Category: 2019

M:On September 7, the legal team of Robert Kocharyan, the accused in the case of Art. 1, the second president of Armenia, submitted a petition to the Yerevan Court of Common Jurisdiction to immediately remove Kocharyan’s preventive detention and stop the criminal prosecution. Apart from that, the defenders, in a letter addressed to the president of the court, requested to ensure that the submitted motions are handed over and examined immediately. They relied on the decision published by the Constitutional Court on September 4, according to which the High Court recognized as unconstitutional one of the two articles contested in the former president’s application, Article 35 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which deals with the circumstances excluding the proceedings or prosecution of a criminal case.

…The decision of the Constitutional Court caused a great public response. These days, there is no shortage of those who criticize and oppose the decision in the press and social networks: lawyers, private citizens, political-social structures and others. Later put his authoritative word into circulation also Thatthe countynoting that S:D decision by force Robert Kocharyan towards initiated criminal the pursuit to stop, to him free to release grounds there are none: To Kocharyan’s supporters this sleeveless nodid n:they believe that their client is innocent ohand should be released immediately based on the decision of the High Court, and: the criminal prosecution should be stopped. “Continuation of detention after this decision is illegal… The decision means that a crime there is none, becauseand: of the president actions they are not can criminal of trial in the framework of discussion object to become», – completeKocharyan’s lawyer Aram Orbelyan said in a conversation with writers։ According to him: if times contested in the law changes be done, all the same from that after and:s: Kocharyan no can obeyw:come out responsibility. Opponent arm representativenaturally, they also have their justifications, according to which the Constitutional Court’s decision in question is illegal, because the examination of the given problem is beyond the scope of his powers: Lawyer Tigran Yegoryan testifies S:D: 2010 in the year accepted number 918 someanda, in which it is said` of court impartiality and impartiality regarding doubtin availability conditions heldgiven judicial the act no match of the Constitution fixed principles and: no can be implemented: “Only this the basis enough is, in order to exactly the same Constitutional of court by accepted the decision not happen»,- of freedom with in the conversation clarify is Yegoryan. By: his Kocharyan the application examined՝ CC: the members already and hasin:n: prejudiced attitude, how many that before «March: 1»-in: to the case related to different decisions regarding firstson authorities positions side I wasn: vote:

And indeed Kocharyan from the application ahead Constitutional of court judge Wahe Grigoryanthe mediation was submitted that CC: president Bye Tovmasyanuh, members Do?and:ik Petrosyanehand Hrant: Nazaryan they are not can unbiased and unbiased to examine this the case: Grigoryan with facts justify was the latter participation «March: 1»-in: related to to affairs: However CC:–n:, without this the mediation to examine, passed isr: Kocharyan application to the exam: In parallel, Kocharyan’s “fakes” in the media and hired protesters demanding Kocharyan’s release began to intensify their “brainwashing” activities on the street.

Whether the main accused of “March 1” will be released from custody or not will be seen in the near future. One thing, however, is already clear. as evidenced by the latest developments related to the case and, especially, by the decision made by the Supreme Court on September 4, artificially generated a situation that is difficult to cope with. A situation that gives both interested parties equal opportunities to evade, to depart from the same legal norms in their own way, to get entangled in fruitless disputes on both sides. wide opportunity. Clearly, a miscalculation was made. Farewell to Tovmasyan and other representatives of the second president’s team (covert or overt?) successfully created eand for a special purpose to the public deliver such don’t a puzzle around which «from swinging swords» until internal division only is one step. Hey, beware of this.

S:On September 11, in defense of Amulsar, a march was called by the Armenian Environmental Front, which was joined by a number of activists, political forces and citizens. Pavlik Manukyan, Garegin Chugaszyan, Gevorg Safaryan, Andreas Ghukasyan, Karen Antashyan were among them. The participants of the march marched from the National Assembly building to the Opera House, chanting the slogan “No mine, as many as we exist”. As a result of Amulsar’s action, Mashtots Avenue was paralyzed, and the participants of the march called passers-by and drivers to join them. The drivers signaled their support to the activists.

