Author: Badalian Vardan

PROVISION CONTESTED BY OMBUDSMAN RECOGNIZED UNCONSTITUTIONAL

12:24 | October 17,2014 | Social

By now in the event of pensioner’s death, his or her heirs, if not
applying for the unit granting pensions, have been deprived of the
possibility to receive due money. As a result, the right of both the
heirs and donors to property was being violated.

Previously, in the event of pensioner’s death, the amount of pension
not received by the pensioner was paid only in the case when the heirs
submitted necessary documents within six months after the pensioner’s
death. In the event of not submitting within the 6 month’s term,
the heirs could receive the above mentioned money within 12 months,
already as an inheritance.

The Civil Code provides two exclusions for inheriting the unpaid
pension after the established period of 12 months:

An inheritance is accepted by a heir after the expiration of the time
period limit established for accepting without applying to court,
on the condition of the consent thereto of all the remaining heirs
who have accepted the inheritance.

The Court recognizes the inheritance accepted if the Court finds the
reasons for missing the time period to be compelling.

It should be noted that in the event of accepting the inheritance
on the ground of actual possession, there is no need of submitting
any application.

The constitutionality of the above mentioned provision of the Law on
State Pensions has been contested by the Defender Karen Andreasyan,
as a result of which it was recognized unconstitutional and invalid.

>From now on, unpaid pension of the dead pensioner can be granted even
after 12 months, if there is the consent of all the other heirs, as
well as if the Court finds the reasons for missing the time period to
be compelling. On the ground of actual possession, the unpaid money
should also be granted without any time limitation.

Such decision made by the Constitutional Court is welcomed, since
it promotes the protection of the right of an individual to receive
inheritance, as well as it promotes the protection of the right to
property, the Ombusman’s Office reports.

HERITAGE PARTY: AGREEMENT ON ARMENIA’S ACCESSION TO EURASIAN ECONOMIC UNION IS NON-CONSTITUTIONAL

by Tatevik Shahunyan

ARMINFO
Friday, October 17, 13:29

Heritage Party condemns the de facto signing of the agreement on
Armenia’s accession to the Eurasian Economic Union and regards this
step as non-constitutional.

“It has put at threat the sovereignty of Armenia and Nagorno-
Karabakh. We believe that Serzh Sargsyan has no right to make such
decisions unilaterally with no preliminary public consultations,”
the party says.

It adds that Armenia has no right to integrate into international
structures until it recognizes the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh.

“The other members of the Eurasian Economic Union do not regard Armenia
as an equal partner. They accepted it just to be able to pressure
Azerbaijan by means of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict,” the party says.

It believes that the true goal of the Armenian authorities was to gain
support for their illegitimate regime. “Besides, a president that
has usurped power through electoral fraud has no right to sign any
documents on behalf of his country,” Heritage says, meaning Armenian
President Serzh Sargsyan.

In this light, the party us urging the Armenian Parliament to refrain
from ratifying the agreement or to do it only when Armenia recognizes
the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh.

The only way-out of this situation, according to Heritage, is change
of the ruling regime. “This is the will of most of Armenians,” the
party says.

GRAHAM BUTLER: “DURING THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, THE UNION COULD VERY WELL SEE NO NEW MEMBER STATES JOINING”

October 16 2014

We spoke with Graham Butler, Ph.D. fellow, lecturer of EU International
Relations Law at the University of Copenhagen and Narine Ghazaryan,
Ph.D, Lecturer in Law at Brunel University about the issues of the
association and enlargemnet of the European Union, Eurasian union and
about the role and perspectives of Armenia in those processes. Question
– Mr. Butler, it is a widespread opinion that the EU Association
Agreements open a large prospect of accession to the EU for the signing
country. Is this really true? Do those agreements really provide for
such a legal possibility of accession to the Union?

And if yes, what perspectives do the former Soviet countries have?

Answer – An EU Association Agreement, legally speaking, is simply
just that – an association, with potential for future co-operation
between the signatories and the Union. However, Association Agreements
do not always lead to accession to the EU. The Union has Association
Agreements with countries such as Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Tunisia,
and Egypt amongst others, and none of which could be argued to hold
aspirations towards eventual EU membership. At the same time, since
the fifth enlargement in 2004 when ten new states joined the European
Union, all ten had association agreements in place beforehand. The
same scenario was true for the 2007 accession of Bulgaria and Romania,
followed in 2013 by Croatia. Former Soviet countries for historic
reasons still retain elements of integration with a bloc they were
formerly a part of. It is the people of Armenia to decide what the
best is for their future, and should not be given an ultimatum for
which ‘side’ they should take. Question – Nonetheless, it seems that
the process of the accession to the EU is rather a complicated one.

