FORUM 18 NEWS SERVICE, Oslo, Norway
The right to believe, to worship and witness
The right to change one’s belief or religion
The right to join together and express one’s belief
===============================================
Wednesday 1 February 2012
ARMENIA: AFTER STRASBOURG PUNISHMENT, WILL GOVERNMENT RESOLVE ALTERNATIVE
SERVICE ISSUE “FOR EVER”?
On 10 January the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) again ordered
Armenia to pay compensation to two Jehovah’s Witness conscientious objector
former prisoners for violating their rights to religious freedom. The
punishment followed two critical Opinions from the Council of Europe’s
Venice Commission and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in
Europe (OSCE) of the 2011 proposed amendments to the Alternative Service
Law. They say these do not go far enough to bring in a fully-civilian
alternative to military service which is not punitive in length. But Deputy
Justice Minister Ruben Melikyan told Forum 18 News Service that a
government Working Group is already preparing new amendments to the
Alternative Service Law “fully taking into account the OSCE and Venice
Commission views” and the ECtHR rulings. He said it would be adopted “this
year”. However, he said until it is adopted, the courts cannot free the 57
imprisoned conscientious objectors nor halt the prosecution of a further
14.
ARMENIA: AFTER STRASBOURG PUNISHMENT, WILL GOVERNMENT RESOLVE ALTERNATIVE
SERVICE ISSUE “FOR EVER”?
By Felix Corley, Forum 18 News Service
Armenia’s new Deputy Justice Minister Ruben Melikyan has told Forum 18 News
Service that a government Working Group is already preparing new amendments
to the Alternative Service Law. His comments come three weeks after Armenia
was again fined by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Strasbourg
for violating the rights to religious freedom of two Jehovah’s Witness
conscientious objector former prisoners. His comments also follow Opinions
on the 2011 proposed amendments now in parliament which were criticised by
both the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission and the Organisation for
Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). They called on Armenia to
ensure that revisions to the Law bring in a fully-civilian alternative to
military service which is not punitive in length.
The new amendments are being prepared “fully taking into account the OSCE
and Venice Commission views” and the ECtHR rulings, Melikyan insisted to
Forum 18 from the Armenian capital Yerevan on 1 February. He said it is too
early to make public the text, as it is still being prepared.
Melikyan, a Deputy Justice Minister since 18 January, told Forum 18 the
amendments would be presented to parliament “within a short period” and
pledged that this would “resolve the issue for ever”. He was unable to say
if they could be adopted by parliament before parliamentary elections due
in May, but insisted they would be adopted “this year”.
Melikyan declined to say what would happen to the amendments approved by
the government in 2011 and now in parliament, which were the subject of the
OSCE and Venice Commission Opinions.
However, Melikyan told Forum 18 the courts cannot free the 57 current
imprisoned conscientious objectors to military service nor halt the
prosecution of 14 others until amendments to the Law have been adopted. He
added that the president cannot pardon them either. “We want to give them
more than a pardon, as pardoning them would not clear them of guilt. The
decision should be more friendly to them.” Melikyan insisted this will
happen “this year”.
Military control
The alternative service now on offer in Armenia is under military control,
and thus unacceptable to those who cannot serve in the armed forces on
conscientious grounds. All the current prisoners are Jehovah’s Witness
young men, who insist they would be prepared to perform a
civilian-controlled alternative service. They are serving sentences of
between 18 and 36 months’ imprisonment. In the past, as well as Jehovah’s
Witnesses, a Molokan conscientious objector was also imprisoned.
Welcoming the ECtHR judgments was Stepan Danielyan, head of Collaboration
for Democracy, a Yerevan-based human rights group which has long called for
a change to the Law. “But it’s easier for our government to pay the
compensation than to amend the law,” he told Forum 18 from Yerevan on 31
January. “Our government doesn’t know what to do now.”
Danielyan said the issue is being little discussed in the media and
lamented that “no-one in Armenia” is interested in resolving it. He said he
doubted if any changes will occur before parliamentary elections, due in
May.
Jehovah’s Witnesses also welcome the ECtHR judgments, maintaining that they
come “at the right time”. However, they complain that the Armenian
authorities “continue to ignore” the Strasbourg Court’s rulings, especially
with the imprisonment of five more conscientious objectors and further
prosecutions. “We hope the Armenian authorities will now reconsider their
position and release the 57 young men that are currently incarcerated as
conscientious objectors,” a lawyer representing the young men told Forum 18
from Yerevan.