… The public tension around Amulsar is not easing in any way. And people’s concern is understandable. Amulsar is not a peripheral Kajara, Alaverdi or Teghut, it is domineeringly spread right in the center of the water resources of the republic. The government and Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan himself are trying to convince the environmentalists, the residents of the villages near the mine and the public and political figures and representatives of the intelligentsia interested in the problem, that the right thing is to exploit the mine. According to the government’s argument, it will promote the development of the economy, bring investments, cheap money, jobs, etc. The Union of Industrialists and Businessmen developed the same idea in its statement recently. And the Prime Minister?yesterday, when urging the residents of Termuk to open the roads leading to the mine, he assured that as of today there is no legal justification for banning the operation of the Amulsar mine.

Among the participants of the above-mentioned march bNationalist Ani Khachatryan retorts that Pashinyan “deliberately does not take into account many risks and claims that there are none”, despite the fact that he promised that even if there was a 0.01% risk, the mine would not be put into operation. According to Khachatryan, the prime minister performs a patronage function. Pashinyan’s “change of mind” also caused the surprise of Levon Barseghyan, head of the “Asparez” club of journalists. On his Facebook page, he gives several justifications for rejecting the Amulsar exploitation project within the framework of legality, citing the opinions of high-ranking experts in the field. At the end of the post, Barseghyan notes: “Now, questions. Where did Nikol’s intelligence and ingenuity go? Why does he insist on a rejected and harmful idea? Who influenced or scared that Armenia will suffer great losses? Why is he gradually separating from the public, what are they blackmailing him with, maybe… I can’t imagine, I don’t know.”

It would not be fair to say that the Government is “sleeping” the problem. Only recently, the executive with Amulsar’s agenda open and closed convened meetings, in order to discuss the situation, he met several times with representatives of “Lidian”, environmentalists, Jermuk and nearby communities residents, professionals, there were discussions, clarifications, debates. “Lydian Armenia” assures that the operation of the mine is 100 percent safe: “not a liter of water will be polluted either on the ground or underground, not a gram of dust, the pastures will even remain clean.” The other side, however, does not believe in such assurances and continues to insist that the operation of the mine is fraught with disastrous consequences, it should be closed immediately. And so consensus cannot be reached.

Meanwhile, the problem urgently requires a solution. Moreover, a solution based on the popular principle of “Measure seven, cut one”. That’s exactly what it seems to be doing. We will live and see.

Gevorg Lalayan commented

Ahead of the presidential and parliamentary elections of 2020, local self-government elections were held in Artsakh last Sunday. In 228 communities, 415 candidates for the head of the community and 2573 candidates for the member of the council of elders were nominated. The number of voters is 103 thousand 10. There were also elections in the capital Stepanakert, where a non-partisan Davit Sargsyan, founding director of “CONSULT FINANCE GROUP” JSC, president of Artsakh Kick-Boxing Federation, was elected mayor from 5 nominated candidates. In this election, unlike the previous ones, Armenian non-governmental organizations also carried out an observation mission, for which the RA government provided more than 33 million drams. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan congratulated the heroic people of Artsakh on the occasion of free, fair and competitive elections of local government bodies.

As part of the criminal case investigated by the Investigative Committee regarding the cases of apparent abuses allowed during the construction process of the “North-South” highway, charges were brought against Serzh Sargsyan’s brother Lyova Sargsyan, as well as the owners of the project’s subcontractor company, Suren and Gevorg Vardanyan. As a result of large-scale investigative and judicial actions, data was obtained that a clearly implemented criminal scheme was operating in the selection of subcontractor organizations during the implementation of the project. Sargsyan was charged with money laundering and using real or perceived influence for profit. A search warrant was announced against him and a petition was filed to choose detention as a preventive measure.

On September 12, the trial of Kocharyan and three other former high-ranking officials, former Minister of Defense Seyran Ohanyan, former Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces Yuri Khachaturov and former Secretary of the Security Council Armen Gevorgyan, began in the Yerevan Court of Common Jurisdiction on September 12. Kocharyan’s defenders submitted a petition, asking the court to immediately stop the criminal prosecution and release Robert Kocharyan from custody, based on the well-known decision of the Supreme Court. In front of the Shengavit court building, where the court session was scheduled, Kocharyan’s supporters and opponents held actions. The court went to the conference room to issue a judicial act, and upon returning, judge Anna Danibekyan announced that the act will be published on September 17, at 1:00 p.m.