Even the states which have singed them become a member of the Union
after a long time. Is the reason for such a situation political
or legal? Answer – For a state to become a member of the European
Union is a long drawn-out process, mainly because the Union has
particular standards in a whole range of areas that new states must
adhere to before their accession is finally agreed. The Union’s own
on-going failures over the single currency at present and in the past
permitting underequipped states such as Greece into the Union has
tightened eligibility criteria, with a willingness for patience in
future accessions. There are both political and legal considerations
which must be observed during the entire process to cater for a smooth
accession to the Union. Question – The EU Association Agreements
are a base for the enlargement of the Union. One may assume that,
nevertheless, there may be some limitations. What kind of legal
limitations are there in the process of the EU enlargement? Answer –
The main political obstruction for a state wanting to accede to the
European Union, but cannot, would be that either one or a number of
existing EU Member States would be adamantly opposed to that state
joining. For a new state to join the Union, absolute unanimity from
the existing twenty eight Member States would be required, with every
existing state holding a veto. From a legal perspective, a state could
not go from simply ratifying an association agreement to a Member
States within a few years – it would first have to become an official
‘candidate country’, which in turn would lead to the opening of areas
of negotiation that would need to meet EU standards, ranging in areas
from freedom of movements of persons, goods and capital, to consumer
protection, energy policy, and environmental standards. The incoming
President of the European Commission who is set to take office later
this year has indicated already that during the next five years,
the Union could very well see no new Member States joining. Even if
Armenia were to take only baby-steps on having closer ties with the
European Union, it would be a long period of time before candidate
status or even accession would be a serious topic of discussion. N.

Ghazaryan: “In case of Armenia the Eurasian economic integration was
intensified to counterbalance or even prevent the European initiatives”
Question – Armenia is going to sign the agreement of accession to the
Eurasian Customs Union on October 10. Recently rather often an opinion
was being circulated that in case of signing the Association Agreement
it would not be possible to become a member of the Eurasian Customs
Union. What is your opinion regarding this process? Do you think that
there is really such a contradiction between the provisions of the
legal acts of two unions? And if yes, what contradiction? Answer -As
such it is not a matter of contradiction between the provisions of
the Association agreement and any other document that would be signed
for Eurasian integration. But rather it is a question of whether trade
cooperation on par with the DCFTA that was promised to Armenia would
have been possible between the EU and the Eurasian Customs Union. Up
to today the EU prefers to deal with countries on a bilateral basis
so far as trade deals are concerned. Besides, even if the EU decides
to deal with the Eurasian Customs Union or the Economic Union as a
trading block, the latter will have to become a functioning legal
organisation, which does not seem to be the case in many respects. It
could be argued that if the Customs Union is based on the WTO rules
(Kazakhstan and Belarus had to accept Russia’s WTO tariff obligations),
then in terms of regulatory framework this should be beneficial for
any future common cooperation.

However, it is not clear how the Customs Union will deal with Armenia
and Kyrgyzstan, already members of WTO: what will be their level of
commitment? In any case, the real issue was no so much about competing
or incompatible economic frameworks of cooperation, but rather one of
a choice between political projects. The Eurasian economic integration
was intensified to counterbalance or even prevent (as it proves to be
the case with Armenia) the European initiatives. Question – Will there
be any legal possibility after October 10 for Armenia to sign the EU
Association Agreement or not? Answer -Signing an Association Agreement
with the EU would have signified close and privileged links, perhaps
even with a possibility of accession. Although the latter wouldn’t have
been acknowledged in the agreement itself, by qualifying the country as
‘European’ similar to the Georgian Association Agreement (qualified
as Eastern European), at least theoretically the accession would be
possible based on the language of Article 49 TEU. However, belonging
to Eurasian Economic Union makes any such possibilities redundant,
as it implies complying with a whole set of new rules as far as trade
cooperation is concerned. Most importantly however it implies belonging
to a different political club. Preventing the signature of the AA
with Armenia by Russia was exactly for the purpose of excluding such
possibility in the future (i.e. the possibility of offering Armenia
a special relationship with the EU). Legally speaking the type of AA
that was on offer would make no sense from the EU perspective: why
offer close and privileged links, when the country in question not
only cannot make independent choices, but already embarks on journey
of establishing another privileged relationship. The interviews were
conducted by Sose Mayilyan Student at the Master’s programme of the
Faculty of Law of University of Copenhagen