Jehovah’s Witnesses said they had heard nothing about any new draft Law
being prepared, but said they hoped the government is ready to change the
Law to allow a fully civilian alternative service. “We hope at last the
Armenian Government will start implementing these Strasbourg judgments in
domestic law and will allow these young men to work productively for their
country rather than languishing in prison.”
No other official comment
Apart from Melikyan of the Justice Ministry, no other Ministry or agency
was prepared to comment to Forum 18. The Foreign Ministry told Forum 18 it
was not an issue for it. The Press Department of the Defence Ministry
referred Forum 18 to the Ministry’s Defence Policy Department. Officials
there referred Forum 18 to Major Alexander Avetisyan, but his telephone
went unanswered each time Forum 18 called on 1 February.
Officials at the Military Prosecutor’s Office told Forum 18 on 1 February
that Gevorg Kostanyan, Armenia’s Military Prosecutor and Armenia’s former
representative to the ECtHR in Strasbourg, was in a meeting and
unavailable. He had taken part in December 2011 discussions of last year’s
draft Law with the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission.
The office of Armenia’s Ombudsperson for Human Rights Karen Andreasyan
promised to comment, but Forum 18 had received no response to its written
questions by the end of the working day on 1 February.
Vahakn Kevorkyan, an expert on the staff of Parliament’s Defence, National
Security and Internal Affairs Committee, told Forum 18 on 31 January that
his Committee had not received the “final text” of the December 2011 Venice
Commission Opinion. “What they published was only the provisional Opinion,”
he claimed. But he too insisted that its views, as well as the new ECtHR
rulings, will be taken into account when considering the proposed
amendments. He doubted whether any action would take place before the May
elections.
Kevorkyan made no mention of the new amendments being prepared in the
government’s Working Group.
Imprisonment violated religious freedom rights
The ECtHR in Strasbourg ruled on 10 January that Armenia had violated the
rights of two Jehovah’s Witnesses by imprisoning them in 2003. Both had
refused to conduct military service on grounds of religious conscience and
both received two-year prison sentences, though they were both released on
parole after less than six months. In the cases of Hayk Bukharatyan
(Application No. 37819/03) and Ashot Tsaturyan (Application No. 37821/03),
the Court found that their rights to freedom of religion or belief under
Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms (ECHR) had been violated.
Jehovah’s Witnesses point out that Armenia imprisoned the two young men
“despite its previous commitment to the Council of Europe, in January 2001,
to institute a genuine civilian alternative service for conscientious
objectors and, in the meantime, to pardon all those already convicted”.
The judgments draw on a landmark judgment by the Strasbourg court on 7 July
2011 that the rights of fellow Armenian Jehovah’s Witness conscientious
objector Vahan Bayatyan had been violated by his imprisonment. The judgment
concluded, for the first time in the history of the ECtHR, that the right
to conscientious objection to military service is fully protected under
ECHR Article 9, which guarantees the right to freedom of conscience,
thought and religion (see F18News 7 July 2011
).
In the 10 January rulings, Bukharatyan and Tsaturyan were each awarded a
total of 10,000 Euros from the Armenian government (5,108,390 Armenian
Drams, 76,486 Norwegian Kroner or 13,205 US Dollars), 6,000 Euros in
compensation and 4,000 Euros in costs. Only one of the seven judges –
Alvina Gyulumyan from Armenia – dissented from the decisions. She had also
been the sole dissenter from the judgment in Bayatyan’s case.
Unless either side challenges the January rulings, they will become final
three months later. The Armenian government would then have a further three
months to pay the compensation and costs of the two men.
Deputy Justice Minister Melikyan said his Ministry is still studying the
two January rulings and has not yet decided whether to challenge them.
Bayatyan compensation paid, but no releases and cases continue
In its July 2011 ruling, the ECtHR awarded Bayatyan compensation of 10,000
Euros and a further 10,000 Euros in costs from the Armenian government.
Jehovah’s Witnesses told Forum 18 that the Armenian government paid
Bayatyan these sums in August 2011, and also published the ECtHR ruling in
Armenian (on the Justice Ministry website) as it was required to do.