During the September 8 municipal elections in Artsakh, one important circumstance emerged, which is worth discussing in detail. Political changes in Armenia, as can already be argued, have significantly changed the logic of internal political processes in Artsakh. The machine of centralized influence on voters, which has been practiced for more than two decades, has failed. Many observers note that for the first time, people were given the opportunity to make free choices. None of the previous factors suppressing the will of the majority of voters showed their effectiveness. Neither the pro-government parties, nor the bureaucratic corps became the “heroes” of these elections. And the fact that in one of the settlements – Kovsakan – voters showed a massive protest against the announced election results, shows even more clearly that this time only the voters decided the fate of the elections.

Times have clearly changed. Initially, it was clear that for the political forces of Artsakh these elections were a measure of public sentiment with an eye to the upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections next year. This can explain the fact that not one of the existing parties nominated their candidates for key posts in Stepanakert and regional centers. Nobody wanted to see their candidate defeated, as this would mean that a particular party has no influence on voters. Preference was given to the tactics of shadow support of self-nominated people who have authority in society.

However, the election situation was more complex than expected. Nobody managed to hide behind independent candidates. Voters behaved quite unexpectedly. Despite the fact that almost every candidate was initially attached with a cliché “a man of such and such,” “a man of power,” etc., society ignored this circumstance. Mostly, a personal choice proved itself, which is already evident from the percentage of votes cast for each candidate. This is clearly seen from the voting results in Stepanakert, where not one of the candidates received a “breakthrough package” of votes. And only the fact that the law does not provide for a second round of voting allowed one of the candidates to win with a minimum of votes.

Thus, according to preliminary data, David Sargsyan, the non-partisan businessman who won in Stepanakert, received 7787 votes, and reserve officer Grigory Sahakyan came in second place with 4765 votes. In the third place Areg Avagyan garnered 3125 votes. Even the current deputy mayor, Armen Hakobyan, received only 3059 votes, while Araik Avanesyan, who received the least number of votes, still got 2108 votes. Given the fact that in Stepanakert, out of the 39 thousand registered voters, 21,543 voters participated in the vote, the victory could be ensured by receiving all the votes of one fifth of the voters. As you can see, none of the candidates showed a serious influence on the opinions of the majority of residents of the Artsakh capital. Almost half of the voters simply showed no interest in the election.

Voting results in some district centers also demonstrate that the factor of administrative resources and the factor of parties did not have a significant effect on the mood of voters. Preference in many places was given to non-partisan self-nominees.

One can only hope that no one will be able to reverse the wheel of the noted positive process.

During the elections of local self-governing bodies held in Artsakh on September 8, an important circumstance emerged, which is worth addressing in detail. The political transformations that took place in Armenia, as it can already be argued, noticeably changed the logic of internal political processes in Artsakh. The machine of more than two decades of focused voter influence has failed. Many observers note that for the first time people were given the opportunity to make free choices. None of the previous factors to capture the will of the majority of voters was found to be effective. Not pro-government neither the parties nor the bureaucratic class became the “heroes” of these elections. And the fact that in one of the communities – Kovsakan, the voters raised their voice of protest en masse against the announced results of the elections, shows even more clearly that this time it was only the voters who decided the fate of the elections.

Times have obviously changed. From the beginning, it was clear that for the political forces of Artsakh, these elections will be a gauge of public sentiments, targeting the presidential and parliamentary elections to be held next year. This can explain the fact that none of the existing parties nominated their candidates for key positions in Stepanakert and regional centers. No one wanted the defeat of their candidate, because it would mean that this or that party has no influence on voters. Preference was given to the shadow of self-nominated people with authority in society support tactics.

However, the situation in the elections turned out to be more complicated than expected. No one managed to hide behind independent candidates. The voters caught themselves completely off guard. Despite the fact that practically every candidate was labeled as “man of so-and-so”, “man of so-and-so”, “man of the authorities” and other such labels, the society treated it with disdain. Personal choice played an excellent role, which is already clear from the percentage of votes cast in favor of each candidate. This was evident from the results of the voting in Stepanakert, where none of the candidates received the “breaking package” of votes. And just the fact that the law does not provide for a second round of voting, giving one of the candidates a chance to win with the minimum number of votes.