Read more at:

ARTSAKH’S YOUNG PEOPLE IMAGINE THEIR WAY OF LIFE ONLY IN FREE AND INDEPENDENT COUNTRY: ARMENIAN AMBASSADOR’S ARTICLE IN “LA NACIÓN”

11:18, 17 October, 2014

YEREVAN, OCTOBER 17, ARMENPRESS: An article by Armenian Ambassador
to Argentina Vahagn Melikyan has been issued this week in the most
read newspaper of Argentina – “La Nacion”.

This way Vahagn Melikyan responds to the article written by Azerbaijani
Ambassador to Argentina Mammad Ahmadzada, where the latter presents
the Azerbaijani positions and views on the Nagorno Karabakh conflict
and its regulation, Armenpress reports.

The article by the Armenian Ambassador refers to the national
liberation movement of 1988, the legal basics of Artsakh’s independence
declaration, the Sumgayit pogroms that followed the movement and the
threats the Armenian population confronted in the entire territory
of Azerbaijan during that period.

“More than the 20 years of independence have enabled to form and
develop democracy, state bodies, to counterbalance the government
branches, to conduct free, fair and democratic elections. Young people
of the Nagorno Karabakh Republic do not imagine and accept any other
way of living but in an independent state, free from Baku’s oppressive
and discriminatory policy,” the article reads.

L’ARMENIE DOIT ASSURER ‘INEPENDANCE DU SYEME JUDICIAIRE

ARMENIE

Les agences de presse et les télévisions rendent compte de la
conférence de presse du Commissaire aux droits de l’Homme du Conseil
de l’Europe, Nils Muižnieks, qui a fait le bilan de sa visite de
cinq jours en Arménie a l’occasion de laquelle il s’est entretenu
avec les plus hautes autorités arméniennes et des représentants
d’ONG et de la société civile. Selon lui, il reste encore beaucoup
a faire en matière de l’égalité des sexes et de défense des
droits des femmes. Il a souligné la faible présence des femmes en
politique et aux postes a responsabilité. Il a également tiré la
sonnette d’alarme s’agissant des avortements sélectifs en Arménie
(dans certaines régions d’Arménie la proportion entre les garcons
et les filles atteint 124 garcons contre 100 filles). Le Commissaire a
en outre appelé les autorités arméniennes a adopter une loi contre
la violence familiale, ainsi qu’a ratifier la Convention européenne
en ce sens. Evoquant le système judiciaire, le Commissaire a évoqué
des études qui révèlent la faible confiance de la société dans le
système judiciaire. Cela étant, le nombre des dépôts de plaintes en
2014 a doublé par rapport a l’année précédente, le nombre de juges
par rapport a la population étant toutefois faible. M. Muižnieks a
jugé essentiel de protéger le pouvoir judiciaire de toute influence
extérieure et a appelé au renforcement de l’indépendance des
juges. ” Certaines préoccupations ont été exprimées au sujet de
pressions sur les juges par le biais de procédures disciplinaires a
leur encontre. En outre, la procédure de sélection, de nomination
et de promotion des juges doit être revue ”, a-t-il signalé.

Par ailleurs, le Commissaire a commenté la possible condamnation a
cinq ans de prison d’un mineur de 15 ans, fils de Chant Haroutiounian,
qui, en novembre 2013, avait déclenché un affrontement avec la
police antiémeute au centre de Erevan. Le Procureur a réclamé 5
ans de prison pour le mineur qui aurait frappé un policier alors que
celui-ci ” agressait ” son père. Selon le Commissaire, la peine
de prison requise pour l’adolescent revient a un emprisonnement a vie
étant donné son âge. Il a considéré que l’enfant n’aurait jamais
dÔ être jugé avec les autres adultes : ” Les enfants ne doivent
pas être traités comme des adultes ”, a-t-il dit, indiquant avoir
évoqué ce point avec le Procureur général. M. Muižnieks a en
outre appelé l’Azerbaïdjan a restituer a l’Arménie la dépouille
du ressortissant arménien Karen Petrossian, décédé d’une crise
cardiaque le lendemain de sa capture par les forces azerbaïdjanaises
en aoÔt dernier. Il a appelé l’Arménie et l’Azerbaïdjan a Ã…”uvrer
de concert avec le CICR pour trouver une solution a cette question.

