SOCIETY MUST BE ABLE TO FORMULATE DEMANDS
Interviewer SIRANUISH PAPYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
Published: 11:47:45 – 06/05/2011
Interview with Arpine Galfayan, chairperson of Institute of Human
Rights and Democracy
Arpine, what is the situation in Armenia and what should be changed?
The main issue is the necessity to change the system, the political
system, at the same time, the economic system with all the relevant
components. The basis of the system is human consciousness, and the
political and civil culture. Now it is right that in Armenia civil and
political activity is growing but at the same time most people are
waiting for a leader’s word to follow. I am very sorry about this. And
this is one of the reasons why we have been experiencing frustrations
for 20 years.
Are we in another phase of frustration?
If we mean the context of the dialogue between the government and the
opposition, frustration comes from useless expectations. Generally,
one should not follow a political party with one’s eyes closed, and to
hope eternally that one leader or another will come and save us from
all our troubles. After all, political forces pursue power. It is
important for the society to be able to formulate their demands and
force the political parties to put these demands on the political
agenda. The better a society is organized, is able to formulate its
demands, the greater the influence and strength. Today it is very easy
to govern thousands of people who follow the appeals of the leader, it
is much more difficult when people know exactly what they want, they
imagine how they can get it, and are going to participate in the
change and innovation. In this sense, the political parties in Armenia
do not want a conscious society.
What should be done to form participatory democracy?
Participatory democracy supposes the active participation of a person,
a citizen in decision making which refers to him or her, not just
voting to representatives from election to election but also
participating actively in the life of the community, company,
university. Student boards and trade unions, civil initiatives are the
main institutions of participatory democracy. Students who are usually
the moving force of social change are mostly a conservative,
reactionary mass in Armenia. Student boards are estranged from
students, their representatives use the board for their career growth
rather than for protection of students’ rights and proceed to
ministerial or other posts, acting as agents of the leadership of the
ruling party and the university.
Arpine, the leader of the opposition says he is ready to talk to
everyone, and the society must go on to self-organize, this is
participatory democracy, isn’t it?
These elite, hierarchic forms are not acceptable. What does he mean to
go and ask for advice, help? After all, a political party is born from
the society, the basis of it are social groups, organized social
groups, the political party must be beside them, it must not be higher
or lower than the society. Civil society and participatory democracy
are strong for these horizontal relations: cooperation for the common
goal, without joining one another, without comparing to one another.
In fact, now the society has more demands from both the government and
the opposition?
The society is not monolithic. What we see in the center of Yerevan
differs greatly from the other parts of the country. In Yerevan
different civil initiatives are active now, which is one of the key
premises of democracy. We have considered for many years that the NGOs
are corrupt, there is no civil society in Armenia but today we can see
the birth of a new quality of civil society. I think they are an
alternative with quite different values underlying their activities.
Unlike the political sphere and the dominant political culture, these
civil initiatives operate on a volunteer basis, and do not pursue
profit, their activities are transparent and disclosed, they do not
have a hierarchic structure, an authoritarian leader, decision making
is equally shared by all the members. Already a process of cooperation
among different movements and groups is visible.
Can we say that the civil sector has defeated the political sector?
Unfortunately, not yet but I can see its development, and along with
the organization of the civil sector the political sector will have to
take it into account. It is important than more young people become
involved in civil activities and it is important to enhance the
organization of the civil sector. Although we may think that civil
activities are spontaneous actions, in depth they are organized very
well and thoroughly, the recent example is the movement in Egypt.
From: A. Papazian
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/interview21676.html