PRESS RELEASE
UN Department of Public Information
Arminé Halajyan (Mrs.), Officer-in-Charge
Yerevan Office (Armenia)
Tel.: (374 10) 560 212
Fax/Tel.: (374 10) 561 406
Mobile: (374 91) 20 37 25
Date: 25 January 2009
COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN (CEDAW) REVIEWS
REPORT OF ARMENIA
Geneva, Committee on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, 23
January 2009. – The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against
Women today reviewed the fourth periodic report of Armenia on how that
country implements the provisions of the Convention on the Elimination of
Discrimination against Women.
Arman Kirakossian, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, presenting
the report, said Armenia had ratified the Convention in 1993, and since then
had presented two periodic reports, in 1996, and 1999. The present report
was on the period from 2002 to 2007, and contained information on the
further legislative and institutional measures taken by the State with the
aim of improving the situation of women in society, in particular efforts
aimed at eliminating all forms of discrimination and making men and women
truly equal. National legislation had been reformed to this end, and a
number of lateral and bilateral agreements signed. Discrimination against
women had been banned – there were no discriminatory laws, policies or
practices against women in Armenia.
Among the questions and issues raised by Experts were what activities the
Government had undertaken to increase the awareness of the judiciary of the
Convention and the country’s obligations there under; whether there was any
legal basis or mention in any legal act regulating the Government and its
structure that would provide for a basis for a department being the National
Machinery for Gender Equality; whether there were any deterrents in place
against domestic violence; why there was such a high level of violence in
the election process, in particular against journalists; the feminisation of
poverty where women were in low-paid jobs and in unemployment and what were
the results of programmes in this context; and what was the legal framework,
rights and obligations of people in de facto relationships and whether
women’s and children’s rights were affected in this situation.
In concluding remarks, Dziunik Aghajanian, Director of the International
Organizations Department at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said the
Government was open to discussion, in particular with civil society and
others to discuss new trends and to tackle issues as they came up, before
they became unmanageable. Armenia had problems, as did other countries, but
it saw the prospect and was keen on working and getting to its destination.
Also in concluding remarks, Naela Gabr, Chairperson of the Committee, said
more interaction would lead to further respect of women’s rights and the
activation of women’s rights in Armenia and its full implementation. The
delegation should address the Parliament on its return and inform it of the
discussions. There should be further awareness raising on the Convention so
that a greater role for women in diplomacy, Parliament and political life as
a whole could be achieved. Abortion should not be used as a means of family
planning, and work should be done to ensure that proper family planning was
available.
The delegation of Armenia also contained representatives of the Permanent
Mission of Armenia to the United Nations Office at Geneva, the Police of the
Republic of Armenia, the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, the Ministry
of Justice, the Ministry of Health, and the Ministry of Education.
The next public meeting of the Committee will be on Monday, 26 January at 3
p.m., when it will hold informal discussions with non-governmental
organizations and representatives of national human rights institutions.
———————————– ——————————-
Report of Armenia
The combined third and fourth periodic report of Armenia (CEDAW/C/ARM/4)
covers the period from 2002 through 2006 and contains information on
subsequent legislative and institutional measures taken by the State to
improve the status of women in society, including by means of eliminating
all forms of discrimination and effecting true equality between men and
women. The principal guarantee of the achievement of that goal is the
Constitution of Armenia of 1995, which has supreme juridical force. The
referendum of 27 November 2005 adopted amendments to the Constitution.
Law-making bodies are guided in their work by the international commitments
and standards agreed to by the Republic of Armenia, as well as by the
Constitutional provision obliging the National Assembly (parliament) to
bring prevailing law into conformance with the new provisions within two
years after the adoption of the constitutional amendments.
Armenian law provides all the guarantees of the protection of human and
civil rights, including the prohibition of discrimination against women. In
Armenia, there are no laws, resolutions, decisions, policies or practices
that discriminate against women. The new version of the Constitution (2005)
not only preserves the articles that prohibit discrimination on the basis of
sex and that secure the equality of rights of men and women upon entry into
marriage, during marriage, and in the dissolution of the marriage, but also
improves the provisions on the protection of the family, maternity, and
children. A gender focus has also been included in the Labour Code that took
effect in June 2005. A range of norms are provided for in articles
pertaining to guarantees for pregnant women and for employees with children
and in chapters pertaining to working hours, vacation time, wages, benefits,
safety, and employee health.
