Author: Boshkezenian Garik

TRANSPORT MINISTER SATISFIED WITH PROCESS OF KAPAN – SHIKAHOGH – MEGHRI ALTERNATIVE MOTORWAY CONSTRUCTION
Noyan Tapan
Jun 19 2006
KAPAN, JUNE 19, NOYAN TAPAN. The RA Minister of Transport and
Communication Andranik Manukian paid a visit to Syunik marz on June
16-17 to familiarize himself with the process of constructing the
93.5-km alternative motorway Kapan – Shikahogh – Meghri with RA state
budget allocations. He expressed his satisfaction over the process
of construction work, noting that construction work of 5 bln 599 mln
drams was carried out in 2005, while this year the work will amount
to 6 bln 300 mln drams. The motorway will be put into operation by
late 2006. According to A. Manukian, the motorway’s construction is
in the center of attention of the Armenian President, and he reports
on the construction process to the President every week. “It is a big
project, there will be flaws but they should not impair the quality
of the work. This in a road being built in line with international
standards and should be in line with such standards,” the minister
told reporters.

HOUSE MEMBERS CALL ON EU TO ENCOURAGE TURKEY RECOGNIZE THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE
ArmRadio.am
20.06.2006 16:48
The Armenian Assembly today commended longtime Armenian issues
supporter, Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney for urging the European
Union (EU) to press Turkey to meet its accession criteria, properly
recognize the Armenian Genocide and end its ongoing blockade against
Armenia.
The congressional correspondence, addressed to European Commission
President Jose Manuel Barroso and signed by nearly two dozen lawmakers,
states that Turkey’s progress towards establishing guarantees for
democracy, rule of law, human rights and respect and protection of
minorities remains wholly inadequate.
The bipartisan letter states in part: “Of particular concern is
Turkey’s lack of interest in considering improvements in areas that
are of paramount importance for the integrity and credibility of
Turkey’s bid for membership.
Principal among such areas is the question of Turkey’s diplomatic
recognition of Armenia, and the removal of its blockade, as a
major impediment to regional security and development in the South
Caucasus. Equally critical is Turkey’s ability to end its official
policy of denial of the Armenian Genocide, and come to terms with
its genocidal legacy.”
“It’s time for Turkey to get serious about meeting its European Union
accession criteria,” Maloney said. “I hope that the EU will make very
clear to Turkey during these talks that it must remove its blockade
against Armenia and end its official policy of denial of the Armenian
Genocide.”
The United States has called upon Turkey to restore economic, political
and social ties with Armenia, while the European Parliament has
adopted a resolution urging Ankara to open its border with Armenia,
and recognize the genocide, as a precondition to membership to the EU.

CANADA-ARMENIA FRIENDSHIP GROUP ESTABLISHED IN CANADA
PanARMENIAN.Net
19.06.2006 19:02 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The Canada-Armenia Preliminary Friendship (CAPF)
for the 39th Parliament was established at a meeting in the House
of Commons on June 14. House of Commons and Canadian Senate members
were invited by MP Gary Goodyear (Conservative-Cambridge) to attend
the founding meeting and elect a new executive for CAPF. So far 32
members of Parliament and Senators have joined CAPF.
In his opening remarks Goodyear thanked MPs and Senators and said:
“Your presence demonstrates your support for the positive relationship
that exists between Armenia and Canada. As you know, our Prime
Minister recently officially recognized the Armenian Genocide of
1915 in Parliament. We believe that this was a positive step toward
healing the wounds of the past and paving the road for a peaceful
and prosperous relationship between Canada and Armenia.”
Arman Agopian, the Charge d’ affairs of the Embassy of Armenia, thanked
the Canadian parliamentarians for their support and commitment to
foster and enhance strong and positive bilateral relationship between
Canada and Armenia. CAPF new president invited Aris Babikian, executive
director of the Armenian National Committee of Canada (ANCC), to
relay the message of the Canadian-Armenian Community, reported Yerkir.

DEMOCRACY LEVEL IN GEORGIA
The Messenger, Georgia
June 19 2006
Freedom House, the international civil rights and democracy
watchdog, recently published its evaluation of the current level of
democratization in Eastern European and the former Soviet Union; the
report says the level of democracy in Georgia has improved, slightly.
