Tweet
FIRST COMPLETE ANALYSIS OF MARCH 1 EVENTS
A1+
[08:03 pm] 25 April, 2008
On April 25 Armenia's Human Rights Ombudsman Armen Harutiunian
released a report on the Presidential election of February 19,
2008, and the events following the election. The Ombudsman says he
prepared and released the report because the Presidential election
and the post-election events had a major influence on the state of
human rights, the protection of the personal, political, social and
economic rights of a human and a citizen.
The report notes that the pre-election and post-election situations
were affected by some problems which were not addressed. The
descriptive part of the report on human rights states that the
report is based on the fact that during the presidential election
the dissatisfaction of a major part of the society got a direction
and acquired new qualities. The report of the human rights defender
says a major part of the society had a demand of extremity, which
shaped support and aggravated the lack of confidence and hatred.
The report of the human rights defender states that "constitutionality
is the limitation of power which excludes such situations when the
winner gets all the political, economic, social levers, and the loser
loses every possibility for normal existence."
"These very situations push the sides into a struggle for life and
death and provide a fertile soil for the emergence of authoritarian
and totalitarian regimes," the report holds.
Its author notes that "the new president and the emergent government
got a very heavy heritage from their predecessor." The ombudsman
thinks it would be desirable if this heritage was not so heavy,
but it is, and it is necessary to find a way out. The ombudsman
recommends 7 steps: to guarantee public control over the government
and strong opposition, reform the election legislation, guarantee
freedom of speech and plurality of the Internet media, rule out laws
which impose groundless constraints on human rights and freedoms,
guarantee constitutional equity and eliminate economic monopolies,
not to battle with the consequence but to eradicate causes. Armen
Harutiunian says it is important to set up an independent commission
for investigating the events of March 1.
AD HOC REPORT
The 2008 Presidential elections and post-electoral developments have
immensely influenced on the entire system of protection of human
rights. The main objective of this Ad-hoc Report /hereinafter report/
is a comprehensive analysis of pre- and post-electoral developments.
The first part of the report illustrates dynamics of transformation
of socio-psychological environment and main causes of its formation
whereas receiving objective information on electoral processes was
impossible.
The second part of the report is devoted to the election day
environment and analysis of legislative grounds leading to its
formation. The third part reveals peculiarities of post-electoral
developments.
Part four presents activities of the Human Rights Defender in regard
with reinstituting of human rights during the post-electoral period.
In the course of examining presidential election developments,
the report, indeed, specifies many objective problems leading
to the formation of pre- and post-electoral situation in the
country, particularly rising resentment in a considerable part of
the society. In fact, many of these problems were described in
the Defender's Annual Report of 2006, the conclusions of which,
regrettably, remained out of attention of authorities.
The cornerstone of the report is qualitative modification of resentment
of a considerable part of society through biased form. Particularly,
the noticeable social and economic polarization, mistrust towards
public and law enforcement bodies, overcentralization of power,
ineffective mechanism of checks and balances between three branches
of power, insufficient guarantees for human rights, formation of a
tightly closed system of privileged group drove a significant part
of society to seek critical and dramatic changes to solve these
issues. Eventually, a demand of extremist activities was formed in a
considerable part of society. In this situation a number of political
forces have provided an adequate offer, which intensified intolerance
and polarization in the society.
The report refers to the aforementioned issues from the perspective
of human rights, freedom of speech and freedom of information. The
objective of the report is firstly to emphasize restriction of freedom
of speech for one part of the society /the opposition/, existence
of unrestricted opportunities for the other part /the government/
including unlawful use of different power tools resulting itself
in restriction of human rights, and secondly that it may offer "ill
services" to the users themselves on the rebound.
Spiritual and material values in the society should be balanced and
coexist in harmony. From this point of view one does not consider
the opposition strategy being mostly focused on social concerns of
a considerable part of population, deplorable human rights records,
shortcomings in public administration, etc., instead of prioritizing
economic development-related issues, such as construction of tunnels,
highways, elite buildings. A number of state representatives were
more enthusiastic in terms of material values while the opposition
rearranged the strategy within political and intellectual values
(civil freedoms, dignity, justice, equal rights).
Division of society into privileged "insiders" and the rest formed
tightly closed system in the country, where democratic principles of
governance were of artificial nature. These hampered the course of
political struggle under the rule of law. Meanwhile, the opposition
adopted the same extremist policy aimed at polarizing the society
into "us" and "them"- "beguiled". The extremist policy of one part
of government and a part of opposition generated March 1-2 events
inflicting the society to suffer. Thus, the society shall enjoy
the right to demand political elite (government and opposition) to
ensure absolute respect for human rights and tolerance shall prevail
in the society.