The continuing economic blockade, the socio-economic adjustments associated
with the transition to a market economy and the high levels of unemployment
and poverty are placing a multitude of obstacles on the path to
democratization and the rule of law. Women are the most vulnerable component
of society as a result of the negative aspects of those processes, which is
why the government is devoting greater attention to protecting their
interests. Operating in the Ministry of Labour and Social Issues is the
Department of Women’s, Family, and Children’s Issues, which, in essence,
constitutes the main national mechanism for the social protection of women,
as well as gender equality. The National Programme to Improve the Status of
Women and to Enhance Their Role in Society in the Republic of Armenia for
20042010 calls for measures to be taken in the socio-economic, political,
and cultural spheres to improve the situation.
Presentation of Report
ARMAN KIRAKOSSIAN, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, presenting
the report, said Armenia had ratified the Convention on the Elimination of
Discrimination against Women in 1993, and since then had presented two
periodic reports, in 1996, and 1999. The present report was on the period
from 2002 to 2007, and contained information on the further legislative and
institutional measures taken by the State with the aim of improving the
situation of women in society, in particular efforts aimed at eliminating
all forms of discrimination and making men and women truly equal. National
legislation had been reformed to this end, and a number of lateral and
bilateral agreements signed. Discrimination against women had been banned –
there were no discriminatory laws, policies or practices against women in
Armenia. The Armenian Constitution of 1995 had the highest legal force, and
contained amendments ensuring the protection of women. Provisions had been
included protecting motherhood and children.
On 8 April 2004, by decision of the Government, the National Programme to
Improve the Situation of Women had been adopted, setting out principles and
the basic priorities and direction of the State to improve women’s problems.
It was directed towards fulfilling obligations contained in the Convention.
The Programme provided for guaranteeing equal rights and opportunities for
men and women on the basis of decisions in public and institutional matters,
improving women’s health, eliminating violence against women including
trafficking, and overcoming of poverty, among others. It also provided for
the implementation of measures in the fields of education and culture, and
the clarification of women’s problems through the mass media and
implementation of institutional reforms. Discrimination on the basis of
gender did not exist in the field of education.
Armenia had recently begun a process of constant open discussion, including
annual press conferences on the Government’s efforts in this field. Every
year there were 16 days focussing on the elimination of domestic violence.
Armenia had joined with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe in order to eliminate domestic violence, publicising the issue –
combating violence against women was part of the National Programe, and the
Government was also focusing other programmes on this issue. Armenia was
aiming to improve the safety regime in public places, and the police carried
out daily prophylactic work with this aim in areas where the public
assembled. A Working Party had been set up with the purpose of timely
implementation of the National Programme, in particular the prevention of
violence against women in the family. The Government was working in close
collaboration with international organizations working in the area of
trafficking in people, and had elaborated a National Plan of Action in this
regard. A Labour Code had been adopted which enforced the equality of
persons in labour relations irregardless of gender. Levels of participation
by women in the political life of the country were varied, but with the
support of other organizations a number of legislative instruments had been
adopted with the aim of improving this. De jure, there was no discriminatory
behaviour, but in practice this could be the case due to the existing
practices and mentality of society. Efforts were being made to eradicate
these.
Questions by Experts
Taking up articles one to four of the Convention, Experts then raised a
number of questions and issues, including what measures, campaigns and
initiatives had been undertaken by the Government to increase public
awareness of the Convention and the Optional Protocol and the awareness of
civil society and women’s organizations to them; which prevailed in the
context of a discrepancy between legislation or the Constitution and an
international treaty and who determined this; what activities the Government
had undertaken to increase the awareness of the judiciary of the Convention
and the country’s obligations there under; whether there was a special unit
under the Human Rights Defender that focussed on protection of women and
women’s equality; whether there were figures on the number of complaints
that had been addressed to the Human Rights Defender; whether there was any
legal basis or mention in any legal act regulating the Government and its
structure that would provide for a basis for a department being the National
Machinery for Gender Equality; whether there was a department that worked
specifically on gender equality and if so how many worked on monitoring and
assessing the policies that were part of the National Gender Plan for the
Advancement of Women; and whether the Government had any types of temporary
special measures targeting women, and not pregnant women, both for enabling
their access to political power but also in education or their access to
employment, among others.
