about the parliamentary system of government. Unlike presidential republics, where term limits have long been a democratic standard, most parliamentary countries do not have such an institution. In Germany, Great Britain, Spain, Italy and other European democracies, the prime minister can serve as long as he enjoys the confidence of the parliamentary majority.

At the base of that approach is the logic that the parliament, the multi-party system, political competition and counterbalance mechanisms are sufficient to prevent over-concentration of power.

However, the decision of Hungary proves that in the 21st century, authoritarianism can be formed not only in the conditions of violation of constitutions or abolition of elections, but also in conditions of formal observance of electoral procedures. When the same political force or leader controls the state system for many years, political competition, institutional counterbalances and the culture of changeable power gradually weaken.

For this very reason, the new Hungarian decision can be considered as a measure of institutional self-defense of democracy, which aims to prevent too long dominance of one person or one political group, even in conditions of electoral legitimacy (however, term limits alone are not enough, more importantly:
independent courts,
free media
real political competition,
the culture of power changeability).

Unfortunately, the political developments in Armenia are moving in the opposite direction.

In recent years, democratic counterbalances have consistently weakened in Armenia. The parliament has practically come under the “heel” of Nikol Pashinyan, the judicial and law enforcement systems have become instruments of political reprisal of the government, an antagonistic environment has been created in the political field.

Power is increasingly identified with the state, and political opponents are presented as a threat.

This is the way in which stable authoritarianism is formed without outright dictatorship. Democratic institutions are preserved in form, but are gradually deprived of content.

The process of centralization of power and strengthening of autocracy continues in Armenia.

Armenia is on a dangerous path to the formation of stable authoritarianism.

Political scientist Suren Surenyants

—

The company “Gazprom Armenia” informs that during the earthworks carried out by another organization, a medium-pressure underground gas pipeline was damaged, due to which, on June 17, at 09:45, the services of Artik city, Horom, Hovtashen, Vardakar, Nor Knyak, Panik, Anushavan, Meghrashen, Getap, Spandaryan, Arevshat, Mets Mantash, Little Mantash were stopped. Gas supply to gas consumers of Harich, Nahapetavan, Saralanj, Pemzashen, Tufashen, Haykasar settlements and related public organizations of various significance.

The gas supply will be restored after the completion of emergency restoration works.

—

In order to make the law-abiding taxpayer system more attractive, to provide additional tools necessary for its implementation, as well as to ensure effective application by revising the regulations for issuing the certificate, the Government proposes additions and amendments to the Tax Code of the Republic of Armenia.

The issue was discussed at the session of the RA NA on June 17.

According to Hamlet Sahakyan, Deputy Chairman of the RA State Revenue Committee, it is proposed to issue the law-abiding tax payer’s certificate indefinitely, while providing for the possibility of its termination. From now on, the activities of businessmen with such a certificate will be subject to quarterly monitoring, which will ensure their continued law-abiding behavior and free them from the need to submit a new application every 12 months.

It is also recommended to use a reducing factor of 0.8 when assessing the riskiness of law-abiding taxpayers during the planning of complex tax audits. According to the keynote speaker, this means that risks will be reduced by 20 percent, which in turn will reduce the frequency of complex inspections.

It is planned to introduce an individual approach to the service of taxpayers, and an individual specialist will be appointed for each law-abiding taxpayer, who will provide continuous and targeted support.

Hamlet Sahakyan noted that in parallel, a draft decision was put into circulation, with which it is planned to review the standards of law enforcement. After the adoption of the law, it will be submitted to the Government for discussion.

Sergey Bagratyan, a member of the commission, presented the positive conclusion of the Standing Committee on Economic Affairs to the head.

The draft law was adopted in the first reading.

—