|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 ARMENIA-DIASPORA RELATIONS: 20 YEARS SINCE INDEPENDENCE
YEREVAN'S 2009 MUNICIPAL ELECTION
IMPLICATIONS OF FINANCIAL CRISIS FOR ARMENIA 
ARMENIA’S 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 
|
|
| HOME > Law and Governance |
|
Archive for March 2008
ArmeniaNow.com
Official Statement of Plaintiff Levon Ter-Petrosyan, as addressed to court March 5
Your Honor Chairman of the Constitutional Court, highly respected members of the Constitutional Court,
I have to make it clear from the very beginning that I will refrain from political evaluations to the event and will dwell on several purely legal accentuations. Although my legal team addressed them, I consider it necessary to do that. Nevertheless, since it is my first public speech after 6.30 am March 1, I want to take the occasion to express my deepest regret over the March 1 tragedy and extend my deepest condolences to the families of all people who died.
And now my speech proper.
I want to invite your attention to Article 78 of the Electoral Code. From the moment of registration, presidential candidates who are in state service or work in local government bodies, are relieved of implementing their working duties and do not have the right to use the advantages of their official position. More... ... In case of the nomination of the president of the republic as a presidential candidate, or according to the Constitution, the acting president of the republic - the chairman of the National Assembly or the prime minister – he continues the implementation of their powers, however must not use the advantages of their official position. This article is very specific and imperative. Imperative articles are not subject to interpretation. The incumbent prime minister could be nominated and registered only under one circumstance – if he had the status of the acting president. The incumbent prime minister does not have this status. I consider that his registration was from the very beginning unlawful, and therefore illegitimate.
Secondly, under Article 53.1 of the Constitution, elections of the republic’s president are not held in the martial state or state of emergency and the republic’s president continues the implementation of his duties. The elections of the president means the whole electoral process – beginning from the registration to the end of the term set for protesting [the election outcome] – that is the verdict of the Constitutional Court. At this moment, we are in the process of elections. Therefore, since it is the state of emergency now, these elections cannot be considered either valid or lawful.
Thirdly, the fact of the unilateral coverage of the Constitutional Court’s proceedings is unclear. The plaintiff does not have the opportunity to provide coverage of the course of the Constitutional Court proceedings. The principle of equality is broken. Besides, many of the witnesses required in the course of the proceedings, who are supporters of our movement and activists of my campaign headquarters, are under arrest. These are our key witnesses. Therefore, under the circumstances, any verdict of the Constitutional Court, besides recognizing the elections as null and void, will cause a shortage of legitimacy, which is dangerous for the future of the country, and for the prestige of the Constitutional Court. I cannot imagine how any verdict arrived at by the Constitutional Court in these conditions will be accepted by me, the plaintiff, the people and the international community. That is, the state of having illegitimate authorities will always hang over the head of the Republic of Armenia. I consider as a way-out the proposals in yesterday’s statement of the European Union presidency, which I will present to you and will ask you to attach to the case. I fully accept these proposals, considering them to be the program, platform of our manner of action during this meeting of the Constitutional Court.
They are the following points:
To end the state of emergency, release all arrested people, provide equal information opportunities, to conduct an international independent investigation of the March 1 events and start a dialogue with the authorities.
I accept all these points, as I said, I consider it to be the basis for our activities.
Thank you for attention.
The following comparison speaks for itself. Though I, too, am not sure what to make of the similarities, in the very least it suggests that Armenian authorities have truly taken a page from the history books, and NOT the books they claim to be reading. While the Armenian government hoists the flag of human rights at every turn of the corner and calls itself an aspiring democracy, its actions as of late are almost frighteningly similar to those of some of the most oppressive one-party system regimes of the 20th Century. But let me not lecture you on this; let the facts speak for themselves.
Poland, 1981
In 1981, the People’s Republic of Poland imposed martial law in an attempt to crush the peaceful political opposition movement that had taken shape in the country. While such powers were intended to apply during wartime, the ruling coalition put itself above the law and imposed martial law, nevertheless. Approximately 100 people were killed, and thousands arrested without charge. A number of peaceful pro-democracy organizations were banned, and their leaders detained overnight. More... ... In less than twenty-four hours after martial law was declared, armed forces littered the streets in military vehicles. In one particular incident, ZOMO commandos killed nine people while dispersing a peaceful protest. Public assembly was prohibited and the media placed under military control.
Armenia, 2008
On March 1, 2008 the Republic of Armenia declared martial law in an attempt to crush the peaceful political opposition movement that had taken shape in the country. While the Armenian Constitution does not specify that such powers are intended to apply during wartime only, it most definitely can be construed in such a manner to make its imposition in this particular case unconstitutional. Dozens of people were arrested, at least 8 killed, and hundreds injured in the government-instigated violence that ensued throughout the day of March 1, 2008. A number of peaceful opposition leaders were detained (and continue to remain in custody). In fact, some Parliamentarians even discussed lifting immunity from those members of parliament who had joined ranks with the opposition. In less than twenty-four hours after martial law was declared, armed forces littered the streets in military vehicles. In one particular incident, military commandos and riot police killed at least seven people while dispersing a peaceful protest. Public assembly has been prohibited and the media severely censored.
Recently Foreign Minister Oskanian commented that the ball was in Levon Ter-Petrossian’s court. I must respectfully disagree. The ball has always been in the State’s court, and how it chooses to play with it will determine whether Armenia will become a hypocrisy, or a true democracy.
|
|
|
|