The conclusions of this internationally respected organization were
welcomed by the current administration, but raised criticism from
both the opposition and numerous experts who are much more critical
of the situation in the country. Freedom House’s analysis is based
on a scale form 7 to 1, with 7 being the least free in terms of civil
liberties and political rights, and 1 being the most free.
The report says countries such as Russia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and
Turkmenistan, which are becoming fat off the energy resources they
posses, possess public institutions subservient to the ruling cadre,
and state governance that is mostly self interested. The major reason
for this situation is unsuccessful-or perhaps uninitiated-reform in
the legal system and the media. The high level of corruption in these
countries is highlighted by the report, with Russia described as an
‘oligarchy of bureaucrats’.
According to Freedom House, the democratic situation in the post
Soviet space in 2005 deteriorated in Belarus (6.71), Russia (5.75),
Turkmenistan (6.96), Uzbekistan (6.82), Kazakhstan (6.39), Tajikistan
(5.93) and Azerbaijan (5.93); all of these countries are described as
“not free”. Democracy strengthened in Moldova (4.96), Armenia (5.14)
and Georgia (4.86); these countries are “partly free”; Ukraine (4.21)
and Latvia (2.07) are both “free”. Ukraine is the only CIS member
that is officially a ‘free country’.
The Freedom House report was seriously criticized by opposition
representatives here in Georgia. The newspaper Rezonansi remarked
that Freedom House represents the opinion of the US State Department,
which tries to promote so-called Color Revolutions, and thus it sees
the situation as it wants to see it.
It is obvious that the situation in Georgia is far from ideal from
the democratic point of view. The reality is that the country will
not change for better if we turn a blind eye to the problems or if
we ignore the improvements.
All kinds of revolutions, be they color, velvet, bloodless or any
other, pose big challenges for any country. The Georgian experience
is proof of that. Since the Rose Revolution the media, particularly
television came under pressure. At the initial stage several critical
talk shows and TV stations disappeared, and only very recently have
some of these critical TV shows come back. The Georgian media has only
managed to recover its critical side due to the courageous activity
of some TV channels.
Certain democratic victories are obvious in today’s Georgia, the
current administration is at least aware of civil society, and
understands the necessity for democratic development. Problems,
however, persist.
Local NGOs and independent experts are especially concerned that
since the Rose Revolution the executive has become very powerful in
Georgia. The balance between the different branches of government
in the country has been shattered. Many questions arise concerning
the electoral law. The election threshold (the percentage of votes
a particular party needs to garner in order to be represented in
parliament) was raised from five to seven percent eight years ago
has not been decreased (most European countries with proportional
representation have thresholds of four percent). There are many faults
in the system of local self-governance; the incumbent authorities
are in such an advantageous position that pluralism will probably
not be achieved.
However if the ‘Rose Administration’ can take this criticism with the
due sense of responsibility, it should be easily able to overcome these
difficulties. Only then will it regain the sympathy of the population,
support it seems to have squandered since the months directly after
the Rose Revolution.

THE FALL IN THE CURRENCY MARKET
Yerkir.am
June 16, 2006
Hundreds of currency exchange units in Armenia seem to be skillfully
using the signal sent by the Central Bank that “there will be no
interference into the currency market”. The exchange rate continues
to flow, therefore they can gain significant profit from the endless
fall of the exchange rate.
The fluctuations in the currency market
Currently the currency exchange units buy US dollar costs at a rate
of 410-415 drams, and sell it at 420-425 drams. In the beginning of
this year the exchange rate was 450-460 drams for one dollar. In the
course of the last month the US dollar depreciated by 35-40 drams. What
is the reason for this depreciation?
In the beginning of the year experts anticipated that the dollar-dram
exchange rate would fall to 400 drams for one dollar by June if
the Central Bank does not interfere. The prognosis turned out to be
true. So far the Central Bank does not want to interfere by collecting
the extra dollars from the market and replacing them with drams. As
a result, currency traders, and not only them, make profit.
In the meantime, the appreciation of the Armenian dram and the parallel
depreciation of the dollar take anecdotal scales. Even though trade
and financial transactions take place during the working day and the
exchange rate valid at the end of the day should be preserved at least
till the morning of the next day, the exchange rate in our country
changes even during the night (the dollar depreciates). This is why
some people say that the Armenian economy grows during the nighttime.