EXPOSITION EXCEPTIONNELLE SUR LE GENOCIDE ARMENIEN A LA MAIRIE DE PARIS EN AVRIL 2015

ARMENIE

Hayastani Hanrapetoutioun fait etat de la rencontre du directeur du
Musee du Genocide armenien, Hayk Demoyan, avec un representant de
l’Hôtel de Ville de Paris, Jean-Yves Camus, avec lequel il a evoque
la preparation d’une exposition sur le Genocide armenien a la mairie
de Paris avec le soutien du Musee du Genocide armenien. M. Demoyan a
dit accorder une très grande importance a l’organisation d’une telle
exposition dans la capitale francaise.

Extrait de la revue de presse de l’Ambassade de France en Armenie en
date du 10 octobre 2014

vendredi 17 octobre 2014, Stephane (c)armenews.com

LA VIE DU BLOG > EN ARMENIE

ARMENIE

Localement bien connu le blogueur armenien > ne se separe
jamais de son ordinateur portable, elle commence sa journee par un > sur son mur sur Facebook et se termine par >.

> a precise
l’ecureuil alias Izabella Abgaryan.

, dit-elle.

En 2012, elle a couru pour un mandat parlementaire, neuvième sur la
liste du parti Heritage mais n’a pas ete elue.

Ses messages sur Facebook parlent frequemment de politique.

[..]

En comparant les elections legislatives et presidentielles elle dit
que pendant cette campagne moins de pierres, moins de salete ont ete
jetes les unes face aux autres, ce qui s’explique par le fait que
les principales forces politiques Рle Parti Armenie prosp̬re (PAP),
le Congrès National Armenien (ANC) et la Federation revolutionnaire
armenienne Dachnaktsoutioun (FRA) – ont ete hors de la course.

Elle n’est pas d’accord avec les revendications que les > et affirme que les elections ne sont
pas un cirque pour etre interessantes, elles doivent etre de >, tandis que dans les elections en Armenie sont associees
a la fraude et la corruption electorales.

est utilise par
les forces politiques hors course pour mettre en evidence leur
importance. Dans le sens où si elles ne participent pas, il n’y a
pas de concurrence.

La verite est que ces forces politiques qui traversent une crise ont
decide de ne pas participer afin de ne pas perdre >> dit Abgaryan. , dit la jeune femme.

Souvent, elle recoit des appels d’abonnes inconnus.

>.

Elle dit que Facebook comprend aujourd’hui une palette politique
complète, et que si les evenements tragiques de mars 2008 se
produisaient maintenant, il obtiendrait beaucoup plus de couverture
mediatique dans les medias en ligne et les choses seraient beaucoup
plus claires.

[..]

Par Gayane Lazarian

ArmeniaNow

jeudi 16 octobre 2014, Stephane (c)armenews.com

RUSSIA SANCTIONS AND ARMENIA: ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES

12:07 * 16.10.14

Russia’s economic decline, caused by the western sanctions, is
highly likely to have its impact on Armenia, a lawmaker of the ruling
political force has said, not ruling out the possibility of advantages
from the process.

“The sanctions have really effected a cutdown in remittances. But in
case of pursuing more far-sighted economic policies. it is possible
to gain advantages and derive economic benefits,” Gagik Melikyan of
the Republican faction in parliament told Tert.am.

Asked why then those policies aren’t pursued and whether he
doesn’t think that the absence of interest is the reason for such a
passiveness, Melkyan said the past two months (since the sanctions
were issued) are too short a period for estimating possible outcomes.

“The sanctions are absolutely new; it’s just two months they have
been applied. So we need to use the two-month period for implementing
economic policy changes to be able to benefit from the advantages
Russia offers to importers, especially those delivering agriculture
produce.” he noted.

Melikyan said he thinks that the advantages will be temporary and
last exactly as long as the sanctions continue.

But he said he observes a progress in economic policies, especially
in the agricultural export.

Addressing the problem, Mikael Melkumyan of the Prosperous Armenia
faction said the sanctions are sure to have their serious impact on
the country (which largely depends on money transfers sent by the
estimated 3 million compatriots working in Russia).

Melkumyan pointed out to three key directions to which he said the
sanctions are likely to apply most. “First, Russia doesn’t get the
high technology devices which were formerly used to produce other
equipment in the country. Secondly, they imported pressure-resistant
high technology components which they used in military industry,
but there is none of these today. And the third important thing is
that the Western financial institutions used to fund Russia’s major
transactions, for example with China and Japan. And they do not any
longer,” he added.