So far, however, it has not removed the cause of the original violation to
prevent further similar violations of the European Convention as it is
required to do. Nor have the current sentenced prisoners been freed or
current prosecutions been dropped.
Jehovah’s Witnesses told Forum 18 that one court appeal to have a current
prosecution halted was rejected, though other courts have deferred or are
still considering such appeals. They note that many of the trials are being
repeatedly adjourned for a variety of reasons.
Jehovah’s Witness lawyers say they will lodge appeals in court to have all
the 57 current prisoners freed in the light of the ECtHR rulings. “We hope
that they will be freed without them having to lodge their own cases to
Strasbourg,” they told Forum 18.
Armenia’s Council of Europe commitment
On its accession to the Council of Europe in January 2001, Armenia formally
pledged to: “adopt, within three years of accession [i.e. by 25 January
2004], a law on alternative service in compliance with European standards
and, in the meantime, to pardon all conscientious objectors sentenced to
prison terms or service in disciplinary battalions, allowing them instead
to choose, when the law on alternative service has come into force to
perform non-armed military service or alternative civilian service”.
The current Alternative Service Law was adopted in 2003 (coming into force
on 1 July 2004), but despite amendments in 2004 and 2006, it still fails to
meet Armenia’s Council of Europe commitment to allow a choice of
“alternative civilian service” to be possible. Jehovah’s Witnesses and a
Molokan who initially accepted the Law’s “alternative service” quickly
abandoned it when it became clear that the “alternative” was controlled and
overseen by the military. They were soon imprisoned, and Armenian has
failed follow its Council of Europe commitment to pardon – and therefore
release – its prisoners of conscience who object to compulsory military
service.
In recent years as many as 76 conscientious objectors have been imprisoned
at any one time. Almost all have been sentenced under Criminal Code Article
327, Part 1, which punishes evasion of the call-up to military or
alternative service. The maximum sentence under this article was increased
to three years’ imprisonment in December 2005 (see F18News 7 July 2011
).
Thomas Hammarberg, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights,
met three of the imprisoned Jehovah’s Witnesses in Artik prison in the
north-western region of Shirak during his January 2011 visit to Armenia. In
his May 2011 report he called for the conscientious objectors to be freed
from prison, and for a genuine civilian alternative service to be
introduced (see report via
).
Government’s 2011 proposed amendments
The government’s 2011 proposed amendments to the 2003 Alternative Service
Law were prepared by the Defence Ministry’s Legal Directorate and
subsequently approved also by the Justice Ministry. They were approved by
the government in April 2011 and sent to parliament, the National Assembly.
The National Assembly assigned the draft to the Defence, National Security
and Internal Affairs Committee (see F18News 7 July 2011
).
The 2011 draft Law is very short and makes no change to the current Law on
the length of alternative military service (36 months) and alternative
labour service (42 months). The main new provision is for a Republican
Commission to oversee whether applications for alternative service will be
accepted or not. The draft Law would also allow those performing
alternative service to change their mind and transfer to military service,
but not the other way round.
It would also ensure that those who complete alternative service are issued
with the military booklet, without which it can be difficult to obtain
work.
OSCE review
On 11 July 2011, the Committee wrote to ask for a legal Opinion on the
draft from the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights
(ODIHR) in Warsaw. The OSCE’s opinion, dated 8 September 2011, was
submitted to the Committee and also published (available from
).
The OSCE’s key recommendations were: “to ensure that the alternative labour
service is not under military control”; “to allow conscripted servicemen to
seek a replacement of their military service with alternative service on
grounds of conscientious objection”; and “to consider reducing the duration
of alternative service”.
The Opinion described the proposal to keep alternative service at 42 months
(compared to 24 months’ military service) as “unnecessarily protracted and
could even be perceived as punitive in duration”.
On the question of whether those already conscripted can change their mind
and opt for alternative service, the OSCE Opinion “strongly recommended”
that “conscripted servicemen who, while undergoing military service,
realize that such service insurmountably conflicts with their deeply-held
religious or other conscientious beliefs” be allowed to transfer to
alternative service. “The law currently in force prohibits the replacement
of the military service with alternative service after conscription,” it
noted.