What are the Central Bank’s arguments?
The Central Bank representatives keep explaining that it is
unacceptable for the fiscal authorities of the country to interfere
into the currency market.
The main argument is that the Central Bank’s main function is the
preservation of price stability in the country while stabilization
of the exchange rate is a secondary issue.
The second argument derives from the first one. The Central Bank’s
monetary policies derive from the interests of Armenian citizens who
receive their income in Armenian drams. Those citizens who receive
their income – salaries, profits, interests, etc. – in foreign
currencies can think that their incomes are of secondary importance.
The Central Bank believes that our society would not agree to have
a fixed or regulated exchange rate while the price level would
be higher. If the Armenian dram depreciates the prices will rise
significantly, the Central Bank states.
It turns out that the appreciation of the Armenian dram has suppressed
the rise of prices. If the exchange rate is fixed then the prices
will inevitably rise. Therefore, there is only one solution … to
accept the fact of further appreciation of the Armenian dram since
it is impossible to pursue two mutually exclusive goals of monetary
policies – to stabilize both the prices and the exchange rate.
However, a number of simple questions arise in this respect. What is
the limit after which it will make no sense to speak about the role of
foreign currency in our market? At what point will it become possible
to state that the Armenian dram is the only currency in which all
calculations and transaction would be made?
Why is it that the central banks in Georgia or Russia can afford
to interfere into the currency market, a tool regularly used in
monetary-fiscal policies? Why is this impossible to do in Armenia?
The next question is why is it possible to allow a moderate inflation
(8-10%) in Georgia, Azerbaijan, Russia and a number of other CIS
countries? Why is it that in these countries no terrible things happen
because of such inflation and the economy and people’s real incomes
continue to grow while the same thing is impossible in Armenia?

GOVERNMENT HELPS UNEMPLOYED TO WORK IN BORDERLINE AREAS
Panorama.am
16:35 16/06/06
Our government has paid a special service to unemployed who would like
to work in borderline areas. According to regulation, the government
will pay the transport fee for such people. The government will pay
for mini bus in case there are no buses going to that region. However,
in case there are buses available, the government will pay for the
bus only, Araik PETROSYAN, deputy minister on employment and social
affairs told a briefing today.
The government however is not concerned where such people will
live. “It is not difficult to rent a flat in such remote areas,”
ministry representative said, stressing that the regulations were
adopted under limited budget. /Panorama.am/

ICTSD MEMBERS DRAFT ARTICLES FOR FUTURE AGREEMENT ON TRADE FACILITATION
International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, UK
June 15 2006
The outlines of a future WTO draft agreement on trade facilitation are
starting to take shape, as Members proposed text for several potential
articles during the 6-7 June meeting of the negotiating group.
The trade facilitation negotiations aim to simplify customs
procedures and cut commerce-related red tape, as well as to enhance
developing countries’ ability to participate in international goods
trade. The July 2004 Framework (WT/L/579) specified that developing
and least-developed countries would not have to implement future
trade facilitation obligations unless they received the technical
assistance necessary to do so. During the recent meeting, a loose group
of developed and developing countries responded to this unprecedented
link by outlining a possible mechanism through which developing
countries could seek and receive technical assistance before having
to comply with new commitments.
Members are specifically mandated to clarify three articles of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994: freedom of transit
for goods from other Member states (Article V), trade-related fees
and formalities (Article VIII), and transparency in the regulation
and administration of trade regulations (Article X).
Proposals suggest text for future agreement
Many of the papers tabled during the meeting built upon already-revised
submissions to propose specific wording for different sections of a
future agreement on trade facilitation. Several of them emphasised that
general exceptions to WTO rules would also apply to the disciplines
proposed.
For instance, the EU, Korea, and Switzerland (TN/TF/W/107) tabled
a series of prospective rules governing the type and amount of
trade-related fees and charges governments could levy, specifying
that they must not exceed the approximate cost of the import- or
export-related service they ostensibly pay for.
In an attempt to get countries to speed up customs clearance times,
EU, Japan, Korea, Mongolia, and Taiwan proposed rules that would
require them to periodically calculate and publish the length of their
average periods for releasing goods, and commit to trying to reduce
them. This provoked a response particularly from Australia and India,
which said that they did not want any such commitment to be mandatory.
