Tweet
PUBLIC OPINION DEFORMED
Gevorg Harutyunyan
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
23 Oct 2008
Armenia
The Eyewitnesses Don't Want To Tell Anything
Interview with the Chairman of the Interim Committee Investigating
March 1-2 Developments and Its Reasons, Samvel Nikoyan.
"Mr. Nikoyan by now which are the events linked with March 1 that have
been completely investigated by the committee and have you drawn any
clear conclusions?"
"The committee has thoroughly revealed what has exactly happened
in the morning of March 1, in the Theatrical Square, what actions
the law enforcers and the demonstrators took. We have scrupulously
studied the events that took place in the morning, and all the other
events following it, which took place in Yerevan streets, up to the
accumulation of the demonstrators in front of the French Embassy.
We have spoken with lots of eyewitnesses. We have conducted
official surveys and have received answers. We have compared all
the answers. And today we have almost the clear picture of what had
happened during the first half of March 1."
"You have many times appealed to the public asking the eyewitnesses
of the 10 death cases to help you clarify in what conditions those
people died.
Are there any responses?"
"Unfortunately no. There are more journalists than citizens working
with us. There is a perception among our society that it is a bad thing
to give testimony. It comes from the Soviet times, that assisting the
state is not encouraged. Our public opinion is deformed in such a way
that people treat the murderer better than the one who gave testimony
against that murder. On the whole, to clarify the death cases,
we get information from the police officers and the law enforcers
who were doing their job at that time. Each death case took place
in front of hundreds of eyewitnesses, but no one wants to give any
information. But everyone demands that the committee reveals all the
details of the events."
"But all the developments took place in the streets, didn't they?
And there are lots of houses there. Why don't you invite the
inhabitants of those houses? All of them are eyewitnesses."
"Our American partners gave one idea - that the committee is doing
its best to meet the demands and the expectations of society. Partial
attitude has been formed among our society towards the committee. Even
if we tell absolute truth society won't accept. This is the aftermath
of the advocacy of certain political forces.
The proposal about questioning the inhabitants of the buildings
located in the places where the deaths occurred is quite to the point
and the committee will discuss this proposal. In my view the inquest
body must firstly invite them for questioning. Our committee can only
invite them but we can't force them to come and give information to
the committee. At the moment the journalists are very active. They
give us lots of information. But why are they so late?"
"Don't you see any intentions here? To what extent do the journalists
give the true testimony, devoid of emotions and self-interests to
mislead social perceptions?"
"The committee is not completely based on those pieces of information.
But we want to hear lots of opinions and stories later to compare
them, to see the difference between the false and the true ones and
draw conclusions.
We have two quite contradicting pieces of information given by two
journalists. One of them says that at 10.20 p.m. on March 1 the water
spraying cars were cleaning the stains of blood. The other one states
that he saw the same river of blood after midnight. Let alone the
fact that you have to butcher a cow to have that much blood on the
ground. Of course these data are baseless. But we are ready to hear
any type of information, to have something to compare.
I'm well conscious that the committee is also aimed at developing
public opinion. But I also believe that society will perceive our
activity in the right way and will understand that we don't veil
anything.
The same DVDs were being secretly spread among the people, aimed at
inflaming artificial fervor. The moment we started to discuss that
issue the public's interest towards those DVDs diminished. At the
moment the committee is setting up a fact-collecting group. In my
view next week it will start its activity and an expert representing
the opposition will also be included in that group.
Gevorg Harutyunyan
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
23 Oct 2008
Armenia
The Eyewitnesses Don't Want To Tell Anything
Interview with the Chairman of the Interim Committee Investigating
March 1-2 Developments and Its Reasons, Samvel Nikoyan.
"Mr. Nikoyan by now which are the events linked with March 1 that have
been completely investigated by the committee and have you drawn any
clear conclusions?"
"The committee has thoroughly revealed what has exactly happened
in the morning of March 1, in the Theatrical Square, what actions
the law enforcers and the demonstrators took. We have scrupulously
studied the events that took place in the morning, and all the other
events following it, which took place in Yerevan streets, up to the
accumulation of the demonstrators in front of the French Embassy.
We have spoken with lots of eyewitnesses. We have conducted
official surveys and have received answers. We have compared all
the answers. And today we have almost the clear picture of what had
happened during the first half of March 1."
"You have many times appealed to the public asking the eyewitnesses
of the 10 death cases to help you clarify in what conditions those
people died.
Are there any responses?"
"Unfortunately no. There are more journalists than citizens working
with us. There is a perception among our society that it is a bad thing
to give testimony. It comes from the Soviet times, that assisting the
state is not encouraged. Our public opinion is deformed in such a way
that people treat the murderer better than the one who gave testimony
against that murder. On the whole, to clarify the death cases,
we get information from the police officers and the law enforcers
who were doing their job at that time. Each death case took place
in front of hundreds of eyewitnesses, but no one wants to give any
information. But everyone demands that the committee reveals all the
details of the events."
"But all the developments took place in the streets, didn't they?
And there are lots of houses there. Why don't you invite the
inhabitants of those houses? All of them are eyewitnesses."
"Our American partners gave one idea - that the committee is doing
its best to meet the demands and the expectations of society. Partial
attitude has been formed among our society towards the committee. Even
if we tell absolute truth society won't accept. This is the aftermath
of the advocacy of certain political forces.
The proposal about questioning the inhabitants of the buildings
located in the places where the deaths occurred is quite to the point
and the committee will discuss this proposal. In my view the inquest
body must firstly invite them for questioning. Our committee can only
invite them but we can't force them to come and give information to
the committee. At the moment the journalists are very active. They
give us lots of information. But why are they so late?"
"Don't you see any intentions here? To what extent do the journalists
give the true testimony, devoid of emotions and self-interests to
mislead social perceptions?"
"The committee is not completely based on those pieces of information.
But we want to hear lots of opinions and stories later to compare
them, to see the difference between the false and the true ones and
draw conclusions.
We have two quite contradicting pieces of information given by two
journalists. One of them says that at 10.20 p.m. on March 1 the water
spraying cars were cleaning the stains of blood. The other one states
that he saw the same river of blood after midnight. Let alone the
fact that you have to butcher a cow to have that much blood on the
ground. Of course these data are baseless. But we are ready to hear
any type of information, to have something to compare.
I'm well conscious that the committee is also aimed at developing
public opinion. But I also believe that society will perceive our
activity in the right way and will understand that we don't veil
anything.
The same DVDs were being secretly spread among the people, aimed at
inflaming artificial fervor. The moment we started to discuss that
issue the public's interest towards those DVDs diminished. At the
moment the committee is setting up a fact-collecting group. In my
view next week it will start its activity and an expert representing
the opposition will also be included in that group.