Thus, according to preliminary data, Davit Sargsyan, a non-partisan businessman who won in Stepanakert, received 7,787 votes, warehouse officer Grigori Sahakyan, who placed second, received 4,765 votes, Areg Avagyan, who came in third place, received 3,125 votes. Even Armen Hakobyan, who currently holds the position of deputy mayor, received only 3059 votes, and Araik Avanesyan, who recorded the lowest result, collected 2108 votes. Taking into account that 21,543 voters participated in the voting in Stepanakert out of 39,000 registered voters, victory could be ensured by receiving the votes of only one fifth of the voters. As we can see, none of the candidates for the capital of Artsakh did not have a serious impact on the opinion of the majority of residents. Almost half of the voters simply showed no interest in the elections.

Voting results in some regional centers also convince that the factor of administrative resources and the factor of parties did not have a significant impact on the mood of the voters. In many polling stations, preference was given to non-partisan self-nominations.

We can only hope that no one will be able to turn back the wheel of the described positive process.

The collective mind of Armenia is in a political and even cultural crisis. Public consciousness rejects the Old, but has not reached an agreement on the New. Rejection of the old, the need for revolution is defended not only by conventional revolutionaries, but also by those people who in one way or another were related to the former authorities, that is, conventional counter-revolutionaries. “Old Armenia” has been left without an owner, few are trying to protect it, but the problem of “New Armenia” is also complicated and unclear. What does “New Armenia” mean? There is no answer. The impression is that not only the “Old Armenia” has been left without an owner, but also the “New” one.

This is an unprecedented phenomenon, the society welcomed the revolution, even many “counter-revolutionaries”, but what was the essence of the revolution, what we are changing, no one has clearly formulated. This uncertainty separates not only people and groups pursuing specific political interests, but also those who just want the progress of the country. Ideological emptiness has started to cause fears and expectations of chaos among people. As is known, fear is a consequence of uncertainty.

The problem of Amulsar has divided the “revolutionaries”, and the development of the economy and the fulfillment of international obligations have been met with resistance by environmentalists. The Istanbul Convention also threatens to split the “My Step” alliance. Transitional justice and vetting similarly have an uncertain future. All these are worldview landmarks, regarding which there is no unity in “New Armenia”.

Uncertainty has another name: crisis, stop of thoughts and ideas. “Crisis” is the Armenian version of “crisis”, however, unlike “crisis”, when studying the origin of the word “crisis”, another layer of the phenomenon, another view emerges. “Crisis” in Greek means “κρισις”, “coup”, “change” or “turning stage” and is derived from the verb κρίνω, which means “decide”, “choose”, and only later acquired a negative tone. Apparently, the following was taken into account. when making a “decision” is delayed, it brings negative consequences.

In other words, the crisis is a stage of changes, a sharp turn in life, when it is no longer possible to live in the old way, and there is a need to make turning decisions, to change the rules of life. In the current period of Armenia, we can talk about political, social, economic and psychological crises, when in all these spheres, changes in relations, behavior and thinking should be made, and if we make the issue more radical, then the problem of building a new culture and a new civilization should be solved.

The crises affect not only the above-mentioned areas, but also foreign policy issues, because the role of Armenia in the changing world civilization is discussed. It is no coincidence that, in addition to ecological problems, for example, Amulsar, the Istanbul Convention has also become a serious challenge, that is, a civilizational problem has already faced Armenia.

Nikol Pashinyan tries to present the “Armenian revolution” on international platforms as a sharp turn in the country’s life, which also has the significance of an international and civilizational choice (especially during his speech at the UN summit), but when a key agenda is set for Armenia, which the international community considers important, problems arise. Many more such agendas will be put in front of us, for which we are not ready, because the society of Armenia is not oriented in the fundamental issues of civilization. “Rejecting Serzh” is still not enough to build a new society, and neither is the “Armenian revolution”. can be converted into international relations.

The other issue that everyone should be interested in is the quality of the governments that implement value system changes. International experience shows that radical changes are carried out by authoritarian authorities, which in many cases destroy old relations, even in brutal ways, and it is no coincidence that all democratic reforms were brought to life through a “strong hand”. This is the second crucial challenge that Armenia is facing: to realize a revolution of values, but to stay away from authoritarian management methods. However, such a development does not threaten Armenia at all, because it is not clear what we are exchanging for what. When it is not clear to the public what the “strong hand” is for, then no one will tolerate such a thing, and the police cars that appear on the streets of Yerevan do not scare people, but on the contrary, they motivate them more.

The reason for uncertainty and expectations of chaos in Armenia is the subconscious understanding that it is necessary to make decisions that the government is unable to make, and to be honest, it does not even imagine what decisions are expected of it.

Hovhannes Vardanyan