Japan, Mongolia, and Switzerland (TN/TF/W/114) tabled a series of
potential disciplines that would require Members to clearly publish all
trade-related laws and regulations. Their proposal lists the precise
kinds of information that governments would be required to provide,
and calls for the establishment of enquiry points where traders from
any country would be able to find out about documentation and other
requirements. Along with Korea, they also put forward draft articles
(TN/TF/W/115) that would require Members to allow traders and other
governments to comment on new or amended trade-related procedures, and
publish adopted rules well in advance of their entry into force. The
four countries jointly submitted another textual proposal (TN/TF/W/115)
on ‘pre-arrival processing,’ which provides for customs and other
border agencies to accept and examine import-related documentation
submitted by traders before the goods arrive, in order to expedite
their eventual clearance.
With regard to the transit of goods from other WTO Members —
a key problem for landlocked countries — Armenia, the EU, the
Kyrgyz Republic, Macedonia, and Moldova (TN/TF/W/113) put forward
comprehensive disciplines to regulate how governments treat such
goods. Specifically, they wanted countries to treat goods from all
Members equally for transit purposes. Many Members were uncomfortable
with the notion of according traders who would likely be from
other countries the freedom to choose transit routes. They also
criticised the proposal’s call for goods in transit to be treated
identically to domestic merchandise. One delegate told Bridges that
locally-manufactured products might not require the sort of mandatory
inspections which could be necessary for foreign goods.
Other potential rules proposed included disciplines from the EU,
Switzerland, and Taiwan (TN/TF/W/109) that would oblige countries
to provide expedited inspection clearance to “authorised traders”
that meet certain criteria for past compliance. The EU and Taiwan
(TN/TF/W/108) outlined a procedure for the progressive elimination of
‘pre-shipment inspections,’ which refers to requirements that the
quality, quantity, or price of goods be verified before they can
be exported.
New Zealand (TN/TF/W/111) tabled a provision that Members would
have to apply objective criteria for the tariff classification of
goods to ensure that they are not “arbitrary or unjustifiable,” and
“do not constitute a disguised restriction” to trade. It suggested
that classifying all tariffs on the basis of the World Customs
Organisations’ HS Convention would achieve this.
Mechanism proposed for implementation
An informal group of developed and developing countries co-sponsored
an informal ‘non-paper’ that spelled out a multi-stage process for
the implementation of a future agreement on trade facilitation,
specifically with regard to commitments that some Members might be
unable to put into place on their own.
Canada, Chile, China, the EU, Guatemala, Honduras, Japan, Mexico,
Pakistan, Paraguay, Sri Lanka, and Uruguay proposed that developing
countries should, as soon as the agreement enters into force, formally
commit to obligations conforming to measures that they already had
in place and implement any minimal set of ‘core’ disciplines that
might arise from the new rules.
The paper provides for developing countries to notify the WTO of
any obligations that would require additional time or technical
assistance to implement, after identifying them through a ‘capacity
self-assessment.’
Developing countries would not have to implement obligations
requiring additional time until the end of the period specified in
their notification.
For measures that would be impossible to implement without technical
assistance, the paper would have developing countries formulate a
‘capacity-building plan’ in cooperation with donors and international
organisations, and notify it along with specific implementation
periods. At the end of the implementation period for such a plan, a
developing country would have to verify whether it had indeed acquired
the capacity to implement a particular obligation, and, if so, notify
its newly-acquired ability to the WTO. Following this, it would become
subject to legal challenge on the basis of the commitments in question.
In cases where Members disagree with another’s assessment of its
capacity to implement an obligation, the paper specifies that
“a mechanism is to be developed” to resolve their differences. It
also provides for ‘multilateral dialogue’ on countries’ initial
notifications of specific needs.
Sources report that interventions on the proposed mechanism were
largely positive, with Barbados, Bolivia, India, New Zealand, and
the US welcoming the proposal.
Comprehensive text likely in July
One trade diplomat described prospects for a comprehensive text on
trade facilitation by July as good, since text-based proposals have
now been made on roughly half the issues in the negotiations. The
delegate suggested that Members are aware that they need to bring
all of the text-based proposals together in a single document; some
have wondered aloud whether the WTO Secretariat could do so, as it
did for an earlier compilation of Members’ less-evolved submissions
(now TN/TF/W/43/Rev.7).