Response by Delegation
Responding to these questions and others, the delegation said in Armenia,
when an international treaty was ratified, it became part of the legislative
system and was therefore published in the official journals by the Ministry
for International Affairs and was put on the websites intended to inform
society. The Ministry of Justice was the one that dealt with the legislative
aspect, giving the information to the Ministry for International Affairs as
to the differences with national legislation. Precedence was, however, given
to the international treaty. Before the treaty was ratified by the
Government, it passed through different channels, and one was the
Constitutional Court, which determined whether it agreed with the
Constitution. The Constitution and legislation were gender neutral – there
had been some discussion as to whether there was a need to include specific
reference to women, but it was thought this could give rise to a new range
of problems that did not currently exist.
With respect to the Ombudsman’s Office, it had received no complaints on a
gender basis, the delegation said. The age of marriage was seventeen for
women and eighteen for men, and the Government was planning to amend the
Family Code in this regard, and a draft had already been prepared. At the
moment, the coordination of gender questions was dealt with by the Ministry
for Labour and Social Affairs, with a sub-section of ten people working on
Women and the Family, divided in two, part dealing with women’s problems,
and the other on children’s problems. Gender issues were considered by the
women’s division, which had three staff members. The Ministry of Labour and
Social Affairs had within it a national institute for labour research and
social questions, and it contained a sub-unit on social questions, including
gender questions, and it took measures such as the elaboration of a draft
bill on gender equality. Gender equality was now part of the measures to be
undertaken by the Government. Under the draft legislation on gender
equality, there was a provision for a coordination body.
On what expertise and knowledge was needed to make progress, this was always
needed, the delegation said, no matter the level of development or
advancement of a country. Civil servants could be given specific training on
request on the issues that were of importance. There was also an expert
level representation in the Parliament within the standing committees in
existence, such as on human rights and women and gender issues. On the
reporting of the implementation of the National Action Plan, there was
reporting, with the Government reporting annually to the Parliament on the
programmes it carried out, both substantially and on the allocation of
resources. Parliament could also call special meetings to discuss issues,
and women and gender issues had been the focus of such meetings, both on the
political and expert levels. There were special programmes targeted at women
in special vulnerable groups, and they could be given special funding and
special training. There had been programmes for women victims of domestic
violence and trafficked women, as these were the particularly vulnerable
groups. They were also helped to reintegrate into economic life so that the
social reason for, for example, their being trafficked, could be removed.
Responding to follow-up questions, the delegation said that legislation
contained the definitions of the different qualities between men and women
–
such as in the Labour Code, which defined the rights of men and women, the
Civil Code which contained an article on the rights between the two, and the
Constitution which defined general human rights. The draft legislation had
been formulated with the involvement of experts and the participation of
civil society representatives, and this year a number of measures would be
adopted which involved society and interested parties working on this
document. The Government had adopted the concept of gender equality, and
would take the necessary measures and had already outlined what it was going
to do in order to accelerate the process. Next year the draft law would be
submitted to the Government. As regarded concrete measures, the delegation
said everything on gender equality was included in the draft, and it also
contained monitoring legislation, not only of the law but of various
programmes, and there were specific sections on the rights and duties of
local Government among others, and there were punitive measures to be
applied if these were not implemented. It also contained reference to the
Convention.
There was a procedure in the Government for the adoption of national laws,
which involved the drafting of the law, then a process of public discussion,
including civil society, after which it would be re-drafted and then
re-submitted before being adopted by Parliament, the delegation said. In
Armenia there was no discrimination against women in the fields of
education, health, labour, and payment of wages, nor against minority
groups. These groups were targeted as long as they were part of a poverty
reduction strategy as socially vulnerable groups that could be dealt with as
Armenian citizens with equal rights to the rest of the population. The issue
of marital discrimination was being discussed. There was monitoring of the
implementation of all national programmes and plans of action that were
adopted by the Government. The Cabinet oversaw these and they went through
a
process to amend and update these plans and programmes. The Ombudsman dealt
with women’s issues, and it had not yet received any complaints under this,
as apparently the legal cases that had taken place had received satisfactory
results, which was why the women involved had not applied to the Ombudsman.
