Tweet
RUTHLESS AND MINDLESS VOTING
HAKOB BADALYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments25286.html
Published: 11:03:42 - 29/02/2012
On February 29, the consideration of the draft law on 100%
proportional representation will be discussed in the parliament. The
Republican Party is against it, which means the OYP is against too.
Heritage and ARF Dashnaktsutyun support the bill, and a different
position of theirs would be strange because they are the authors of
the draft.
Gagik Tsarukyan lets the party members free in their choice and each
member should vote in accord with their conscience and mind, as member
of the parliamentary group of the party Naira Zohrabyan stated.
So, we find out there are also cases when the MPs don't vote in accord
with their conscience and mind but under the pressure of someone else.
In other words, the party leader instructs the party members to vote
this or another way.
This situation is present not only within the BHP but also in all
other political forces of Armenia, especially those governmental. For
example, the Republican Party does not differ at all in this sense and
takes each step as Serzh Sargsyan says.
But in these cases, we cannot be sure that the MPs vote against their
conscience and mind. After all, MPs are also possible to have no
conscience or mind.
In general, the situation looks like a paradox when it is stated that
the leader of a party lets free the MPs to vote in accord with their
conscience and mind. Does it mean that if the party leaders want they
can force MPs a ruthless and mindless voting?
The issue on the lack of democracy within the parties is a priority in
terms of the lack of development of the system in Armenia, one of the
major vices of the political system when the parties fighting for the
establishment of democracy in the country, have not created democratic
mechanisms inside their own parties, and having a different opinion
means betrayal.
While, the party is a union of people with common values and ideas,
and not a sample forcing the same opinion to everyone and once out,
one will be punished.
The mechanisms of internal party democracy are seen among the
political unions in Armenia as attempts to intervene in the internal
affairs of the party. In other words, if there is no strong fist and
common behavior, the party can be destroyed from outside.
The same approach is present also in relation to the democracy of the
country when it is perceived as global treachery and a measure to
intervene in internal affairs of the country. In this context too, the
false idea on national unity is forced when any ideas on democracy and
rights are immediately assessed as an encroachment on the national
unity.
This situation in the parties and in the country makes clear the
prevalent thinking of the greater part of the Armenian parties
rendered them attaches of the Armenian ruling criminal-oligarchic
system even if these parties dwell on democracy, freedom of speech and
civil freedoms.
HAKOB BADALYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments25286.html
Published: 11:03:42 - 29/02/2012
On February 29, the consideration of the draft law on 100%
proportional representation will be discussed in the parliament. The
Republican Party is against it, which means the OYP is against too.
Heritage and ARF Dashnaktsutyun support the bill, and a different
position of theirs would be strange because they are the authors of
the draft.
Gagik Tsarukyan lets the party members free in their choice and each
member should vote in accord with their conscience and mind, as member
of the parliamentary group of the party Naira Zohrabyan stated.
So, we find out there are also cases when the MPs don't vote in accord
with their conscience and mind but under the pressure of someone else.
In other words, the party leader instructs the party members to vote
this or another way.
This situation is present not only within the BHP but also in all
other political forces of Armenia, especially those governmental. For
example, the Republican Party does not differ at all in this sense and
takes each step as Serzh Sargsyan says.
But in these cases, we cannot be sure that the MPs vote against their
conscience and mind. After all, MPs are also possible to have no
conscience or mind.
In general, the situation looks like a paradox when it is stated that
the leader of a party lets free the MPs to vote in accord with their
conscience and mind. Does it mean that if the party leaders want they
can force MPs a ruthless and mindless voting?
The issue on the lack of democracy within the parties is a priority in
terms of the lack of development of the system in Armenia, one of the
major vices of the political system when the parties fighting for the
establishment of democracy in the country, have not created democratic
mechanisms inside their own parties, and having a different opinion
means betrayal.
While, the party is a union of people with common values and ideas,
and not a sample forcing the same opinion to everyone and once out,
one will be punished.
The mechanisms of internal party democracy are seen among the
political unions in Armenia as attempts to intervene in the internal
affairs of the party. In other words, if there is no strong fist and
common behavior, the party can be destroyed from outside.
The same approach is present also in relation to the democracy of the
country when it is perceived as global treachery and a measure to
intervene in internal affairs of the country. In this context too, the
false idea on national unity is forced when any ideas on democracy and
rights are immediately assessed as an encroachment on the national
unity.
This situation in the parties and in the country makes clear the
prevalent thinking of the greater part of the Armenian parties
rendered them attaches of the Armenian ruling criminal-oligarchic
system even if these parties dwell on democracy, freedom of speech and
civil freedoms.