One delegate expressed doubt that all delegations were in a position
to submit proposals in the form of draft legal text, but suggested
that the simple fact that Members had already started text-based
discussions was notable. The negotiator acknowledged the concern
among some developing and least-developed countries that trade
facilitation negotiations were almost proceeding ‘too speedily,’ and
said that an agreement would have to wait for a deal on agriculture
and industrial tariffs. Another trade diplomat said that if ministers
and senior trade officials scheduled to meet at the end of June made
a breakthrough in these two areas, Members would probably call upon
the Secretariat to draft a comprehensive trade facilitation text
based on their submissions.
Sources report that Chair Tony Miller (Hong Kong) suggested that he
was not planning to come forward with a comprehensive text of his
own, as some of his counterparts in other negotiating areas have been
asked to do. He urged Members to keep producing text-based proposals
until the end of June, ahead of an informal meeting of the negotiating
group scheduled for 10-11 July.
ICTSD reporting.
tory3.htm

EVICTED RESIDENTS THREATEN
A1+
[08:20 pm] 14 June, 2006
“Thieves, robbers…” These were the cries of the residents of the
North and Main Avenues, the Koghbatsi street, the Dalma gardens, as
well as the representatives of the “Justice” bloc and the Communist
party who organized a rally of complaint in the yard of the National
Assembly.
The people holding posters which said “Deputies, include the issue of
the Dalma gardens into the agenda”, “The 10% you took was illegal”,
“We are not selling our houses” demanded the deputies to discussed
their problems. They intended to meet the Prime Minister who was to
come to the National Assembly.
“After the decision of the Constitutional Court the evictions still
continue. If the problem is not solved, we will demand change of
authorities,” said Vachagan Hakobyan, the president of the Committee
of protection of the North Avenue residents.
There were as many policemen opposite the Parliament building as
participants of the rally. Nevertheless, there were not incidents
between them. None of the Government members paid any attention to
the people.
Gegham Babayan, the secretary of the People’s Party regional
organization of Kentron community, had also come to support the
citizens. He said, “They have applied to us, and it is our duty to
help them.”
By the way, the representatives of the opposition informed that
they support the people outside, and inside the Parliament Stepan
Demirchyan and the other members o the Justice faction are to raise
the issue of the evicted citizens.

FOR WHAT WARS SHOULD RUSSIA BE PREPARED?
Source: Komsomolskaya Pravda, June 9, 2006, pp. 12, 13
Agency WPS
DEFENSE and SECURITY (Russia)
THE OPINION OF HIGH-RANKING US OFFICERS AND RUSSIAN GENERALS ABOUT
POSSIBLE MILITARY CONFLICTS IN WHICH RUSSIA MAY BECOME ENTANGLED IN
THE NEAR FUTURE
The newspaper asked Russian generals in what conflicts the Russian
Army may become entangled in the near future.
High-ranking US officers recently posted the scenarios of wars,
which may break out in the near future, on the Internet. (…) The
newspaper examined these forecasts and asked Russian generals in what
conflicts the Russian Army may become entangled in the near future.
(…)
POSSIBLE SCENARIOS
The Crimea
It’s not ruled out that Russian and Ukrainian warships will engage
each other in the Black Sea within ten years. Moscow and Kyiv agreed
that the Russian Black Sea fleet will leave Sevastopol in 2017.
However, the Russian Navy does not want to leave the city of Russia’s
glory. It’s possible that Ukraine will join NATO by that time and
organize provocations. Russia will strike back. Armed conflicts are
possible. Turkish, US and UK naval groups will intervene. Russian
seamen will have to leave Sevastopol after negotiations under pressure
from NATO.
Spitsbergen
Norway declared its 200-mile zone around Spitsbergen without
discussing this matter with Russia. Moscow does not acknowledge this
zone. Russian geologists found a substantial gas reserve on the shelf
of the Barents Sea. Norway seeks to explore it. Norwegian warships
already patrol this area. This irritates Russia. The scenario is as
follows: a naval group of the Northern fleet encircles the gas field.
Norway refuses to leave this zone. Russia declares an ultimatum and
opens fire after the timing is over. We hope that the crisis will be
settled diplomatically.
