POST-MARCH 1, DOES ARMENIA HAVE AN AGENDA FOR CHANGE?
Gayane Abrahamyan
Eurasianet
June 5, 2008
NY
Armenia will soon be called on to demonstrate to the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe that it is ready to make a fresh
start after the violence of March 1. The question is whether it will
pass the test.
In an April 17 resolution, PACE outlined the changes it expects: the
release of political prisoners, revocation of limitations on public
rallies; start of an "open and serious dialogue" between political
parties about reform; and an independent investigation into the events
of March 1.
If the demands are not met by its June 23 session, PACE could opt to
suspend Armenia’s voting rights — a move that would be an unwanted
public humiliation for the new Sarkisian administration.
Within Armenia, two proposals under discussion in parliament are
being closely watched to gauge the government’s willingness to meet
the PACE demands.
A so-called "Public Council" made up of pro-government, opposition and
non-governmental organization representatives is the first. According
to Sarkisian, the group is meant to serve as "the broadest forum for
dialogue." The Council will function only as an advisory body.
But after a month of back-and-forth barbs, the talk about this
discussion group has remained just that — talk. Both sides blame
the other for the delay.
"We won’t get involved in a dialogue of any kind as long as there
is a single political prisoner left in Armenia," Arman Musinian,
spokesperson for ex-President Levon Ter-Petrosian, commented to
EurasiaNet.
Ruling Republican Party of Armenia parliamentarian Hermine Naghdalian,
a member of Armenia’s delegation to PACE, counters that the opposition
is simply not interested in a two-way conversation.
"The authorities do their best to enter into a dialogue and meet the
[PACE] resolution requirements, but, obviously, the other side avoids
it, and this turns into a monologue instead of being a dialogue,"
Naghdalian said.
Meanwhile, one incentive has been offered. Presidential advisor Garnik
Isagulian, who is overseeing the campaign to set up the Public Council,
tells EurasiaNet that Ter-Petrosian himself could serve as president
of the Council if his opposition movement decided to take part.
"There will be nothing to hinder the former president from heading
the council," said Isagulian.
But the offer means nothing to one prominent Ter-Petrosian supporter.
"If the council is created by the president, and it is under his
control, then what else can one expect from it?" asked Karapet
Rubinian, a former deputy parliamentary speaker who was recently
released from prison. "It will be just another structure glorifying
the president."
Instead, to promote dialogue, the opposition is calling for fresh
presidential and parliamentary elections. Neither Sarkisian nor the
current legislature, elected in May 2007, reflect the public’s wishes,
they say. Only one opposition party, the Heritage Party, currently
holds seats in the 131-member body.
Republican Party members, though, in turn, say they see no reason to
back that option.
"It has turned into a tradition already. The losing side demands
new elections after each election," commented parliamentarian
Samvel Nikoian, secretary of the Republican Party’s parliamentary
faction. "If we call new presidential or parliamentary elections,
the losing political parties will again protest the results and will
take its supporters out to the streets."
The second proposal for meeting the PACE demands — fresh amendments to
a law on demonstrations — have proven only slightly less contentious.
The changes require that the police now provide "reliable" information
that a rally will disrupt public order or undermine the country’s
stability before the government can ban a demonstration. Courts have
one day to issue a ruling on any appeal of the decision.
Impromptu rallies would be allowed, but not if they run beyond
six hours.
Parliamentary Speaker Tigran Torosian stressed that the changes would
"prevent a repetition of March 1."
The opposition Heritage Party, however, objects that the new amendments
are "cosmetic and a formality."
PACE’s demand that the law be revoked in full has not been met,
argued parliamentarian Anahit Bakhsian "[T]he draft law changes only
two provisions and does it in a way that will not stop officials from
finding reasons not to authorize rallies."
For now, few Armenians venture to predict what PACE’s response will
be at its next session later this month.
At a May 26-27 meeting in Kyiv, PACE monitors welcomed the steps taken
by Armenia to meet the resolution, but cautioned that the measures
so far "have led to only a few tangible results."
The monitors expressed frustration at the lack of an independent
inquiry into the events of March 1 and found that "no progress" had
been made in releasing prisoners "detained on seemingly artificial
and politically motivated charges."
But one ruling party parliamentarian says that not all PACE
requirements need to be met blindly.
"The stability of our state is much more important," said Rafik
Petrosian, deputy chairperson of the parliamentary committee for
public affairs and the protection of human rights. "They [PACE] have
made demands without going deep into the situation in the Republic
of Armenia, without understanding that any gathering may turn into
a national massacre."
Whether PACE will agree remains moot.
"[A]lthough time is limited," PACE monitors wrote late last month,
"it is still possible for the Armenian authorities to address the
requirements of the Assembly."