Over the last 70 years, economic disparities had drawn women to the family
–
now that the situation was improving, women were working more, in particular
in the civil service, the delegation said. The Government could not
artificially raise the figures for women’s participation, but over the last
years it could be seen that women were gaining more decision-making posts.
Work was being done to raise awareness and increase self-esteem among women
in order to encourage them to go into politics.
Questions by Experts
Taking up articles five and six of the Convention, Committee Experts raised
a number of questions and issues, including whether there had been any
survey or study on gender stereotypes that were present in Armenian society;
whether there was any legal provision on the prohibition of gender
stereotypes in the media and advertising; whether there were any measures in
place to encourage the media to adopt a self-regulating mechanism with
regards to the use of gender stereotypes; whether there were any deterrents
in place against domestic violence; whether rape within marriage was also an
offence; the need for Armenia to further address the issue of domestic
violence; a request for more information on the penalties for domestic
violence such as fines and imprisonment; why there were such low figures on
rape reporting and whether this was due to issues of corruption; what
efforts were being made to combat trafficking and what was being done to
rehabilitate the victims of trafficking and of forced marriage; a request
for an assessment of the first Programme of Action to Prevent Trafficking as
well as for statistical data on the number of trafficked persons; what was
being done to protect the rights of victims, in particular in the case of
witness protection; and whether registration of the individual legalised
prostitution, and what sort of protection it afforded.
Response by Delegation
Responding to these questions and others, the delegation said there were a
number of pieces of legislation which covered domestic violence, and there
was no discrimination with regards to gender in this regard. The term
"violence" covered everything including murder, grevious bodily harm, mental
cruelty, threats, destruction of property, and rape by a husband, all of
which were punishable. There were crisis centres for those who had been
subjected to violence, which aimed to provide full support to women victims.
Work was being carried out actively in this area and had been for several
years, in particular to determine the figures for domestic violence. The
Police and the Government had been actively working on a National Programme
for several years which would include measures to eliminate violence against
women and children.
With regards to the rape figures, there was a total number of 29 articles
under which such cases could be brought to the courts, the delegation said,
including "sexual untouchability". With regards to bride kidnapping, this
did not exist as such, but there were cases where there was a basic
agreement from the girl, and later on the couple got married. With regards
to prostitution, this was not punishable by law, and was not a criminal
offence. It was considered to be breaking the law, and was covered by the
Criminal Administrative Code, with a fine levied of 50 per cent of the
amount at least. This fine was only applied to people over the age of
sixteen, and for people under that age it was the other persons involved who
were punished. This came under the Criminal Code and was viewed as
trafficking. Since 2000 the Police had been working hard with the civil
society community on this issue.
Gender stereotypes did exist in Armenia, but not in the fields of education
and health, the delegation said. Girl students went to areas that were
traditionally considered to be male-dominated and vice versa, with more
girls going to higher education than to boys, which was also a matter of
concern. There were stereotypes that impeded more active participation by
women in political life – a wide-ranging and deep study had recently been
published on this matter, which would serve as a basis for the Government to
formulate means to increase women’s participation in political life. On
trafficking, a consistent information flow for the last six years showed the
limits of this. The causes were being dealt with through very strict
preventive mechanisms by providing information to the population on a
regular basis on emigration laws and on trafficking. All victims that were
revealed were mainly found abroad and were repatriated, and they went into
the reintegration and assistance process. Upon identification of a victim as
a possible victim of trafficking, then shelters and assistance as well as a
range of other services were provided.
Questions by Experts
Taking up articles seven to nine of the Convention, Experts raised a number
of questions and issues, including why there was such a high level of
violence in the election process, in particular against journalists, and
whether the State was aware of this, and if so what was it doing to prevent
this; the need for sex-disaggregated data on women’s representation at a
certain level of the civil service, including in the Foreign Ministry; and
a
request for information on women’s entrepreneurship.
