Tweet
POLITICIZATION OF THE SOCIETY, THE DEGREE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND REPLACEMENTS
Naira Hayrumyan
KarabakhOpen
24-01-2008 12:37:51
It is believed that a stable society is one that depends on politics
the least. In such societies sports news and the life of celebrities
are on the first pages of newspapers. Hardly half of the population
votes in the election, and most people have no idea about the members
of their own government.
There are countries, however, where people have to live with politics.
People rush at morning papers to learn about new appointments,
president's statements and the backlash of the opposition.
Karabakh belongs to the second type. Unfortunately, we do not have
an established mechanism of government, therefore the quality of life
of people depends on who leads one agency or another.
In this connection, the situation in Karabakh was special last year. It
became clear in spring that the ex-president Arkady Ghukasyan was not
running a third term, and a new person will appear at the top of the
pyramid in summer, Karabakh fluently was set on the mode of waiting.
Everyone was waiting for the presidential election from May. On July
19 the president was elected, and everyone started waiting for the
new government.
The prime minister was appointed in late September, and the cabinet
was appointed on October 17. Then people had to wait for replacements
of lower ranks. The local elections added to this on October 14. After
the elections everyone started waiting for replacements at the City
Hall of Stepanakert and the local governments.
In mid-December it seemed to be calmer but at the end of the month
the second round of appointments began. Officials were replaced, and
vacancies appeared, and everyone started waiting for appointments to
vacant posts. In mid-January replacements and structural changes at
the City Hall of Stepanakert were announced.
The mode of waiting continues. Several programs were suspended,
such as the registration for the housing program, privatization and
a number of other functions which are directly related to the housing
problems of people.
Somewhere private construction was stopped because it is not known
who will be "overhead".
There is no certainty because replacements are chaotic and
incomplete. The rules of the game are not clear. What is the point of
replacing people if the rules of the game are the same? If the rules
are changed, why are the former officials appointed to new posts? Why
the degree of responsibility of the government officials for default,
machinations, wrongdoing is not set?
If an official is not responsible for his work, it means the rules
have not changed. What has changed then? People?
The topic of responsibility of government officials has recently been
discussed in the media. Stories about a citizen of France Armen who
lives in Shushi and tries to protect his rights at the court of law
were published.
Even though the ruling of the court states that the government
officials made a mistake, he cannot get a compensation for his
damage. There have been a lot of cases when the court confirmed
the mistake of the government official but common citizens had to
pay for their mistakes. No case comes to mind when a director of a
state-owned factory was tried or made to recover the damage because
his wrong policy led to bankruptcy. On the contrary, the director
"went through" the process of bankruptcy and as a result became owner
of a share of sold assets.
The change of the degree of responsibility of a government official
may mark a real change in the manpower policy. However, this is not
a mere approach, this is part of a worldview that should be conveyed
to people. In one of his recent addressed the first president of
Armenia Levon Ter-Petrosyan conveyed this approach in a very simple
wording. To the question whether there will be a redistribution of
property in case he is elected, Levon Ter-Petrosyan gave a negative
answer. "If a businessman became the owner of some property as a
result of wrongdoing, he is not responsible for wrongdoing but the
government official who must observe the law," the first president
of Armenia said.
He did not discover America. A similar approach is used in many
countries.
There also happens so that something is arranged through bribe,
but those are exceptions. And if such cases are revealed, even
presidents lose their posts. Meanwhile, in our country the degree
of responsibility for a mistake of say a notary is not even set down
in the law. Even if this mistake causes a person lose his property,
the notary only undergoes an official reprimand.
Naira Hayrumyan
KarabakhOpen
24-01-2008 12:37:51
It is believed that a stable society is one that depends on politics
the least. In such societies sports news and the life of celebrities
are on the first pages of newspapers. Hardly half of the population
votes in the election, and most people have no idea about the members
of their own government.
There are countries, however, where people have to live with politics.
People rush at morning papers to learn about new appointments,
president's statements and the backlash of the opposition.
Karabakh belongs to the second type. Unfortunately, we do not have
an established mechanism of government, therefore the quality of life
of people depends on who leads one agency or another.
In this connection, the situation in Karabakh was special last year. It
became clear in spring that the ex-president Arkady Ghukasyan was not
running a third term, and a new person will appear at the top of the
pyramid in summer, Karabakh fluently was set on the mode of waiting.
Everyone was waiting for the presidential election from May. On July
19 the president was elected, and everyone started waiting for the
new government.
The prime minister was appointed in late September, and the cabinet
was appointed on October 17. Then people had to wait for replacements
of lower ranks. The local elections added to this on October 14. After
the elections everyone started waiting for replacements at the City
Hall of Stepanakert and the local governments.
In mid-December it seemed to be calmer but at the end of the month
the second round of appointments began. Officials were replaced, and
vacancies appeared, and everyone started waiting for appointments to
vacant posts. In mid-January replacements and structural changes at
the City Hall of Stepanakert were announced.
The mode of waiting continues. Several programs were suspended,
such as the registration for the housing program, privatization and
a number of other functions which are directly related to the housing
problems of people.
Somewhere private construction was stopped because it is not known
who will be "overhead".
There is no certainty because replacements are chaotic and
incomplete. The rules of the game are not clear. What is the point of
replacing people if the rules of the game are the same? If the rules
are changed, why are the former officials appointed to new posts? Why
the degree of responsibility of the government officials for default,
machinations, wrongdoing is not set?
If an official is not responsible for his work, it means the rules
have not changed. What has changed then? People?
The topic of responsibility of government officials has recently been
discussed in the media. Stories about a citizen of France Armen who
lives in Shushi and tries to protect his rights at the court of law
were published.
Even though the ruling of the court states that the government
officials made a mistake, he cannot get a compensation for his
damage. There have been a lot of cases when the court confirmed
the mistake of the government official but common citizens had to
pay for their mistakes. No case comes to mind when a director of a
state-owned factory was tried or made to recover the damage because
his wrong policy led to bankruptcy. On the contrary, the director
"went through" the process of bankruptcy and as a result became owner
of a share of sold assets.
The change of the degree of responsibility of a government official
may mark a real change in the manpower policy. However, this is not
a mere approach, this is part of a worldview that should be conveyed
to people. In one of his recent addressed the first president of
Armenia Levon Ter-Petrosyan conveyed this approach in a very simple
wording. To the question whether there will be a redistribution of
property in case he is elected, Levon Ter-Petrosyan gave a negative
answer. "If a businessman became the owner of some property as a
result of wrongdoing, he is not responsible for wrongdoing but the
government official who must observe the law," the first president
of Armenia said.
He did not discover America. A similar approach is used in many
countries.
There also happens so that something is arranged through bribe,
but those are exceptions. And if such cases are revealed, even
presidents lose their posts. Meanwhile, in our country the degree
of responsibility for a mistake of say a notary is not even set down
in the law. Even if this mistake causes a person lose his property,
the notary only undergoes an official reprimand.