Melkumyan said he sees that the sanctions effected a high profitability
decline also in many European companies, causing stagnation on the
agricultural market due to the unexported surplus.

“So they, as a matter of fact, suffer bigger losses than Russia,
as Russia manages to fill that gap due to [the import] from other
countries. But its losses do exist as far as crediting and high
technologies are concerned,” he said, adding that the situation
leads to a slowdown in the country’s economic growth and slump in
the national currency.

Melkumyan said further that the cross-effect process influences
many world countries and organizations. “What Armenia suffers is of
very trivial significance against the backdrop of this big game’s
rules: there’s just a decline in the Russian transfers. We annually
received 1.5 billion [US] Dollars from Russia, so now it will be
less. But instead. Armenia has a chance to export products to the
Russian market. The Russian market seeks goods in big volumes, but
our manufacturers aren’t ready for that,” he said, noting that loan
interest rates are too high in Armenia to offer any advantages to
major exporters (whose loan burden is heavy as it is).

Mellumyan said he finds that the negative impact will be inevitable
in the country. “The prices of products will surge, but the economic
decline and slowdown is too low to make a further collapse possible,”
he noted.

“All that will lead to a certain negative impact in Armenia, causing a
surge in the prices of products, but the economic decline and slowdown
is so low that no further collapse is possible,” he added.

US URGES AZERBAIJAN TO RELEASE HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDER LEYLA YUNUS

13:28, 16 Oct 2014

“The United States is alarmed that human rights defender Leyla
Yunus remains in pre-trial detention in Azerbaijan, without access
to necessary medical care, despite her deteriorating health,” State
Department Spokesperson Jen Psaki said in a statement.

“We are also especially concerned about continued threats to Leyla
Yunus’ physical security. On humanitarian grounds, we urge the
Government of Azerbaijan to immediately grant Leyla Yunus access
to independent medical evaluation and care, security, and improved
conditions,” she added.

The US urges the Government of Azerbaijan to respect the rule of law
and to release those incarcerated for exercising fundamental freedoms,
starting with those with serious medical conditions.

“This would include Leyla and her husband Arif, whose deteriorating
health make their release particularly urgent. It is in Azerbaijan’s
interest to ensure that its citizens are afforded the dignity, human
rights, and fundamental freedoms to which all citizens are entitled
under Azerbaijan’s international obligations,” Psaki concluded.

OSCE PRESENTS REPORT ON PROCESS OF ARMENIA’S TRANSITION FROM ANALOGUE TO DIGITAL BROADCASTING

Thursday 16 October 2014 15:13
Photo: PAN Photo

Yerevan /Mediamax/. An OSCE-supported report detailing Armenia’s
switchover from analogue to digital broadcasting was presented today
in Yerevan.

The report notes that while the technical preparations are going
to schedule, not enough effort has been invested in raising public
awareness and that the criteria for distributing decoders to vulnerable
families is not clear.

The report, which was produced by the Committee to Protect Freedom of
Expression (CPFE) with support of the OSCE Office in Yerevan, analyzes
the implementation of the Government’s Action Plan on Transition from
Analogue to Digital Broadcasting.

Armenia committed to digitalization by July 2015.

The report covers three aspects of the digital switchover: legal,
technical and social. It identifies many gaps in Armenia’s broadcast
legislation. These include the absence of legal provisions elaborating
on the conditions for licensing of private multiplexes as well as
uncertainty regarding various broadcast technologies and the impact
it may have on media freedom in the country.

“The OSCE continues to support Armenia’s regulatory framework
reform and the digital switchover. The new draft amendments to the
broadcasting law, developed by professional media organizations,
reflect key recommendations of the OSCE experts,” said Oliver McCoy,
Democratization Programme Officer at the OSCE Office in Yerevan. “I
believe that today’s discussions will serve as basis for further
dialogue between government and civil society as Armenia makes this
technological leap to a digital broadcasting system.”

“The Report provides several recommendations concerning technical
and social aspects of the digital transition, which must be duly
considered. In addition, the working group established with OSCE
support, consisting of partner organizations, resulted in a package of
draft amendments to the Law on Television and Radio already submitted
to the Parliament, addressing legal problems mentioned in the Report”,
Ashot Melikyan, CPFE Chairman said.

The report in Armenian and English can be found here.