Response by Delegation
Responding to these questions and others, the delegation said the 15 per
cent rule had been made stricter by stipulating that there should be one
woman out of every ten on the election lists, and this would be made even
more strict. The process was continuing, and by the time of the next
elections the issues would be worked out. On violence against journalists,
only one case had been reported and it had been investigated under Criminal
Law and it went to the courts. There were a number of women in various posts
in the Foreign Ministry, and the number was increasing, in particular that
of women Ambassadors. The number of judges in Armenia was 172, and 34 of
them were women. On violence against journalists again, there was a special
article, 164, in the Criminal Code which protected the freedom of
journalists and covered various penalties for this crime. There were no
cases of journalists being abducted and raped. There had been an increase of
the number of women working for the Police to 20 per cent, some of which
were officers, numbering two per cent.
Response by Delegation
Responding to these questions and issues as well as follow-up questions, the
delegation said with regards to media and sensitivity to stereotypes, there
were training sessions annually for the media on all issues that could be
considered derogatory. A Code of Conduct for journalists had been adopted
that regulated their behaviour. As far as specific programmes aimed at
targeting specific groups of people such as victims of trafficking or
domestic violence, there was a weekly TV programme by the Police informing
people, and there were also talk-shows on specific issues that taught and
raised awareness of existing legislation and the avenues that victims could
use to gain redress.
On trafficking, the delegation said the Criminal Code only contained an
article on this in 2003, so there was no earlier information. There were 14
cases with 36 victims in 2007, and 11 cases with 20 perpetrators in 2008 out
of which 19 were women, and four were convicted, all women – there were 39
victims, 29 of which had been referred to non-governmental organizations for
assistance.
Questions by Experts
Taking up articles 10 to 14 of the Convention, Experts raised a number of
questions and issues, including what was being done to reduce the drop-out
rate and encourage girls to continue their education, particularly in rural
areas; if there was any sort of strategy in place and safety net that had
been provided to women who had been affected by the closure of schools and
pre-schools, either by a loss of employment or by the need to leave
employment to provide care to children; the feminisation of poverty where
women were in low-paid jobs and in unemployment and what were the results of
programmes in this context; what was being done to reverse the structural
problem in which women had temporary or fixed-term contracts and men had the
long-term contracts; how did the Labour Code deal with sexual harassment in
working life; what were the results of a programme on gender-mainstreaming;
whether there were any plans to improve family planning services and through
this reduce the use of abortion as a means of birth control; whether birth
control pills were distributed to all free of charge; and the importance of
envisaging measures focusing on women refugees living in the countryside.
Response by Delegation
Responding to these questions and issues and others, the delegation said
everybody had the right to education – general education was compulsory,
with the exception of certain specific cases. There were no fees linked to
general education. After study at school, students, on a competitive basis,
went to higher education establishments, either free of charge or on the
basis of payment. The number of girls in tertiary education was higher than
that of boys, they were therefore not suffering. Following the closing of
schools due to optimisation, there had been a large number of teachers who
had been retrained. In the field of general education, the number of women
was higher. In past years there had been a drop in the payment of teachers,
and men had therefore been taken up by other jobs. In schools, among
teachers, the majority had been and were women. In scientific work there
were more men, but this trend had existed for a very long time due to women
taking time out for children. Regarding the standard of living and the
programme, the latter was taught in the higher classes of the general
education system.
Armenia did have a high birth rate compared to some countries, the
delegation said, due to early marriage. At 17 or 18, six per cent of young
people had already married. With regards to the reproductive rights of young
persons, Armenia was one of the first Commonwealth of Independent States
countries where sexual education had begun for young people, and for the
last 10 years there had been "life skills", which was something which
ensured sexual health. This aimed to change previously entrenched
sereotypes. All age groups had dropping mortality and morbidity. There was
a
State programme aiming to improve not only general health but also the
health of mothers. Armenia recognised the importance and problems of
abortion, and there had been programmes on this topic. Armenia had created
services for family planning in many areas, including rural areas. The birth
rate was somewhat better in rural areas than in towns. Substantial steps
were being taken to improve the medical services’ equipment and the teaching
of staff.
With regards to disabilities, there was no specific difference in disability
programmes for men or women. They all used the same programmes, and there
had not been any form of discrimination on a medical or employment level.