The change of ruling political forces through elections, the exchange
of roles between ruling and opposition forces is a key indicator of
democratic development and an effective safeguard of socio-political
stability. If the opposition forces are deprived of possibilities to
replace the incumbent authorities through free and fair elections, and
the authorities are democratic insofar as it secures their "normal"
reproduction, then extremism in the political struggle cannot be
avoided.
Constitutionalism is a limitation of the power, which precludes
situations in the political struggle, when the winner assumes all
political, economic, and social control, while the defeated side
loses any possibility of survival. This is the type of situation that
pushes sides into a "life-or-death" struggle, laying the ground for
the emergence of authoritarian and totalitarian political regimes.
The newly-elected President and the new system of government inherited
a heavy burden from their predecessors. It would have been preferable
to avoid it, but it could not be done, and now, everyone must now
come together to overcome this situation.
The following issues have to be resolved in order to address this
situation:
1. To ensure that the authorities function in a framework of public
accountability, and to secure a strong opposition: this is the only
case in which the authorities will no longer be able to subordinate
society to their will. As a result, the opposition will not have to
go to the streets, because they will be able to voice their concerns
through legal and political means.
2. To reform the electoral legislation: in particular, it is necessary
to revise the Electoral Code provisions on the formation of electoral
commissions, the recount procedures, etc.
3. To safeguard the freedom of expression and to put in place
conditions for pluralism and impartiality in the electronic
media. Without pluralism, society cannot be free, and the authorities
will not exercise self-restraint. To this end, it will be essential
to reform the legislation on television and the radio. It is also
necessary to ensure equal participation of the representatives of
the power and the opposition in the formation of television and radio
regulatory and supervisory bodies.
4. To rule out laws groundlessly restricting human rights and freedoms
(such as the recent amendments to the Republic of Armenia Law on
Conducting Meetings, Assemblies, Rallies, and Demonstrations).
5. To safeguard the constitutional principle of equality of rights
and to eliminate existing economic monopolies, which will help to
overcome the oligarchic system of governance. This is the only way
to enable people to realize their creative potential. As a result,
society will no longer demand political extremism, and political
forces will no longer generate such supply. Extremist ideas are born
out of an extremely polarized society. If society is not polarized,
no extremist idea can activate the broad masses.
6. To fight against causes, rather than consequences.
To this end, it is vital to create an independent commission to
inquire into the March 1 events.
7. At this point, it would be most dangerous and useless to imitate
reforms.
Information and Public Relations Department of
Human Rights Defender's office
A1+
[08:03 pm] 25 April, 2008
On April 25 Armenia's Human Rights Ombudsman Armen Harutiunian
released a report on the Presidential election of February 19,
2008, and the events following the election. The Ombudsman says he
prepared and released the report because the Presidential election
and the post-election events had a major influence on the state of
human rights, the protection of the personal, political, social and
economic rights of a human and a citizen.
The report notes that the pre-election and post-election situations
were affected by some problems which were not addressed. The
descriptive part of the report on human rights states that the
report is based on the fact that during the presidential election
the dissatisfaction of a major part of the society got a direction
and acquired new qualities. The report of the human rights defender
says a major part of the society had a demand of extremity, which
shaped support and aggravated the lack of confidence and hatred.
The report of the human rights defender states that "constitutionality
is the limitation of power which excludes such situations when the
winner gets all the political, economic, social levers, and the loser
loses every possibility for normal existence."
"These very situations push the sides into a struggle for life and
death and provide a fertile soil for the emergence of authoritarian
and totalitarian regimes," the report holds.
Its author notes that "the new president and the emergent government
got a very heavy heritage from their predecessor." The ombudsman
thinks it would be desirable if this heritage was not so heavy,
but it is, and it is necessary to find a way out. The ombudsman
recommends 7 steps: to guarantee public control over the government
and strong opposition, reform the election legislation, guarantee
freedom of speech and plurality of the Internet media, rule out laws
which impose groundless constraints on human rights and freedoms,
guarantee constitutional equity and eliminate economic monopolies,
not to battle with the consequence but to eradicate causes. Armen
Harutiunian says it is important to set up an independent commission
for investigating the events of March 1.
AD HOC REPORT
The 2008 Presidential elections and post-electoral developments have
immensely influenced on the entire system of protection of human
rights. The main objective of this Ad-hoc Report /hereinafter report/
is a comprehensive analysis of pre- and post-electoral developments.
The first part of the report illustrates dynamics of transformation
of socio-psychological environment and main causes of its formation
whereas receiving objective information on electoral processes was
impossible.
The second part of the report is devoted to the election day
environment and analysis of legislative grounds leading to its
formation. The third part reveals peculiarities of post-electoral
developments.
Part four presents activities of the Human Rights Defender in regard
with reinstituting of human rights during the post-electoral period.