(…)
Trans-Dniester territory
Moldova seeks to gain control over the pro-Russian Trans-Dniester
territory and strengthens its army. The Moldovan Defense Ministry
has already prepared the plan of invasion on the left bank of the
Dniester River. Moldova demands that Russian servicemen (2,000
people) be withdrawn. The Moldovan Army may intervene in the
Trans-Dniester territory. The Russian group of forces will have to
repulse aggression. The conflict will be long because Romania will
support Moldova.
Russian commanders will have open ammunition depots and hand out
weapons to locals. Some Russian citizens will go to the Trans-Dniester
territory to support local troops. It’s hard to predict the outcome. To
all appearances, Moldova will have to retreat. However, UN peacekeepers
will be sent to the Trans-Dniester territory.
Caucasus
Georgian Defense Minister Okruashvili promised to resign if he fails to
seize South Ossetia by January 1, 2007. However, the Georgian Army will
have to deal with Russian peacekeepers in Tskhinvali. It’s obvious that
they will not cast oranges at Georgian soldiers. It’s hardly likely
that Russian troopers will let Saakashvili defeat Abkhazia’s army.
If the Georgian Army decided to attack Ossetia and Abkhazia, Moscow
will probably send weapons to these territories. It’s possible that
volunteers from the Caucasus will support them. The conflict will be
long and unpredictable.
(…)
Operations in Armenia and Tajikistan
Members of the Collective security treaty must provide military aid to
each other in case of a military threat. The Treaty includes Armenia,
Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan. Two of them
are on the verge of military conflicts. Azerbaijan may resume war on
Armenia because of Nagorny Karabakh. Tajikistan will have to defend
itself from Talibs if the US forces them out from Afghanistan.
Russia will have to support its allies using its bases in Armenia
(6,500 servicemen) and Tajikistan (7,000 servicemen). It’s not ruled
out that fighters deployed at the Kant base in Kyrgyzstan will suppress
Talibs. Talib gangs will hide in the mountains. The conflict may last
for decades.
RUSSIAN GENERALS’ OPINIONS
Major-General Alexander Vladimirov, vice president of the Collegium
of military experts, “We will have to defend our allies.”
The Caucasus will pose the main threat to Russia within the next
10-15 years. Wahhabis become stronger and expand to Dagestan,
Kabardino-Balkaria and Adygeya. A very high crime rate in this region,
gigantic unemployment, drug trafficking and caviar smuggling testify
that Russia will have to use the Army there. A long military campaign
is not ruled out.
It’s possible that Russia will have to use the Army in order to defend
Kazakhstan. The US seeks to expand to this republic. It’s not ruled
out that it will attempt to replace the regime in this country.
We will have to use our military units.
Colonel-General Leonid Ivashov, vice president of the Academy of
Geopolitical Problems, “We will hold Belarus and Ukraine.”
Our enemies seek to create prerequisites for NATO’s invasion in Russia
and the territory of our allies such as Belarus. The West supports
the opposition, which must replace Lukashenko and destabilize the
situation. Russia will have to support the Belarusian government. An
armed conflict with NATO is not ruled out. It’s not ruled out that
Ukraine will split into two or three parts and a civil war will break
out in this country. We will intervene in order to defend Russian
people living in Ukraine.

BUILDERS OF BAKU-CEYHAN OIL PIPELINE REFUSE TO COMPENSATE DAMAGE INFLICTED TO ARMENIAN VILLAGE
Noyan Tapan
Armenians Today
Jun 14 2006
AKHALKALAK, JUNE 14, NOYAN TAPAN – ARMENIANS TODAY. The
SPI-Capag-Petrofac company carrying out the construction of the
Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline in the territory of Georgia has inflicted a
land damage to the village of Ghado, Akhalkalak region, for using sand
necessary for the construction and has been refusing to compensate
the damage up to this day.
According to the A-Info agency, at the construction company they
explain that the land used by them belongs to the state and they
have the respective licence for using it from the Ministry of Nature
Protection.
The residents of Ghado insist that the sand used for the oil pipeline’s
construction is taken from the territory belonging to them and they
have the respective certificate of public ownership. Besides, the
residents of Ghado mention that a compensation in a large amount was
given in other regions when the territories of Georgian villages were
used for the same purposes. For the present, the inhabitants of Ghado
hope for the justice of the Georgian law-enforcement bodies. The
case made up on the basis of their complaints has already reached
the Georgian Prosecutor General’s Office.