Questions by Experts
Taking up articles 15 and 16 of the Convention, Experts raised, among other
things, whether there were special family courts in Armenia; what was the
legal framework, rights and obligations of people in de facto relationships
and whether women’s and children’s rights were affected in this situation;
whether same sex couples had any form of rights and recognition in Armenia;
whether spouses’ pension rights were considered part of marital property to
be divided; and how was economic safety provided for and protected with
regards to divorced women.
Response by Delegation
Answering these questions and issues as well as others, the delegation said
both men and women had the right to free legal assistance from the State.
During a marriage, the property created jointly was divided absolutely 50/50
between the former husband and wife. In Armenia there were no Family Courts.
Divorce could be carried out in a registry office in cases where the couples
had no claims on each other and there were no children. With regards to de
facto marriages, same sex couples enjoyed the same rights as any other
citizen in Armenia – there was no specific registration required, and they
enjoyed the same property, education, political and health rights as any
other citizen. If a marriage had not been registered, then children from
that relationship were under the guardianship under the State. In a civil
marriage, the father could declare that he was the father, then the child
received a birth registration certificate.
Responding to a range of follow-up questions, the delegation said that
Armenia had a law in writing which governed entry into marriage and
succession – there was a whole mass of laws, which were gathered into the
Family Code, which regulated marriage. If a court ruled divorce or it was a
question of what happened to children after a marriage or to property after
divorce, all was regulated by the Family Code, which was long, containing a
multiplicity of articles on what could happen between a man and a woman.
Abortion was not a method of family planning and was not viewed as such. It
could be a method of regulating births for the population – the Government
considered that in any case it should take steps to reduce the number of
abortions, and State statistics did give some glimmer of hope that something
had been achieved in this regard.
With regards to the female population from 15 to 30, the delegation said
there was entirely free external testing for all citizens of Armenia, men
and women. Medical services and treatment in hospital were free for all,
regardless of their financial situation, and in every town there was a
centre which provided medical services to women, free of charge. There were
very few women drug-takers or alcoholics in Armenia compared to men, and
depression did not affect them as much as men either. Some 85 per cent of
women in 2008 had voluntarily tested to see if they were affected by
HIV/AIDS. There was a total of 600 cases of HIV/AIDS that were registered,
with women at about 27 per cent. There had recently been pregnant women
identified with HIV/AIDS, and five children who were born to infected
mothers, but these women had all been infected from heterosexual
intercourse, and were mainly from the Russian Federation and Ukraine.
In secondary schools, boys dropped out and started to work, the delegation
said. Pensions were not divided during a divorce. Alimony was attributed to
a mother if there was an underage child. If a family was under the poverty
line, then the family could enjoy social benefits from the State. Women went
for low-paid jobs, whereas men did not – this was a matter of sustaining the
family, and they therefore always tried to get higher-paid jobs. Given the
fact that recent economic growth had allowed the Government to get involved
in funding, it was increasing this with regards to a shelter for
trafficking, and would next fund a shelter for domestic violence. There was
a law which ensured equal pay for equal work and posting.
Concluding Remarks
In concluding remarks, DZIUNIK AGHAJANIAN, Director of the International
Organizations Department at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, said
she wished to thank the Committee for its very interesting and challenging
questions. The Government was open to discussion, in particular with civil
society and others to discuss new trends and to tackle issues as they came
up, before they became unmanageable. Armenia had problems, as did other
countries, but it saw the prospect and was keen on working and getting to
its destination.
NAELA GABR, Chairperson of the Committee, in concluding remarks, said she
wished to thank Armenia for the report, even though it was a bit late. She
thanked the delegation for the clarity and sincerity of their answers, and
was pleased at the progress that had been achieved. More interaction would
lead to further respect of women’s rights and the activation of women’s
rights in Armenia and their full implementation. The delegation should
address the Parliament on its return and inform it of the discussions. There
should be further awareness raising on the Convention so that a greater role
for women in diplomacy, Parliament and political life as a whole could be
achieved. Abortion should not be used as a means of family planning, and
work should be done to ensure that proper family planning was available.
* * * * *
http://www.un.am