A Case Study in `Armenian Justice’?
HETQ
20:23, December 11, 2011
By Dr. Audrey Selian
Nothing could have made more a mockery of the Armenian `justice’ system
than the recent arrest of Nareg Harutunian in Yerevan this past
week. Indeed, it would be difficult to render the words `Armenian justice’
more oxymoronic, as in essence Nareg is the ‘perfect guy’ to charge with
counts of `money laundering’ and/or `tax evasion’. The unadulterated, pure
irony of Nareg’s arrest will serve as a powerful tool in undermining the
status quo of the system of governance in today’s Armenia. This irony is
not lost on those of us who know him and his work, and who will do
everything in our power to communicate our knowledge.
As someone whose personal track record in the venerable Motherland is so
overtly philanthropic and well-meaning, the very notion that this
particular man is capable of involvement in an illicit pursuit of cash is
outrageous. Could a more patriotic and devoted individual have been
wrongly accused? On the other side of the equation, could the
counterparties be more unsavory and shady? This simply begs the question
whether those in the justice industry actually conduct real investigations
before they arrest, indict and sentence people? Or are those acting in the
name of justice rather simply following the orders of the corrupt Mafioso
`du jour’? Since the former is unlikely, the latter appears to be the
more
depressingly realistic possibility. It appears this `investigation’ has
been on-going since earlier this year. Commissioners, could you really not
figure out who was at the bottom of this problem all these months? Or is
the real guilty party making that harder to see, somehow. That’s an
intentionally rhetorical question.
As a long-time fan and supporter of Naregatsi Art Institute,years ago I
attempted in various ways to help the organization fundraise. Much of the
financial burden of the organization in both Yerevan and Shushi was carried
by the Harutunian family, with the help of a small number of sponsors and
donors from within their network of friends and family. Much as I would try
to suggest alternative and more commercial routes to fundraising, Nareg
would be adamantly against commercializing his work; he has never intended
to squeeze a penny out of the distribution of any of the artists or
performers whose work he has tirelessly supported and disseminated. Even
when the burdens of running multiple projects in both Armenia and Karabagh
got heavier, even when I would ask questions about how on earth one handles
the kinds of challenges of operating in Armenia – he told me, `you have to
care for the Motherland as you would care for your sick child whom you are
helping to make better’. This attitude assuaged my concerns. Until now.
To be sure, with corruption rankings from multiple international
institutions that paint a bleak picture, and with rumours of rampant
impropriety in the vast majority of Diasporan-related investments (whether
for-profit or not), the Armenian government might want to consider taking a
more pro-active hand in managing the unfriendly image projected to the
international philanthro-investment community. Whether the issue is in
attracting investors or grant-makers, we can be sure that stories like
this, in tandem with the fiasco faced by the likes of George and Carolann
Najarian from Boston, Ma., or even my own experience with deeply
questionable local partners in the case of MER DOON NGO at its inception
–
all of these present a real and present danger for the nature of Armenian
relations with its Diaspora.
This is in effect what some could term the beginning of a serious crisis of
public diplomacy – not at high political levels – but rather at the levels
of seemingly trite, colloquial exchange. But these are also the levels at
which ordinary people talk to eachother. And thus on a viral basis, we as a
collectivejust might think twice before opening our checkbooks next time to
support projects in Armenia without deep, comprehensive due diligence. If
that due diligence is not happening on an organization we support, it
better be happening on the local partner we have chosen. To date, every
penny that has been usurped, misallocated, intentionally subverted or
outright stolen from the coffers of private philanthropists, corporate
investors or donor agencies working in Armenia is the responsibility of
those who have made the choice to give, send or invest it. That’s a LOT
OF PENNIES. That’s right; the corruption of Armenia is as much the
responsibility of us lazy Diasporans and one-eyed development finance
institutions as it is that of the unsavoury local few who abuse rank and
role.
Naturally, the case of Nareg Harutunian’s arrest has taken all of this
issue of corruption in aid, charity and investment to the next level. The
one error many might agree was committed by Nareg in all of this was one
based on trust; to have had too much faith in the nature of those he may
have called `friends’ or `brothers’, and not enough foresight to imagine
the consequences in the event of fall-out or disgruntlement. The moral of
the story appears to be something along the lines of: never extend `power
of attorney’ to a local Armenian partner. Is this really the image we want
to live with moving forward? Is this really what is going to help the
people of Armenia?
Once again, the very nature of the illegal activity with which Nareg is
being charged is antithetical to his very person, and this is what will
galvanize us most effectively within the borders of Armenia as well as in
Diaspora to stand up and fight this ridiculous injustice. Had those who
executed upon their orders to arrest Nareg conducted even the lightest
proper due diligence in scratching the surface of his character and of this
case, they would have foreseen the international tsunami of dissent that
was about to hit them. Brace yourselves, bitches! We have a new battle
cry for you and it’s one that only Nareg and his friends will
know: `Struvijnaya’!