Tweet
ARMENIA SUBMITS PROTOCOLS TO CONSTITUTIONAL COURT: WHAT'S NEXT?
By Harut Sassounian
Panorama.am
15:25 24/11/2009
Politics
Pres. Serzh Sargsyan quietly submitted the Armenia-Turkey Protocols to
the Constitutional Court on November 19, without a public announcement.
Under Armenian law, all international agreements have to be submitted
to the Constitutional Court, prior to their consideration by Parliament
for ratification. The Protocols were signed by the Armenian and Turkish
Foreign Ministers on October 10, after both sides publicly committed
on August 31 to "make their best efforts" to ratify the Protocols in a
"timely" manner.
Given the fact that Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu had already
introduced the Protocols to the Turkish Parliament on October 21,
the timing of Pres. Sargsyan's submission to the Court may have been
prompted by his wish to avoid accusations of foot-dragging by Prime
Minister Recep Erdogan during his Washington visit on December 6.
Indeed, over the weekend, a Turkish official accused Armenia of not
taking any steps to ratify the Protocols.. Hurriyet newspaper quoted
a Senior Turkish Diplomat as stating: "I do not think that one could
press Turkey at this moment when Armenia has still not submitted them
to Parliament."
Forwarding the Protocols to the Constitutional Court, however, does not
necessarily mean that Armenian officials intend to ratify them quickly,
since they had announced that they are going to wait for Turkey to
ratify them first. Moreover, Turkish leaders have repeatedly linked
the ratification of the Protocols to the resolution of the Karabagh
(Artsakh) conflict, thus making it questionable if the Protocols
would be ratified at all.
The Armenian Constitutional Court's website indicates that after
submission of a case to the Court, the first step is assigning one
of its judges to conduct a preliminary review within 15 days, which
could be extended by 10 days. In all, the Court has 90 days from date
of submission to announcing its decision. The Constitutional Court's
mandate specifies that its decision will not be based on whether the
Protocols are in compliance with the Constitution, but on whether
the obligations deriving from such an international agreement are in
conformity with the Constitution.
Given the lack of public trust in Armenia's courts in general, most
Armenians, especially those who oppose the Protocols, are highly
skeptical that the Constitutional Court would not rubber stamp the
government's position on these Protocols. Some members of the press
questioned the appropriateness of Gagik Harutyunyan, the Constitutional
Court's Chair, accompanying Pres. Sargsyan on his recent overseas
"consulting tour," trying to convince Diaspora Armenians that the
Protocols were in Armenia's best interest.
Given the critical nature of the proposed Protocols and their
long-term impact on Armenia's national interest, it is expected
that the Constitutional Court would approach this case with the
utmost seriousness and responsibility. While most Armenians would
prefer that the Court disapprove the Protocols, it is more likely
that it would approve them after adding several clarifications and
interpretations that would be part and parcel of the agreement prior
to submission to Parliament. Such clarifications would hopefully
minimize the detrimental effects of the Protocols and not allow
Turkey to misinterpret the agreement, particularly references to
international treaties that may preclude future Armenian claims,
and formation of a historical sub-commission that could question the
facts of the Armenian Genocide.
Another important issue that the Constitutional Court may consider is
adding a provision that would give the Armenian government the right
to unilaterally abrogate this agreement, should Turkey violate any
of its provisions after ratification.
During Pres. Sargsyan's meeting with over 60?? Armenian community
leaders in Los Angeles on October 4, I suggested that the Armenian
government add a formal reservation to the Protocols, giving itself
the right to consider the agreement null and void, should Turkey,
after ratification, not open the border with Armenia within the
stipulated 60-day timeframe or if it closed the border after opening
it. Significantly, Pres. Sargsyan publicly agreed with my suggestion
and committed himself to adding such a provision.