In the course of examining presidential election developments,
the report, indeed, specifies many objective problems leading
to the formation of pre- and post-electoral situation in the
country, particularly rising resentment in a considerable part of
the society. In fact, many of these problems were described in
the Defender's Annual Report of 2006, the conclusions of which,
regrettably, remained out of attention of authorities.
The cornerstone of the report is qualitative modification of resentment
of a considerable part of society through biased form. Particularly,
the noticeable social and economic polarization, mistrust towards
public and law enforcement bodies, overcentralization of power,
ineffective mechanism of checks and balances between three branches
of power, insufficient guarantees for human rights, formation of a
tightly closed system of privileged group drove a significant part
of society to seek critical and dramatic changes to solve these
issues. Eventually, a demand of extremist activities was formed in a
considerable part of society. In this situation a number of political
forces have provided an adequate offer, which intensified intolerance
and polarization in the society.
The report refers to the aforementioned issues from the perspective
of human rights, freedom of speech and freedom of information. The
objective of the report is firstly to emphasize restriction of freedom
of speech for one part of the society /the opposition/, existence
of unrestricted opportunities for the other part /the government/
including unlawful use of different power tools resulting itself
in restriction of human rights, and secondly that it may offer "ill
services" to the users themselves on the rebound.
Spiritual and material values in the society should be balanced and
coexist in harmony. From this point of view one does not consider
the opposition strategy being mostly focused on social concerns of
a considerable part of population, deplorable human rights records,
shortcomings in public administration, etc., instead of prioritizing
economic development-related issues, such as construction of tunnels,
highways, elite buildings. A number of state representatives were
more enthusiastic in terms of material values while the opposition
rearranged the strategy within political and intellectual values
(civil freedoms, dignity, justice, equal rights).
Division of society into privileged "insiders" and the rest formed
tightly closed system in the country, where democratic principles of
governance were of artificial nature. These hampered the course of
political struggle under the rule of law. Meanwhile, the opposition
adopted the same extremist policy aimed at polarizing the society
into "us" and "them"- "beguiled". The extremist policy of one part
of government and a part of opposition generated March 1-2 events
inflicting the society to suffer. Thus, the society shall enjoy
the right to demand political elite (government and opposition) to
ensure absolute respect for human rights and tolerance shall prevail
in the society.
The change of ruling political forces through elections, the exchange
of roles between ruling and opposition forces is a key indicator of
democratic development and an effective safeguard of socio-political
stability. If the opposition forces are deprived of possibilities to
replace the incumbent authorities through free and fair elections, and
the authorities are democratic insofar as it secures their "normal"
reproduction, then extremism in the political struggle cannot be
avoided.
Constitutionalism is a limitation of the power, which precludes
situations in the political struggle, when the winner assumes all
political, economic, and social control, while the defeated side
loses any possibility of survival. This is the type of situation that
pushes sides into a "life-or-death" struggle, laying the ground for
the emergence of authoritarian and totalitarian political regimes.
The newly-elected President and the new system of government inherited
a heavy burden from their predecessors. It would have been preferable
to avoid it, but it could not be done, and now, everyone must now
come together to overcome this situation.
The following issues have to be resolved in order to address this
situation:
1. To ensure that the authorities function in a framework of public
accountability, and to secure a strong opposition: this is the only
case in which the authorities will no longer be able to subordinate
society to their will. As a result, the opposition will not have to
go to the streets, because they will be able to voice their concerns
through legal and political means.
2. To reform the electoral legislation: in particular, it is necessary
to revise the Electoral Code provisions on the formation of electoral
commissions, the recount procedures, etc.
3. To safeguard the freedom of expression and to put in place
conditions for pluralism and impartiality in the electronic
media. Without pluralism, society cannot be free, and the authorities
will not exercise self-restraint. To this end, it will be essential
to reform the legislation on television and the radio. It is also
necessary to ensure equal participation of the representatives of
the power and the opposition in the formation of television and radio
regulatory and supervisory bodies.
4. To rule out laws groundlessly restricting human rights and freedoms
(such as the recent amendments to the Republic of Armenia Law on
Conducting Meetings, Assemblies, Rallies, and Demonstrations).
5. To safeguard the constitutional principle of equality of rights
and to eliminate existing economic monopolies, which will help to
overcome the oligarchic system of governance. This is the only way
to enable people to realize their creative potential. As a result,
society will no longer demand political extremism, and political
forces will no longer generate such supply. Extremist ideas are born
out of an extremely polarized society. If society is not polarized,
no extremist idea can activate the broad masses.
6. To fight against causes, rather than consequences.
To this end, it is vital to create an independent commission to
inquire into the March 1 events.
7. At this point, it would be most dangerous and useless to imitate
reforms.
Information and Public Relations Department of
Human Rights Defender's office