Venice Commission review
However, just three weeks after the completion of the OSCE Opinion, Hrair
Karapetyan, chair of the parliamentary Committee, wrote to the Council of
Europe’s Venice Commission seeking a further legal Opinion. He insisted the
move was motivated by the willingness of the Armenian authorities to ensure
“the maximum compliance with international standards of the legislation of
Armenia”. As they prepared their opinion, Venice Commission representatives
held a series of meetings in Yerevan in mid-November 2011 to discuss the
draft Law.
The Venice Commission’s Opinion was discussed at its Plenary Session in
Venice on 16 and 17 December, where it was approved. Participating in the
discussion from Armenia was Military Prosecutor Kostanyan. The Opinion was
published on 20 December 2011
(). It was
handed to the Armenian representation to the Council of Europe the
following day, the Venice Commission confirmed to Forum 18.
The Opinion noted, citing information it had received in Yerevan in
November 2011, that no-one had applied for the military-controlled
alternative service since 2005, which “indicates that the present system
does not work effectively”.
The Venice Commission also noted from its meetings in Yerevan that the
draft Law had been prepared “long before” the July 2011 Bayatyan ECtHR
ruling, and “further amendments must be made to address specifically the
implications of the judgment”.
Alternative service “too long”
Like the OSCE, the Venice Commission criticised the proposal to retain
alternative service at 42 months. “The term for alternative service appears
to be too long,” the Opinion declared and called on the Armenian
authorities to “reconsider the duration of alternative service”.
Like the OSCE, the Venice Commission also expressed concern about the role
and composition of the Republican Commission overseeing who would or would
not be allowed to perform alternative service. It criticised the failure to
define the Republican Commission’s role and responsibilities. “As concerns
the composition of the Republican Commission,” it added, “the Venice
Commission is of the view that the assessment of applications for
alternative service based on conscientious objection should be under the
control of civilian authorities, not under the control of the military.”
As for the conditions of those conducting alternative service – which the
Venice Commission insisted must be fully civilian – the Opinion expresses
concern at the proposed requirement that individuals must be at their
assigned place of work 24 hours a day, as well as the ban on alternative
service individuals undertaking management jobs.
The Venice Commission lamented the lack of clarity over who would have
operational supervision over those performing alternative service. “It has
to be recalled that any form of control over alternative service should be
of civilian nature,” it declared, “and in order to alleviate any ambiguity,
the amendment should explicitly state that the military have no supervisory
role in the day-to-day operational supervision of those who perform
alternative service.”
Like the OSCE, the Venice Commission criticised the absence of the
possibility for those already conscripted into military service who
“realise that such service insurmountably conflicts with their religious or
other conscientious beliefs” to transfer to alternative service. “This
prohibition conflicts with relevant international standards,” it notes.
However, the Venice Commission welcomed the fact that the draft Law would
ensure that those who complete alternative service would be issued with a
military booklet, a “crucial document for civil life”. “It is recommended
that the military booklet state that its holder had been exempted from
performing military service, but that no explicit mention be made of the
reason for which this exemption had been granted.”
New proposals?
Deputy Justice Minister Melikyan declined to tell Forum 18 what would
happen to the 2011 draft Law now in parliament. He stressed that the
executive cannot tell the legislature what it should do.
But he said the Working Group – one of whose members is from the Justice
Ministry – is currently preparing a new version of the amendments to the
Alternative Service Law. He declined to discuss the specific content of the
amendments but insisted that “Armenia is going to comply with all the
relevant European Court of Human Rights rulings and amend the Law to take
account of them.” He said he was unable to put a timescale on the work, but
said it would be “systematic” and quick. (END)
More coverage of freedom of thought, conscience and belief in Armenia and
the unrecognised entity of Nagorno-Karabakh is at
A personal commentary, by Derek Brett of Conscience and Peace Tax
International, on conscientious objection to military service and
international law in the light of the European Court of Human Rights’ July
2011 Bayatyan judgment is at
).
A compilation of Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe
(OSCE) freedom of religion or belief commitments can be found at
.
A printer-friendly map of Armenia is available at
.
(END)
© Forum 18 News Service. All rights reserved. ISSN 1504-2855
You may reproduce or quote this article provided that credit is given to
F18News
Past and current Forum 18 information can be found at
http://www.forum18.org/
http://www.forum18.org/
http://www.forum18.org/