Since it appears that the Armenian government is intent on going
through with these Protocols despite all objections, the Constitutional
Court and the Armenian Parliament should attempt to minimize the
damage they are sure to cause to the country's national interests
by adding specific reservations and clarifications prior to their
eventual ratification.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
By Harut Sassounian
Panorama.am
15:25 24/11/2009
Politics
Pres. Serzh Sargsyan quietly submitted the Armenia-Turkey Protocols to
the Constitutional Court on November 19, without a public announcement.
Under Armenian law, all international agreements have to be submitted
to the Constitutional Court, prior to their consideration by Parliament
for ratification. The Protocols were signed by the Armenian and Turkish
Foreign Ministers on October 10, after both sides publicly committed
on August 31 to "make their best efforts" to ratify the Protocols in a
"timely" manner.
Given the fact that Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu had already
introduced the Protocols to the Turkish Parliament on October 21,
the timing of Pres. Sargsyan's submission to the Court may have been
prompted by his wish to avoid accusations of foot-dragging by Prime
Minister Recep Erdogan during his Washington visit on December 6.
Indeed, over the weekend, a Turkish official accused Armenia of not
taking any steps to ratify the Protocols.. Hurriyet newspaper quoted
a Senior Turkish Diplomat as stating: "I do not think that one could
press Turkey at this moment when Armenia has still not submitted them
to Parliament."
Forwarding the Protocols to the Constitutional Court, however, does not
necessarily mean that Armenian officials intend to ratify them quickly,
since they had announced that they are going to wait for Turkey to
ratify them first. Moreover, Turkish leaders have repeatedly linked
the ratification of the Protocols to the resolution of the Karabagh
(Artsakh) conflict, thus making it questionable if the Protocols
would be ratified at all.
The Armenian Constitutional Court's website indicates that after
submission of a case to the Court, the first step is assigning one
of its judges to conduct a preliminary review within 15 days, which
could be extended by 10 days. In all, the Court has 90 days from date
of submission to announcing its decision. The Constitutional Court's
mandate specifies that its decision will not be based on whether the
Protocols are in compliance with the Constitution, but on whether
the obligations deriving from such an international agreement are in
conformity with the Constitution.
Given the lack of public trust in Armenia's courts in general, most
Armenians, especially those who oppose the Protocols, are highly
skeptical that the Constitutional Court would not rubber stamp the
government's position on these Protocols. Some members of the press
questioned the appropriateness of Gagik Harutyunyan, the Constitutional
Court's Chair, accompanying Pres. Sargsyan on his recent overseas
"consulting tour," trying to convince Diaspora Armenians that the
Protocols were in Armenia's best interest.
Given the critical nature of the proposed Protocols and their
long-term impact on Armenia's national interest, it is expected
that the Constitutional Court would approach this case with the
utmost seriousness and responsibility. While most Armenians would
prefer that the Court disapprove the Protocols, it is more likely
that it would approve them after adding several clarifications and
interpretations that would be part and parcel of the agreement prior
to submission to Parliament. Such clarifications would hopefully
minimize the detrimental effects of the Protocols and not allow
Turkey to misinterpret the agreement, particularly references to
international treaties that may preclude future Armenian claims,
and formation of a historical sub-commission that could question the
facts of the Armenian Genocide.
Another important issue that the Constitutional Court may consider is
adding a provision that would give the Armenian government the right
to unilaterally abrogate this agreement, should Turkey violate any
of its provisions after ratification.
During Pres. Sargsyan's meeting with over 60?? Armenian community
leaders in Los Angeles on October 4, I suggested that the Armenian
government add a formal reservation to the Protocols, giving itself
the right to consider the agreement null and void, should Turkey,
after ratification, not open the border with Armenia within the
stipulated 60-day timeframe or if it closed the border after opening
it. Significantly, Pres. Sargsyan publicly agreed with my suggestion
and committed himself to adding such a provision.
Since it appears that the Armenian government is intent on going
through with these Protocols despite all objections, the Constitutional
Court and the Armenian Parliament should attempt to minimize the
damage they are sure to cause to the country's national interests
by adding specific reservations and clarifications prior to their
eventual ratification.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress